I both agree and disagree here. I would have preferred something still closer to the novels (this did go closer than anything before, but still not all the way), but I guess one problem for any films about Tarzan is that the movie Tarzan is so much better known than the original version that film makers just don't want to drop all the elements from the movies. Or dare. People tend to prefer what they have liked before, and going hardcore original with Tarzan might disappoint lots of potential audience who liked the movies, or are at least sort of vaguely familiar with the movies even if they are not fans or have even seen any but maybe the Disney version but are totally unfamiliar with the novels.
Today especially those who loved that Disney cartoon as kids. For most people now that IS Tarzan because it's the only exposure to the character they have ever had.
Disappointing those people, the largest group who might be kind of predisposed to see this movie would have been a risky move to take, and I do get why they didn't go there, not fully, but kind of ended somewhere between the cartoon and the novels here.
Personally I think this film did use the film elements fairly tolerably. He didn't summon the animals because they were his "friends" - except for the Mangani, and the lions, but the Mangani were fairly true to the novel version, animals very, very close to humans and the family he had grown up with, and the implication was that the lions were something he had tamed when they were cubs, as Jane mentioned to Williams when the lions were introduced in the film, "he has known them since they were cubs" - but because he knew their behavioral triggers and could imitate their calls well enough to fool them. The wildebeest stampede happened because he drove them with the help of the lions (and cats will run after anything that runs from them so no real training for the lions needed there, just get them to run with him towards the wildebeest which would then run from them), Mangani and Williams' gun, the crocodiles came in the end because he imitated their "mating call", and then attacked Rom when on the site simply because that is what they do when they get close to easy prey.
He was also a bit too nice, still. The original is way more hardcore, this guy did get violent but didn't even personally kill anyone. But again, my guess is that the point was risk avoidance. From what little I have read of the development it seems the wish was to make movie using the original, but I guess some parties somewhere did get bit of a cold feet. Possibly the studio representatives... maybe the character had to be softened a bit in order to get the movie done at all in the first place.
It's a pity that a sequel at least right now seems unlikely. There is the possibility that the hope, or plan, was kind of softer first followed by a more true version, sort of careful easing of the audiences unfamiliar with the original character into the real Tarzan.
reply
share
eriknieminen
8 years ago
Good points, and I suspect you may be on to something with regards to studio interference.
It's also a good point that they might feel like it's a safer bet to feed the audiences something they're more familiar with.
If marketed correctly though, it could be like the Batman reboot... who knew the audience wanted the dark gritty real Batman until it was made (and properly promoted)?
The Tarzan character of the books can be quite sympathetic... and multi-dimensional (this can be expanded for film form). The movie Tarzan has thus far been very very dull. They tried to give him more layers here, but maybe it was the acting.. I don't know. It all just seemed very bland.
On a side note, I wish they hadn't changed Jane's upbringing story... but not too surprising I guess.
reply
share