The Legend of Tarzan (2016) User Reviews

(heavy sigh) It's OK, but it could have been great

[A_Different_Drummer · 7/10 · 10 July 2016]

The core Tarzan story is not only iconic, it speaks to something deep within us. It is at the same time the ultimate Romance and the ultimate Action tale. It is no coincidence that, almost a century ago, when young Hollywood looked to find a franchise for its new "talkie" motion pictures, they turned to the Tarzan tale, and spawned a franchise so successful that it literally outlived the shelf life of its star.

In my lifetime I have seen well over a dozen versions, retellings and re-imaginings of the Tarzan story. I have no doubt that after I am gone, producers and writers will continue to be attracted to it and continue to "make their bones" by bending it to their unique style.

That said, this one is not especially good. After a great opening scene, there is the filmic equivalent of "dead air" for about 35 minutes and when the script does finally get in gear it stumbles and falls, subject to a wildly disjointed narrative and equally bizarre editing.

Alexander Skarsgård has been impressive in other films (a race driver, a superhero) and I think with different material and a different director he could have connected. Christoph Waltz and Sam Jackson remain two of the most over-exposed stars in Hollywood and, good as they are, they are running out of clever ways to play the same character over and over. And over. And over.

The spirit of Tarzan is alive!

[NileFortnerBoogieBuddha954 · 7/10 · 6 July 2016]

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. :)

Wow! Was not expecting it to be so spectacular!!

[subxerogravity · 7/10 · 1 July 2016]

Was not expecting it to be so good.

I did go into it thinking I did not want to see a movie about a white dude becoming King of an African Jungle, and I think the filmmakers themselves tried to be favorable of that opinion.

If you have any familiarity with Tarzan, especially movies that came before, this film acts as a continuation of that. It tells the origin of Tarzan, a boy lost in the jungle and raised by apes to become a ghost like figure, but this film more focus on the life after Tarzan left the jungle and joined civilization were his legend became the stories that Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote about.

Samuel L Jackson plays a doctor who needs Tarzan's help when Tarzan gets an invitation to come back to the Congo, the doctor needs to come with him to find out if slavery is being practice there, but it turns out the invitation was a trap laid out by the the villain, Rom, played by the brilliant Christoph Waltz in his element, to deliver Tarzan to an old enemy, also played brilliantly Djimon Hounsou.

Jackson's role in this keeps it from being some white dude who saves Africa from other white dudes. This is one of his better supporting roles as he was funny and dramatic when needed. The chemistry between Jackson and Alexander Skarsgård works like a charm.

I love Djimon Hounson character as an African Chief seeking vengeance with Tarzan's death. It was very Black Panther like (or more like Black Cheetah, as the costume design shows).

I like Margot Robbie as Jane as well. At first it seem they tried too hard to to make Jane not just the chick Tarzan saved, but as the movie went on and her character developed , she went on a small adventure herself that was as exciting as Tarzan.

It's an action packed adventure through the Congo. The visual effects worked to make the terrain beautiful and dangerous and epic.

It's also fun an exciting, it will have you laughing throughout all the action.

It still floors me how fantastic this thing turned out. Worth seeing

Going Ape

[jadepietro · 7/10 · 30 June 2016]

(RATING: ☆☆☆½ out of 5)

THIS FILM IS RECOMMENDED.

IN BRIEF: A conventional approach to the Tarzan story which swings back and forth, without getting anywhere.

GRADE: B-

SYNOPSIS: The story of a little boy who goes ape.

JIM'S REVIEW: There have been many incarnations of the Tarzan legend, starting with Edgar Rice Burroughs original 1914 novel, Tarzan of the Apes. Our ape man has appeared in magazines, novels, comic books, movies, radio, cartoons, and television shows, all with varying degrees of success. Various actors have filled his loincloth, from the most famous actor in this role, Johnny Weissmuller in the 1940's, to Gordon Scott in the 1950's and Ron Ely taking hold of those vine reins in the mid 60's. His legend lives on once again in this modern day re-boot, The Legend of Tarzan, with Alexander Skarsgård as our muscle-toned hero.

