Tarzán

I loved this story as a young kid so when I saw this coming out I thought that I will take my 6 years old to watch it - I watched the trailer and it was not looking baby-ish which he can't stand... so deal... Unfortunately I had to after that forever explain to my kid that this was not actually the real story and that meteorites and Tarzan have nothing in common... Not very good and truth be told - there would have been a great market for this movie as (already mentioned) it would have called to the kids that have grown out of musical animations if it was representing the story as told by E.R. Burrows. As not the case I would not recommend to anyone. Still gave 6 as animation not bad at all.

Bad plot, awful human animations... in all a waste of my time.

Predictable story line you know all the things that will happen before they do. The mix some people are doing on topics is absurd... kind of the Cowboys and Aliens movie !! what a joke and here meteors, extinction of the dinosaurs, and Tarzan??

The other thing that was just enough for me was the gorilla behavior, even they seem to know how to use a knife (and the meaning of it for a kill) and to open a door... truly people?!!

This types of movies are a slap to your intellect... please do not waste your time like I did mine, hope producers and writers could give me back the hour I could stand of this nonsense.

people always complaining about the origin of Tarzan. as for me, i'd love to watch some alternate story, just like this.

although it has some kind of sci-fi plot, but who cares. at first, like some other guy, i thought that this was a life action because of kellan lutz played a role, but then, ow, this is some CG movie.

some people said that the animation are bad, but for me, is not. it has some potential for animated movie which didn't made from Hollywood, as far as i know.

in my opinion, don't trust the review too much, and give it a try. perhaps you would enjoy this movie as well as me, because watching movie is not always about plot or something you'd expect.

The story of Tarzan of the Apes written by Edgar Rice Burroughs had been interpreted in many films since the 1930s. We all remember those classic films starring Johnny Weissmuller and Maureen O'Sullivan as Tarzan and Jane. In the 1980s, there was an acclaimed film version starring Christopher Lambert and Andie McDowall as the legendary couple. In the 1990s, Disney gave us its own take on the story in its traditional 2D animation with a pop musical score by Phil Collins.

I was very surprised that this year, another version was being announced on ads. I saw the name of Kellan Lutz, and thought this was a live action film, starring this Twilight actor who just recently took on another classic film character Hercules. It turns out this was another animated production, but using motion capture technology.

This incarnation of Tarzan gives the new generation an updated origin story. There is a comet from outer space that unscrupulous power companies are fighting over as an unlimited energy source. Instead of the shipwreck, we have a helicopter crash this time. The young Greystoke here was already a talking toddler rather than a newborn baby.

The whole first hour was rather bland and boring. There was a lot of scenes which were dedicated to the romance between Tarzan and Jane. Only later when the villain character Clayton makes his appearance, it was only then that the action picked up.

But by then, we can see that this version of Tarzan was very much influenced by the film "Avatar" with its environmental message, the layout of an army of technology, down to the rocky peaks in the setting. A hilarious modern day reference was the presence of a worker who was dressed like Bob the Builder.

The quality of animation is not at all bad, to be honest. The story though had already been told so many times, and the modern upgrades were too incredible and too familiarly derivative to accept. This is not essential viewing, only when you have restless kids and nothing else to see at the mall. Only an hour and half long, it will be enough to keep their interest. But afterwards, they will probably still remember the Disney version more.

I had high hopes that this movie's gonna be a whole lot better than the 1999 version. The story is dull and the there are a bit dragging scenes. The 1999 version still remains to hold the crown. It had a better plot, soundtrack and character selection.

But, comparing the 1999 and 2014 version, this one got my vote for graphics and animation. Most scenes appear true to life, especially the jungle, the water, sky, helicopter, meteor and so much more. When shot from a far angle, the humans look real. From skin tone to clothes and hair strands.

If you're looking for something worth your money, go get the 1999 version. But if you prefer graphics and animation more than the plot, this one's the film for you.