Tarzan

I've been a Tarzan fan for pretty much my whole life when I read my mom's copy of Tarzan and the Madman. Watching the Jonny Weissmuller movies as a kid and the Ron Ely series later and owning all of the Burroughs books doesn't make me an expert, just a great fan. I don't believe there's even one Tarzan movie that I haven't seen, the Jock Mahoney, Mike Henry, Bo Derek and the Elmo Lincoln silent film versions included, I have no idea how I missed this in theaters. Having said all that, I think they did a remarkable job on this film. Instead of (like most Tarzan films) starting the movie with a background story this began with Lord Greystoke (John Clayton) already in London. The background was covered in flashbacks as the movie went on. The story itself is very good. Samuel Jackson did an excellent job with his character and had one scene where I was nearly falling off my couch with laughter. Christoph Waltz as always does a fine job as well as Margot Robbie and Alexander Skarsgard as Tarzan. Overall I really recommend it for Tarzan fans, I think you'll enjoy it.

Many people today can argue, that Tarzan is somewhat a forgotten character and property. I believe, that kids today, are not all that familiar with the character Tarzan. So it was a matter of time, that one day we would get a reboot. That kids would get schooled on Tarzan, keep it fresh for the people. I believe that this movie does a good job of keeping the character, & the legend of Tarzan fresh.

In this tale of Tarzan, we don't get the wild man version at first. We get an older, more civilized, easy going man. Who has left his old lifestyle behind him. But things don't stay this way forever. Tarzan is trying to keep his cool, but Leon Rom played by Christoph Waltz (Inglourious Basterds, Django Unchained) has to go around, and mess with Tarzan's homeland. By stealing diamonds, and killing people. At first, Tarzan doesn't seem interested in helping. However, a former civil war fighter, Samuel L. Jackson (According to Ted in Ted 2. If you've seen any movie ever he's the black guy) is basically saying "You have to save them...Motherfu#ker!"

From the trailers, and T.V. spots, I was expecting the tone of Tarzan to be very dark and gritty. But, it's not that dark. In my opinion this movie has two very different tones. We have some dark and dangerous visuals of the jungle, and Samuel L. Jackson brings the comedy to this movie. Samuel L. Jackson was awesome as always. He really did a fantastic job at delivering the comedy. I literally laughed like the joker when he said "You want me to lick his nuts too?" (referring to the Gorillas nuts) This was okay at times, but it sort of felt like two different people directing at times.

This film has some very snazzy visuals, and beautiful cinematography of the jungle. I'm not sure if they traveled to Africa to film. Nonetheless, if the didn't it is because they really didn't need to go. Everything looked very real, and it really is gorgeous scenery throughout the film.

Also, the wardrobe was fantastic. Whoever did, the wardrobe, and makeup design should get some serious praise. Djimon Hounsou (Blood Diamond, Furious 7) looked like a badass, along with his tribe. Even Marvels Black Panther, would look at them like damn, you guys bad.

Surprisingly, my only real complaints about the film are the performances by Christoph Waltz, and Jane, played by Margot Robbie (The Wolf of Wall Street, Suicide Squad). I believe that Margot Robbie delivered a good performance. However, the way the character was written, could have been more interesting. She could have been more of a bad-ass chick, like we all know she can be, and not be underused. Christoph Waltz as well, could have been written just a little bit better. In my opinion, he will go down in history as an actor famous playing villainous roles. However, this role, came off to me as a little cartoonish.

So these are my final Bitchin' Buddha thoughts on the Legend of Tarzan. Superhero movies are very popular at the moment, and this movie does a good job at making Tarzan feel like a superhero. It keeps the character fresh, and interesting. Tarzan is fun for the moment, but sadly I don't think i will remember it a couple of months from now. I would love to see it again, on T.V. or streaming. That doesn't mean it is a bad film; it's just not a perfect film. It has it's moments, and I love the films message. On how know matter what you do, your past is a part of you. At the end of the day it was fun, and as Phil Collins once sang, "You'll be in my heart". I believe The Legend of Tarzan earns a...

7/10.

This review is brought to you by Boogie Buddha, and remember, don't just get down, but get Boogie. Thank you for reading/viewing, and I hope you all have an amazing day as always. :)

I recently read (or re-read) about twenty of the original Tarzan books. I always wondered why we never saw a Tarzan movie that portrayed the character as he was written in the books.

In the books, the adult Tarzan was very well educated and spoke several languages, but in the movies he hardly knew any English and rarely spoke in complete sentences. In The Legend of Tarzan, Alexander Skarsgård plays the character much like I imagined him when I read the books. Tarzan's command of language is competent, and his interaction with other people is never awkward or stilted as it had been in earlier movies.