The story adheres to its source and follows the basic outline of Burrough's novel. Told in flashbacks, we learn of an infant left in the jungle without parents and adopted by the great apes. Tarzan, now John Clayton III, Lord Greystoke, lived and thrives in his tropical environs until he was rescued and returned to England. Having difficulty readjusting to British society, he finds a comrade in the beautiful Jane Porter (a beguiling Margot Robbie). Upon his return to his childhood home in the Congo, Greystoke (a.k.a. Tarzan) discovers man's cruelty in the form of Belgian huntsman, Leon Rom (a typecast Christoph Waltz, playing, what else, but the villain). Whereupon Tarzan must takes sides to protect his adopted tribe of primates and protect his homeland.

Mr. Skarsgård plays Tarzan as an eloquent victim, more at home with his hairy friends than his human species. No "Me Tarzan, you Jane" monosyllabic banter here, and no loincloth either. This Tarzan mixes the physicality and brutishness of Stanley Kowalski with the sophistication and aplomb of a true noble gentleman, no small feat. If only the film matched his interpretation also.

The Legend of Tarzan is all too proper and seriously-minded which cuts down on the fun and adventure. David Yates directs his film solidly, keeping the action moving. Yet the production design by Stuart Craig seems too well-crafted for its own good, nothing out of place. It lacks authenticity in its detailing. This man-made jungle is just too pristine, so clean and sanitized just like its story. (When the vines look suspiciously like greenish rubber tubes and the cragged rocks like painted styrofoam, something is a bit off.) The special effects aren't that special either. Except for the primates, most of the animal kingdom is obviously the results of CGI, effective but slightly unreal and unsatisfying.

On the plus side, the fluid camera-work by Henry Braham has an acrobatic energy, especially as Tarzan travels from vine to vine, the best part of the cinematic experience. Mark Day's fine editing enhances the effect. The panoramic vistas help to give the film a sense of epic adventure, even if the adventures we witness never attain the grandeur of other epic film tales due to its script.

The narrative structure swings from its more interesting backstories (Tarzan's early life and upbringing, his adaptation to his aristocratic England, Jane's personal journey) which are only hinted, to the standard main story dealing with The Great White Hunter's poaching of ivory, diamonds, and the slave trade...granted all important subjects, but the treatment is painted in the most black and white terms with the widest of brushstrokes. That's the problem...there are no grey stokes in this Greystoke's version.

None of the characters are remotely real or believable, but the roles are well cast. There is a nice chemistry between the two leads, although their beauty reminds us too often of an Abercrombie and Fitch ad. Both are gorgeous human specimens who fortunately can act, even if the dialog that they are given by screenwriters Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer, is banal and stilted.

Given strong support is Samuel L. Jackson as the real life George Washington Williams, a political activist and do-gooder, but his character, as written, speaks in anachronistic modern day jargon. Still the actor brings much needed bravado and is amusing in his role. Djimon Hounsou as the avenging chief does some effective underplaying when Mr. Waltz again overplays the menace angle. However he does bring some interesting human quirks to the part. (Nice moment with the silverware arrangement, Christoph.)

All in all, the initial story line remains intriguing, the action sequences entertain, and Mr. S. makes an awesome impression, all swagger, six-pack, and sensitivity in a tight delightful manly package, although his fluent English language skills are never addressed.

This Tarzan has its flaws, but it does keep the legend intact, until the next chapter.

Visit my blog at: www.dearmoviegoer.com

ANY COMMENTS: Please contact me at: [e-mail]

Lord of the Apes

[ThomasDrufke · 7/10 · 30 June 2016]

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

The true 'sequel' to "Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan," 32 freakin' years later

[Wuchakk · 7/10 · 13 August 2016]

"The Legend of Tarzan" (2016) stars Alexander Skarsgårda as John Clayton (Tarzan), Margot Robbie as Jane and Samuel L. Jackson as Tarzan's American friend. The events take place a decade after Tarzan & Jane leave Africa for England with brief flashbacks to the ape man's origins. Christoph Waltz co-stars as the villain, Rom, who enslaves blacks in the Congo to mine the diamonds of Opar. Tarzan, Jane and Willliams (Jackson) aim to set things aright.

"Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes" (1984) was the best modern Tarzan movie, and one of my favorites despite a somewhat lethargic second half (and an irritating overuse of the "Ooo, ooo, ooo"ape vocalization, which this movie thankfully only does once). Unfortunately, they dropped the ball with the sequel, 1998's "Tarzan and the Lost City" with Casper Van Dien in the title role, as it was half-baked, a quickly-thrown-together "sequel" to presumably steal some of the thunder of Disney's animated version that was coming out the next year.

