The Legend of Tarzan (2016)

Top comments

1. 

   ikkegoemikke

   "Bring it to me. Bring him to me. And you shall have your diamonds."
   
   
   
   
   Once and a while my mother allowed me to choose a comic strip at the store when I was a small boy. I always opted for a Tarzan comic strip. It appealed very strongly to my imagination at that time. That ruler of the jungle who used lianas to travel and who ruled over those wild fellow residents of the jungle. Even films from the old days with Johnny Weissmuller captivated me. Weissmuller was more impressive compared to this Tarzan. I'm talking about the size of his thorax and those developed biceps and triceps. Tarzan in this movie is a tad less muscled and he's already adapted to modern society. No "Me Tarzan.You Jane" conversations. He rather listens to the name John Clayton (Alexander Skarsgård). A distinguished English gentleman who walks around gallantly on two legs and speaks eloquently to his fellow men. He's civilized, in other words.
   
   And then there's Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) who explores Africa while looking for valuable diamonds to fund the expansionism of the Belgian King Leopold II. Rom is a determined globetrotter who won't let anything stand in his way so he can reach his goal. There's one obstacle between him and the valuable diamonds. And that's Chief Mbonga (Djimon Hounsou) who only wants one thing in exchange for those precious diamonds. And that's Tarzan. Time for Rom to forge a plan and lure the lord of the jungle in a clever way to the dark African continent. The jeering jungle dweller is being accompanied by his lovely wife Jane (Margot "Focus" Robbie). Something else to be worried about.
   
   Is "The Legend of Tarzan" a bad movie? No, not really. But it isn't an excellent movie either. It sometimes looks a little bit out dated. Even though Tarzan is placed in a totally different zeitgeist and his attitude towards the natives in Africa isn't so explicitly authoritarian anymore. Even Jane isn't such a sensitive screaming blonde in distress, who runs out of the jungle the moment a tiny wild animal shows itself. Ultimately, the film unfolds itself like a typical Tarzan story in which the terror of the jungle has to rescue his wife out of the hands of the bad guys. That's how it also was portrayed in comics and the older movies. Lets say, it's not such a legendary movie.
   
   Admit it. Tarzan doesn't look like he could withstand the primal force of the Mangani and actually he should have ended up as a comfy carpet in some hut in the bush after receiving such hammer blows of this fearsome attacker. But I could live with that. After all, he's a legend. This film is about THE legend. An unassailable and invincible superhero whose status reached iconic proportions. Clearly noticeable was the unconvincing look of the group of gorillas. Compared to "The Jungle Book", the CGI of the wild animals sometimes really looked miserable. Then again, the flock of ostriches advancing in a "Jurassic Park" kind of way, were beautifully designed. The thing that went over my head (probably because I'm thinking with a rational mind), was the way they were chasing the speeding train. The way those lianas made sure they caught up with it, was mind blowing. What ingenious system was constructed to achieve this? I couldn't figure it out immediately. But it still looked really ridiculous.
   
   "The Legend of Tarzan" is suitable material for a cozy movie night . There's sufficient action to enjoy. And Samuel L. Jackson has been recruited to provide the comic relief. Margot Robbie looks breathtaking again as the "lady in distress." And the confrontation between Tarzan and the tribe of Mbonga was brilliant until the digitized gorillas appeared on screen. The easiest part was played by Christoph Waltz. He just had to play himself again. A great actor, but he's stuck in the same routine lately. Despite everything, Tarzan was,is and remains a vibrant legend.
   
   More reviews here : http://bit.ly/1KIdQMT 7 years 6 months ago
2. 

   dpanter

   Same as most people, I had only heard one thing about the movie beforehand. It seemed like the buzz revolving a certain set of muscles was the only thing worth spreading.
   That is a rather strong warning signal. The movie unfortunately lived down to the (lack of?) expectations.
   
   Initially, I liked the way the story was presented,

   "Tarzan" going back to revisit his true home instead of another forgettable origin story variant,

   but as the thing dragged on and on it became more and more irritating.

   Kind of like my iCM comments. :P

   
   
   Alexander looked tired and bored, even when he

   returns home to Africa and he

   should be very happy. Also did not nail the English accent, but I'm nitpicking now.
   I felt Margot Robbie's performance was plain bad. Nowhere near her greatness in Wolf of Wall Street (great movie) or her brilliance in Suicide Squad (crap movie).
   Speaking of bad, there's Sam and Christoph. Another two actors of great talent and skill who simply swing and miss, horribly. Let's not even mention Djimon Hounsou or Jim Broadbent... basically, it's a paycheck for everyone, forget the script and all that other movie making hoo-haa. Off to the next one.
   
   Special effects fail brutally in the later half, there were something like 7 special effects studios involved. Perhaps a case of too many cooks.
   Essentially, everything in the movie is more or less a letdown and this piece of crap won't do anyone involved any favors. It's making profit worldwide so technically, it's a success? Ugh.
   
   Not recommended. At all. 7 years 6 months ago
3. 

   Zeltaebar

   This was surprisingly entertaining considering all the negative buzz from critics. I enjoyed the spectacle of exotic places and animals, superhuman physics and the ridiculously high stakes at every turn. It's a leave-your-brain-at-the-door kind of popcorn flick to be enjoyed by people who like to see old-fashioned adventure yarns. 6 years 10 months ago

See all comments

Friends

Login to see which of your friends have seen this movie!