Some changes from the books that The Legend of Tarzan makes is the way Tarzan communicates with animals. Instead of using words (as in the books), Tarzan can read an elephant's eyes, and he calls crocodiles by mimicking a mating call. Another change is the removal of many of the more racist elements the books had in the depiction of African tribesmen, and they are not missed at all. One other element missing from the books is the science fiction or supernatural slant that several of the stories had. The Tarzan stories that had those elements were never my favorite ones anyway, so I don't mind that they are absent from this movie.

One aspect of Jane's character that was often ignored in the earlier Tarzan movies, is that Jane lived in the USA before she married Tarzan. Earlier movie Janes were often given a British accent and occasionally had a pampered upbringing. It was refreshing to see Margot Robbie's take on the character. This Jane is American, and is feistier than we usually see her.

Christoph Waltz and Samuel L. Jackson looked like they had a lot of fun in their roles. I enjoyed watching them, but it sort of seemed like they were there as "stunt" casting - nice but unnecessary. They were each good, but every time they appeared on the screen, I never really saw the characters they were playing, I saw the actors.

Overall, I liked the movie. At times it was a little more "epic" than it needed to be, but I guess that just added to the fun. Of all the film versions of Tarzan I have seen, this one is my favorite. I think anyone who enjoyed the books would most likely agree that this is the closest to the book character of Tarzan that we have ever seen.

I am really surprised at the mediocre reviews so far of this film. Honestly when I first heard about the film I had little interest in seeing it, but the trailer was better than I expected, and when has Christoph Waltz been anything short of terrific in every role he has played, but particularly when he is a bad guy. (Come to think of it has he ever been a good guy?) The whole cast is solid, and I really liked the historical setting concerning the Belgian King Leopold and his exploitation of the Congo.

I found all the animals and the CGI to be surprisingly cheesy. Undoubtedly the weakest link in the film, but that factor did not subtract much from a constantly entertaining and solid story. Besides the cheesy CGI the rest of the film looked terrific. I would recommend to see it on the big screen. It will probably lose a lot on smaller screens. Good summer popcorn film.

The story of Tarzan is so ingrained into the brains of moviegoers that it's difficult to really put a new stamp or add something fresh to something so well-known. While Legend of Tarzan certainly attempts to take a new approach structurally, it never swings off the screen as gracefully as I had hoped.

2016 has been a rough year for big budgeted films. So many bombs and duds overshadow some of the great ones we've had through the first half. This film isn't necessarily in either camp. It begins the second half of this year with a formidable installment in the long-running ape-man franchise. David Yates, director of the last four Harry Potter films, does absolutely nothing special with the characters of Tarzan and Jane, but I was nonetheless entertained by the film from beginning to end.

Alexander Skarsgård and Margot Robbie portray Tarzan and Jane respectively. Both give solid performances but neither brought anything new to the characters. It took me awhile to adapt to Skarsgård's more guarded portrayal. In fact, for a good portion of the first half, I found his performance to be quite stiff. Tarzan isn't supposed to be running around cracking jokes, but I would have liked to have seen a bit more lightness to him. Although Robbie is very good as Jane, she doesn't get a whole lot to do as she's tied up by the villainous Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) for half the film. She's far from a damsel in distress, because she's definitely not helpless, but the plot constantly puts her in position to be a device or Tarzan's motivation to do something. I think Robbie could have done something special given the chance.

Undeniably good, however, is everything to do with the apes. I've seen the backstory before, but I loved watching his ever-changing relationship with his family of apes and the various flashbacks to what came before Tarzan's venture into home life in England. It's also where the film succeeds the most visually. While some animals, including a pretty bad ostrich, are weak on CGI, the apes are animated tremendously. The cinematography through the jungle and in the African mountains is quite beautiful. However, there are several moments of awful green screen footage. I'm talking cringe worthy background visuals.

Having said all this, I was definitely invested in the story they were telling. Tarzan is thrust into a choice to return home and chaos ensues when Leon Rom, a corrupt Belgian captain who tricked him into returning to the Congo in the first place. At times the tone blurs the lines from taking its source material too seriously and supplementing it with some weak dialogue with an average romance. I think that's the best way to describe most of the film, average.

I appreciate the filmmakers approach in taking the Tarzan story in a different direction in having it be about his return home and to his animalistic ways. But the best part about this film is Tarzan's relationship to his ape family and the background to that. I would have just liked to see more of that side of things rather than just bits and pieces here or there. Christoph Waltz was exactly what I needed out of a Tarzan villain and Samuel L. Jackson's humorous sidekick to Tarzan worked seamlessly. To me, there's plenty good here, but there was potential for greatness.

+Solid performances from the leads

+Samuel L added some much needed humor

+Apes Apes Apes

+Some visuals and fight scenes

-Others were too noticeably green screen

-Struggles to balance tone at times

-Needed more apes

7.4/10