This one comes across as the true sequel to "Greystoke," albeit with an altogether different cast and understandably so, seeing as how it's 32 years later. The portrayal of the lost city of Opar is different from the books. There's no ravishing High Priestess La (a blonde white female) or ape-like denizens. The Oparians in the movie are just an intimidating black tribe covered with white body paint, but this is no big letdown because changes are to be expected when transferring to a different medium and, besides, Opar doesn't play that big of a role, at least not the city itself.

In any case, I found this to be a solid Tarzan flick with a serious adult tone mixing drama, jungle adventure and unbelievable action. I was thankful for the thoughtful lulls in the story, which shed insights on the characters or conveyed the wonders of nature, like when Tarzan communes with an elephant at night or when Williams honestly confesses about his past mistakes as a youth where he feels he's not so different from the odious Rom. Moreover, Margot expertly brings Jane to life and is easily one of the better Janes in the movies. The CGI animals are great, especially the powerhouse apes.

The film runs 1 hour, 50 minutes, and was shot, believe it or not, in England with aerial shots done in Gabon (West of the Congo).

GRADE: B.

I've seen stencil graffiti with more depth than this

[fortheloveofcinema · 3/10 · 7 July 2016]

If you want to see a painfully unoriginal and unengaging story of paint-by-number characters getting at it in the green room for 90% of the time, go see this movie.

The most deplorable thing about this movie - aside from the plot being an incoherent mess - is the way the villains are portrayed as caricatures, and the good guys as saints who can do no wrong. I don't know about you, but when the villains are portrayed as sadistic psychopaths with no real motive or character, I lose interest in the story.

tl;dr lots of CG, completely two-dimensional characters and a plot that could've been auto-generated with a smartphone app.

FINALLY - A Tarzan closer to way he was in the books!

[ocebay2 · 8/10 · 1 July 2016]

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.

Thoroughly Enjoyable.

[joegreen16 · 7/10 · 3 April 2019]

A very good take on the legend. I honestly do not know what the bad reviews are for? You are watching a man swing from trees with apes you are never going to get a 10/10 film.

Myself and my wife enjoyed this film it's decent, not amazing but decent.

It will have you screaming from the trees

[jb07-660-944395 · 1/10 · 10 July 2016]

How, in this modern day, with such high standards of education and courses on script writing and film making, can a big budget film like this one be so bad? It was only because we watched in it Gold Class, in comfortable seats and with food service, that we didn't walk out.

After about fifteen minutes my partner leaned over to me and asked when anything was going to happen (in the movie that is). I couldn't help her.

In fact my seat was so comfortable, and the movie so bad, that I fell asleep three times.

When my partner told me she thought this was the worst movie ever, and that she was confused, I couldn't help her again - I'd been asleep.

I did however witness the butterfly land on Jane's shoulder, then fly off. What a beautiful CGI scene. Totally irrelevant to the plot or story, and I'm still not sure why it was included.

Then there was the scene when giant ostriches nearly trample Tarzan and his mate. At last, I thought, something is going to happen. Tarzan's mate asks Tarzan what did the Ostrich say. Tarzan replies something like - "The Ostrich is telling you it can trample you." And then, the Ostriches run off. That's the last we see of them. Confused? I was.

The writers and director don't know whether Tarzan is Spider Man, Batman or some other action hero - but he certainly isn't Tarzan.

The poor old apes get a very bad rap here. They are huge, aggressive monsters with razor sharp teeth.

This movie is a showcase of when bad script writing, bad directing and masses of CGI meet.

I can only recommend this film to people watching it on late night TV, when they need to be put to sleep.

What would Tarzan say about this movie: AwwwwwwOaaaaaaaaWhaaaaaa

On a side note, it is interesting to see that people that rate this movie high, usually have only one review in their list - this one. This usually means that they have some connection to the film.

(Edit 2 days later) I rest my case. After posting this review, 6 positive reviews have been posted after mine, all saying this is the greatest movie ever, and 4 of the reviewers have only 1 review to their name - this movie, and the other two reviewers have 2 reviews to their name. With a ratio of 6 biased reviews to 1 honest review, no wonder it is getting so hard to trust the IMDb rating system anymore.

As a Tarzan fan I was pleasantly surprised

[Darthfrodo58 · 9/10 · 19 January 2024]

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.

Good movie!

[jimthor-13847 · 7/10 · 30 June 2016]

I saw this movie at 915pm at the Potomac Mills Mall, IMAX theater in Woodbridge, VA. June 30th, Thursday.

The acting was excellent. The story is not the original but close enough. Tarzan is Tarzan with a varied story line but it's good. I thought the overall movie was good to very good. Entertaining throughout.

The movie is a love story and about Tarzan and Jane...duh! lol. The animation or whatever they used for the animals was excellent, There is, of course, deaths, and lots of action.

It's worth the money to see. IMHO Jim

Waste of time and money

[stanleyprunty · 3/10 · 8 July 2016]

This movie started off quite well, for a movie I had quite mediocre expectations it caught my interest when it introduces some interesting characters with mixed motives, unfortunately that and a few good cinematic shots is where the praise ends for this movie.

This movie had potential which only makes it even more disappointing,we're first introduced to Tarzan as a British politician and is then forced to rediscover his wildness but lacks any real character and only comes across one dimensional with the traits of an angsty teen who's marriage we're supposed to care about but I'm not sure why

This movie tries to incorporate way to many elements, the overall plot about the enslaving the Congo and getting rich from a mythical city full of jewels that we're not even allowed to see at any point combined with fueds with passed foes that don't really come to any settlement a tribe leader that had his son killed by Tarzan that wants revenge, gorilla brother that wants him dead, trying for a baby and flashbacks of a potentially better film we could have had, they rush through these very quickly without really developing or keeping your interest

Some really awful scenes, Samuel Jackson who I'm not sure needed to be in this movie jumps off cliffs only to land unscathed on a branch, combined with a very predictably unsatisfying ending that couldn't of come fast enough and causally wrapped up with all the bad guys defeated, they may as well have froze in the air jumping to the backdrop of a sunset, with the joy of sweet release as the credits rolled to only leave me with a face like a bulldog eating a wasp and annoyed and frustrated that I have wasted time and money sitting through another failed sequel that is sure to fade into obscurity

Overall this movie lacks any fun or adventure, poorly directed as this movie lacks any identify, wouldn't recommend this film to anyone other than my worst enemy, all round disappointment

Better than I thought it would be

[TheOneThatYouWanted · 7/10 · 7 September 2016]

Well, the critics were wrong about this one. I'm not saying this is the greatest movie of all time or anything. But it does just what it should do for an action adventure. However what I like the most about this movie is how it feels like an established franchise right out of the gate. Tarzan is established and we get just enough of an origin story, without being bored to death. The acting in the film is solid all around. In what has been one of the most disappointing years when it comes to movies in resent memory (thanks to the DCU, they need to reboot it ASAP), Tarzan is a very much welcomed adventure. Final score, 7.3 out of 10.

I enjoyed it

[Gordon-11 · 17 August 2016]

This film tells the story of an English aristocratic son who is raised by animals in the forests of Congo. He grows up and goes back to England, only to go back to Africa to help the people who are getting enslaved by the Belgian king.

"The Legend of Tarzan" is so much better than the trailer. It has very little scenes of Tarzan growing up in the wild, and concentrates on his civilised adult life. He maintains a deep connection with the nature and the animals, which is a beautiful message that can be translated to everyone being friendlier to the environment. The story is engaging and at the end beautifully poignant. The two leads Alexander Skarsgard and Margot Robbie are both very visually pleasing, which adds to the charm of the film. I enjoyed it.

Not ERBs Tarzan,

[morn1960 · 7/10 · 23 April 2023]

I rate this higher than I should have because they did an ok job with Tarzan's childhood. Obviously they didn't read the books, yeas children Tarzan is based on a series of books by Edgar Rice Burroughs, and yes the books Would be considered racist by todays standards. But these novels are over 100 years old and are products of their time and I am not defending the racism.

Only Greystroke has come close to representing the vision ERB gave us. Jane for example is an American but from Charleston, South Carolina; she and her father become separated in the jungles of Africa and Tarzan saves her, Tarzan's friend is not even in this movie. It's sad that today's children are too lazy to read older books.

enjoyable but not great

[Saf_Li · 6/10 · 26 December 2021]

Oh man theres no denying this is a visually stunning film, its a complete spectacle but thats kind of where the good ends. I suppose i could have loved this, i should have loved this ? In fact...i wanted to love this, but the truth is there is just something missing. I dont know if it was the story or the cast but i was nowhere near as enthralled as i should have been. However, it might be good to note though that i really cannot take to margot robbie and that probably explains why i thought her version of jane was the most drab thing ive ever seen. There was just no emotion . They sexied her up but forgot to tell her how to act at the same time. Also tbh the cgi was mostly terrible. There was a good scene with lions that looked promising as they looked really real but no, all the other animals were pretty bad, especially the gorillas which is a shame because they were the main part. Anyway, its worth a watch for how much of a show it puts on but do remember it could have been better.

Despite mostly very good production values, this 'Tarzan' lacks swing

[TheLittleSongbird · 4/10 · 28 July 2016]

'The Legend of Tarzan' did have a good deal going for it, with talented actors in the cast, entertaining and insightful source material that has been adapted to variable but mostly entertaining effect on film and media and with David Yates as director.

Despite not being sure what to make of the trailers/advertising, which indicated a visually beautiful but muddled film, this reviewer saw 'The Legend of Tarzan' anyway because of the above things. Sadly, 'The Legend of Tarzan' is a let down, not an awful film but one where mixed perceptions of the trailers were not improved upon in the film itself. Some very good things here, but a rather bland and dull film without much swing.

Luckily, there are some quite big merits here. Mostly, 'The Legend of Tarzan' looks great, with beautiful evocative period detail and even more stunning scenery, while not skimming over the fact that the jungle is also still a place of many dangers, complemented by the wonderful mix of the darkly brooding and sumptuous London and the lusciously colourful and appropriately earthy jungle in the cinematography. A great score was also done with the film's music score by Rupert Gregson Williams, it has energy, whimsy and a cool and again brooding atmosphere.

Of the performances, which mostly didn't do very much for me, Christoph Waltz comes off the best. Can't say that I was completely enthused, it is another typecast villain role and character-wise it is one of Waltz's least interesting, however Waltz does inject a good deal of menace and charisma without being too overt or too low-key. Alexander Skarsgaard is at times wooden and a bit too civilised for the title role, but he at least looks the part mostly, does his best with giving energy and feeling and fits within the period.

This cannot be said for Margot Robbie, who sleepwalks through her role as Jane and makes her very annoying as well, the snarky attitude really grates too much. Despite looking beautiful and having obvious sex appeal, Robbie has a look far too modern and it sticks out like a sore thumb. Samuel L. Jackson is also out of place and more obnoxious than amusing, with some not particularly funny and often ill-timed comic relief in a role that is like a badly watered-down parody of other much more interesting Jackson performances. Saddled once again with a clichéd and incredibly one-dimensional noble savage character, with a back-story every bit as simplistic and predictable, Djimon Hounsou tries but lacks the dignity and passion needed, it can be one-note at times.

Although it has been said that 'The Legend of Tarzan' looks great, not everything in the visual department comes over completely successfully. The editing is too often incredibly choppy and indicated that more was actually filmed but was cut out for time constraints, which accounts for the cheapness of a few scenes and the jumpy incompleteness in some of the more eventful scenes. Particularly bad was the train vine scene, a pretty risible scene in general. The special effects are variable, most are fantastic like the elephants and the gorillas (different to the gorillas one usually is acquainted with but fits the descriptions of the gorilla species from the source material), some like the lions are mostly well-rendered but are hindered by rushed editing and tighter budget constraints seemingly in busier scenes and others like the ostrich, the buffalos and to a lesser extent the crocodiles are so fake-looking and lack the finesse shown elsewhere that it took me out of the film.

Scripting was a huge issue here (Jane getting a lot of the worst of it), aside from the story it was the asset that most brought 'The Legend of Tarzan' down. There is a lot of clunky soap opera in the interactions between characters, and it never seems to know which direction to take with distracting shifts in tone, the darker and more tense scenes feel too safe and are too often fatally undermined by comedy that kills the mood, the comedy misfires badly more than it hits and there is a lack of emotional connection. The story gets off to a sluggish start and never recovers, trying too to cram in too many characters and subplots that not only are so simplistic and lacking in dimension but don't make the story as clear as it should be, which does make the film a slog to get through and makes the characters and their relationships not developed enough or as relatable as they should (that's including the one between Tarzan and Jane). Yates shows great technical competence but lacks focus when it comes to the more substance-related elements (story and pacing).

Overall, not without its good points but lacking in a lot of areas...including swing. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Flawed but never boring

[somf · 8/10 · 29 June 2016]

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.

Adventure Trip

[Luigi Di Pilla · 6/10 · 29 June 2022]

Finally the background story of the legend Tarzan how all began. The special effects were well adapted but sometimes the pace of the scenes was slow.

The end was great with full of action.

It's a truly escape from our daily business into the jungle of Kongo. Give it a try. 6/10.

Hilariously Bad!

[btarver · 2/10 · 16 July 2016]

Visually, this film looked like it was trying to be a live action version of the Disney animated feature, down to young Tarzan's dreadlocks and Jane's yellow dress. This was easily the best thing the film had going for it.

If there were live animals used in this film, I missed them, because I was so busy noticing how absolutely fake the CGI animals (and vine-swinging Tarzan) looked. Even the single blue butterfly that alighted on Jane's shoulder was obviously fake. At one point, even the green lighting reflecting off the green screen used to shoot the film is visible on Skarsgard and Samuel L Jackson.

The villain, Rom, is comically bad. Showing the respect for religion that has become fashionable in Hollywood, Rom constantly carries a crucifix with him, made of spider silk and inexplicably strong. He uses this not for prayer, but to choke victims (and Tarzan) as necessary. There is of course a joke about priests and abuse, which will likely be offensive to Catholics (I am not.)

The motivation of the chieftain that deals with Rom to lure Tarzan back to the jungle from London so that he can kill him is undeveloped and secretive, until the end, at which point it is resolved rather easily. You'd think that in years of knowing each other, Tarzan and the chief would've had an opportunity to discuss their grievances with one another, but apparently not.

By my clock, it took an hour and 50 minutes to get to the first iconic Tarzan yell, a wimpy holler that would've been better performed by Carol Burnett. The yell is a trademark, and it was glaringly absent.

Tarzan and his crew -- apes and men both -- swing through the trees in several scenes that suddenly make similar moments in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull appear more believable. These were not thrilling moments, but were comical and bad!

In the movie's climactic scene, Tarzan -- who has nearly superhuman strength -- is snared by Rom with his nearly unbreakable crucifix. Unable to free himself with his hands, and somehow unable to fight off the frail and thin Rom, Tarzan nearly passes out from lack of oxygen until ... he SWALLOWS. This action, just enough extra muscle power from a weakening Tarzan, is enough to break Rom's beads, and Tarzan is suddenly free and able to fight! I laughed out loud!

Tarzan, one would think, would make short work of Rom thereafter, but this is no Johnny Wisemuller Tarzan, and there are not moral lessons to be learned. Instead, Rom is left to the aggressive CGI crocodiles, who deliver the death bites.

There's simply nothing redeeming about this film, and the story, special effects, plot, writing, and acting are all second rate. The title, the Legend of Tarzan is at least appropriate, because the laughs are legendary. It's unfortunate that Mystery Science Theatre 3000 is no longer in production, because this film is ripe for ribbing by that crew.

Legend of Tarzan -- Pulp Poetry With a Beating Heart

[sellers-michael · 10/10 · 29 June 2016]

There's a moment in David Yates' excellent and emotionally resonant Legend of Tarzan when George Washington Williams', played by Samuel L. Jackson, goads civilized Tarzan, played by Alexander Skarsgard, just a little too much. Alexander Skarsgard's Tarzan erupts instantly and spectacularly with a combination of physical force and gut-chilling animal sounds and pins the American to a wall, then growls out the words: "They have my wife, and their families." In this single small moment, Yates and Skarsgard put on display Tarzan's utter commitment to the woman he loves while at the same time same evoking the internal contradiction of a man who in adulthood could pass among society as a aristocratic Englishman, but whose feral upbringing has left him with a volatile beast within that can overwhelm the civilized trappings in an instant. Unlike the filmmakers who have come before him, Yates effectively captures this duality – and in so doing delivers a film that is fresh and appealing to modern sensibilities, yet is faithful to the character of the books in ways that Hollywood has never attempted before. The result is pure pulp poetry with a beating heart. Edgar Rice Burroughs would approve of it, and 21st century audiences will, if they can be lured into theaters to see it, be intrigued and satisfied by it.

Legend of Tarzan begins eight years after Tarzan and Jane (a luminous and effective Margot Robbie) have left Africa to undertake a gentrified life in London, where Tarzan has claimed his birthright of John Clayton III, Lord Greystoke. He is drawn back to Africa at the behest of George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson), a black American journalist who is based on the historical figure who led the exposure of the crimes of King Leopold II of Belgium. Williams recruits him to assist in Williams' quest to investigate the suspected crimes of King Leopold. Accompanied by Jane, the two men return to Africa where Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) has laid a trap for Tarzan that, if successful, will result in Rom delivering Tarzan to Chief Mbonga (Djimon Hounsou), who seeks to deliver vengeance to Tarzan for killing Mbonga's son many years earlier. Mayhem and adventure ensues.

When Edgar Rice Burroughs was firing on all cylinders, his pulpy, emotionally infused adventure novels were able to strike a mythic vein that caused him to become the J.K. Rowlings of his day – the first global superstar pop culture author, translated into 57 languages, his books and characters embedded in cultures from Russia to Turkey and Japan. At the time of his death in 1950 he was the best known author on the planet with his works selling more than the combined sales of his contemporaries Hemingway, Faulkner, and Joyce. Hollywood tried more than fifty times and although the movies obviously met with success — not one of them ever captured what the grand old pulp master had created on the page. Yates is the first to do it; his Legend of Tarzan stands head and shoulders above the Tarzan movies that came before it–and regardless of how it fares in the crowded summer theatrical marketplace, it is assured of a place in cinema history as the Tarzan movie that captured the heart and spirit of Burroughs' creation.

It remains to be seen how 2016 audiences react. Has Tarzan's time on the world stage passed, or is there indeed something mythic and archetypal that can cause the character to come alive in the modern imaginations? Yates and his team have given it an extraordinary "best shot" and have created something of heart, beauty, and lasting value. The editing of the film by Mark Day is taut and streamlined –not a moment is wasted and the story drives forward with energy and commitment; Henry Braham's cinematography is cool and brooding in London, and lush and earthy in Africa; the production design by Stuart Craig is grand and evocative; and the music by Rupert Gregson Williams is both emotional and pulse-quickening. Special mention goes to screenwriters Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer who updated the Burroughs material, giving it unexpected historical gravitas, while excavating from the pages of the early Tarzan books the core values that made them unique. And the CGI wizardry is seamless, photo-realistic, and effective on all levels.

Give Legend of Tarzan a chance to work its magic on you. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

Terrific Film To Watch

[RECB3 · 7/10 · 19 January 2024]

This is a sensational film for all viewers to watch and enjoy. The storyline of the film was real original and it held itself strongly throughout the entire film. The crew did a fine job in creating this film. The cast selection was tremendous. They really committed and connected to the storyline and to their respective characters. This film reveals to viewers the courage and strength anyone can gain when they are protecting everyone and everything that they want to protect. It also shows what growing up and building a life can do. During my entire lifetime, I have never been allowed to build a life for myself. This is a fabulous film for everyone to watch.

Lost the plot

[fockerfarmer · 3/10 · 8 July 2016]

*****Potential Spoilers*****

lost the plot

As more and more animated films are getting a modern make over, I can say that I was genuinely excited when I saw the first teaser for this Tarzan film. Straight away I was thinking of how my favourite scenes from the previous movie would be brought back to life along with How the animals would look, if they Would talk, At what point would we hear the iconic Tarzan roar and of course how would the vine swinging look with today's cgi technology. In my opinion the animated storyline was a great foundation to work from and should have been ( for the majority at least) left the same. The trailer when released made me almost certain that that was going to be the case. Particularly after seeing The shot of the tree house over looking the ocean and the gorillas discovering Tarzan as a baby.

However. . . . This story is being told very very very differently. The entire story I was hoping to see brought back to life has already come and gone. All You are treated to are multiple flashbacks throughout the film to relive certain moments such as how Tarzan met Jane, what happened to his parents and how he became one with the animals etc but they couldn't even get that in the slightest bit right. The first time you see Tarzan in this film you don't see the Tarzan we know and love we instead see a well dressed, well spoken Tarzan ( called John) who is discussing politics and events that are unfolding/about to unfold in Africa. Straight away I felt like I was watching what should have been a sequel to a revamped first film.

Then who happens to appear . . . . Drum roll please . . . .who else but Samuel L Bloody Jackson 😫😫

Playing a character that was completely out of sync and in all honesty laughable. A character who found himself able to jump off cliffs and land safely In trees, stand and watch Tarzan take on a full sized gorilla with not a flicker of fear other than the occasion typical Jackson outburst. A character that if changed into different clothing could have been playing any off his previous roles. There was no adaptation to suit the film.

David Yates directing this film reminds me of Roy Hodgson managing the England team during the Euros. Had a good base to work with but ultimately had no idea how to put it together so that it worked. You were only teased you with what could have or might have been. A fight scene fuelled on the loss of loved ones and raw emotion that only lasted a few minutes (with more than an underwhelming conclusion) would be an example of that.

The characters had no depth and this was not the Tarzan and Jane I was hoping to see. That being said I think the choice of actors ( Samuel L Jackson being the exception) were the right choices for their parts but were portrayed completely wrong by the director and the direction of the film.

Bitterly disappointed with the plot, the characters and also some of the visual affects. I think the majority of people who were expecting or hoping to see what I was hoping to see will be as well.

Despite Some Rough Edges, The Legend Of Tarzan Is A Pleasant Surprise... A Good Tarzan Movie

[jaredpahl · 7/10 · 17 July 2016]

After decades of trying to bring a successful live-action Tarzan film to the big screen, Warner Brothers and director David Yates have come as close as anyone could have hoped for, with The Legend of Tarzan. This Tarzan has a little bit of extra fat in its script and its big scenes don't fly as high as they could, but The Legend of Tarzan is a solid, old-fashioned adventure that is sure to please those looking for an original, uncynical summer blockbuster.

The Legend of Tarzan is set years after the titular jungle man has left Africa and married his one true love, Jane. Having settled into a civilized life in London, John Clayton III, played by Alexander Skarsgard, is called back to the Congo by Leon Rom, an underling of King Leopold of Belgium, played by Christoph Waltz. Rom plans to capture the man formerly known as Tarzan and turn him over to the natives in exchange for diamonds in order to alleviate the King's mounting debt. Tarzan's wife Jane, played by up and coming superstar Margot Robbie, insists on joining her husband on the trip and is soon captured by Rom, who uses her to lure Tarzan into his grasp. Tarzan and Samuel L. Jackson's Civil War veteran George Washington Williams journey across the African wilderness to save Clayton's wife and stop Rom from enslaving the natives of the Congo. Right there is a perfect Tarzan story, bringing a civilized John Clayton back to the wild to rediscover his untamed roots (which we see in a few well done flashback sequences). However, the story gets quite muddled at times, focusing too heavily on the politics of King Leopold's exploitation of the Congo. This political thread is present throughout the film's 110 minute run-time, and it often dilutes the underlying, more adventurous storyline. The story feels unnecessarily padded with politics, when a more straightforward adventure yarn would have been more appropriate.

Most of the film's stars all do well in their parts. Skarsgard unfortunately isn't given much to work with in the script. He's neither the untamed wild man nor the sophisticated gentleman. His character is stuck in limbo. Skarsgard does look the part and he certainly doesn't mangle the role, but his Tarzan is unremarkable. The supporting characters fare better. Robbie, Waltz, and especially Jackson bring much needed energy to the film. Robbie's Jane is plucky without being obnoxious, Waltz is a solid, literal mustache-twirling villain, a role he can play in his sleep by now, and a surprisingly endearing Sam Jackson brings consistent comedic relief as the sidekick, George Washington Williams. Jackson and Waltz's presences elevate the movie in a big way.

The biggest draw of The Legend of Tarzan, the action and special effects, don't disappoint, but don't particularly impress either. Director David Yates, of Harry Potter fame, films the action well and the effects do their job. The animals are all digital here, which is something of a shame considering that while the gorillas, lions, ostriches and more never look fake, I can't say they looked entirely real. The African landscapes are also... okay. The natural locations themselves are gorgeous, but Henry Braham's cinematography is only hit or miss when it comes to capturing that beauty. For every grand vista is a mist-filled gray mess. Still, when things work, they work well. There are moments in this movie where action, cinematography, and special effects come together beautifully and we are treated to some brilliant Tarzan moments. Any time Tarzan swings through the trees is a real treat.

Tarzan has been a difficult property to adapt in modern Hollywood, but luckily The Legend of Tarzan mostly succeeds in doing so. Yes, the political plot line is too heavy a presence in the film's otherwise great story, and yes, the special effects aren't in the same league as some of Hollywood's other big budget blockbusters, but David Yates' adaptation of Edgar Rice Burrough's classic stories is far from the flop it could have been. The talented cast and sure-handed direction keep the movie afloat and allow for a good amount of thrills. The movie would have benefited greatly from some plot trimming, but The Legend of Tarzan is a solid entertainer and a refreshingly old-fashioned piece of summer fun, nonetheless.

70/100