Please distribute this URL as you see fit.

Opinion By Ted Baldwin

Tarzan


Reviewed: 6/20/99
What a splendid film.
After so many tries at Tarzan, Disney is the one that gets it right.
This animated feature is even more faithful to the original concept of ERB than Greystoke, and Tarzan and the Lost City, with Caspar Van Dien (character was good, just didn't look tall enough).
Tantor!Tantor!Tantor!Tantor!Tantor!
FIVE POSSIBLE


      Tarzan is the undisputed Lord of the Apes. No other jungle-man series ever came close to capturing the imagination of the public as did this, and there is a singular reason for it. Tarzan was created by Edgar Rice Burroughs, one of the greatest action-adventure writers we have ever known. He infuses his tales with a vibrancy and life that still rings true after almost 90 years. They are fresh, and beguiling, and full of wit and wisdom at a most practical level. ERB is particularly good at pointing out the foibles of mortal man.

     To start the tale of Tarzan of the Apes, Burroughs marooned an enterprising young English Lord and his expectant Lady on a tropical shoreline. Born in the savage wilderness, Tarzan is but a year old when nature claims his parents. He soon finds himself adopted by a grieving she-ape, Kala, and learning the ways of the jungle.

     From that humblest beginning, Tarzan grows into the most fearsome, brutal, yet just creature the jungle has ever seen. Possessed with a sly, grim humor, and a ruthlessly practical get-it-done attitude, he sets about rescuing fair maidens, intimidating natives, cohabiting with Jane Porter and screwing up bad guys in general.

     With a massive intelligence and a propensity for imitation of the sounds of the jungle, Tarzan asserts his dominion. He is a practicing conservationist, and a peacemaker, but not above planting a few cannibal heads on stakes to terrorize the rest. He is funny, and a source of amusement, but Burroughs makes it possible to find humor in his plights without degrading the dignity of the ape-man.

     Furthermore, Tarzan finds companionship with all manner of man and beast, and for his day, was quite tolerant of almost every stripe.

     Yes, yes. But what about the movie?

     I liked it a lot the first time. I liked it better the second time.

     You will find

  • an adventurous, intelligent Tarzan, growing up, growing strong, and making mistakes that cost dearly
  • passages lifted directly from the original Tarzan book.
  • comic characterizations of Tantor, here re-imagined as a younger but sillier elephant.
  • wild leopards and other ferocious animals abounding, untamed and unequaled in any Disney efforts previous.
  • lower jungle creatures much in evidence too, especially a Cheetah wannabe. (Shades of Aladdin...)
     Most mercifully, Tarzan did not have a monkey companion in this one.

     The canvas for all of this is the deep jungle, and special software was developed precisely for this effect. Deep Canvas, they call it. Hmmmmmm.

     The result is simply exhilarating. Wild chases, acrobatics, and plain old Sunday drives on the vines take on new perspectives. It is a rambunctous P.O.V. that has not been animated before, at least not to this level of sophistication and detail.

     And other aspects of the film fare as well. Even the PC elements so pervasive in recent Disney films are excised...in fact the title song refers to Tarzan as a "Son of Man".

     This is remarkable progress considering the "colors of the wind" sermon in Pocahontas(albeit beautiful) (not that there's anything wrong with that). Maybe we can finally get back to normal inclusivity without having to bend over backwards taking care of everybody's feelings. (Before you even start, I am a founding member of an inclusive language church here in Batonburg, so I know what from what in inclusive language.)

Smorgas-bar

"Things Tarzan Has Eaten"

     Disney's Tarzan was criticized as being anatomically incorrect. They declared that Tarzan's jungle diet would have precluded the development of huge muscle mass. Since it purportedly would consist of fruits and leafy matter, it would be hardly a protein rich diet. So, no hunk.
They also reasoned that the Apes have adapted to this diet over millennia and thereby can develop muscles on the human-unbuffing diet.
     The truth is, anyone reading the original Edgar Rice Burroughs books knows that Tarzan was a mighty hunter, and a devotee of raw, bloody flesh.
     He would eat until sated, then "wipe his greasy fingers on his thighs". (For those who like aged meat, Tarzan would bury the rest of the kill for later, to keep scavengers away.)

From the novels, more or less, here is what Tarzan ate:
  • Milk from his birth Mother's breast
  • Milk from his Ape mother's breast.
  • Bugs
  • Fruits
  • Vegetables
  • Berries
  • Lions
  • Pumas
  • Wild Boar
  • Antelope
  • Elephant (Once. It was bad, he hallucinated and shot arrows at the moon all night- Jungle Tales of Tarzan.)
  • Monkey
  • Clams
  • Fish
  • Great Ape
  • Gorilla
  • Snake
  • French Cuisine, and
  • English food.
     He did not, however, eat human flesh. This is gone into in great detail in the first book, Tarzan of the Apes.

As I reread the novels, I will add to this from time to time should I see anything new...

     One little PC moment that was snuck in had Terk (Rosie O'Donnell) asking "what primitive creatures are responsible for this mess!" as the camera panned test tubes and beakers of the Porter's makeshift jungle lab. As a scientist, and not "of sorts", being an actual, living, breathing, chemist, I take offense at the continual jibes at technology. Especially when mouthed by Rosie O. Oh well, come the revolution...!

     The only weak point seems to be the under-developed conflict between Tarzan and Clayton, or rather I should say, the conflict is developed late in the picture. And Clayton is a little one-dimensional for a two-d film. But then the story is more about Tarzan overall, his education, and life, than about one villain in a contest of wills.

     Songs are by Phil Collins. I am not a huge fan of his, being more of an Elton John appreciator, but they are nicely done. I suspect "Son Of Man", or possibly "One Family", will get an academy nod, even if there are no other vocal standouts. Terk and the boys do a pretty good job of destroying the campsite with a romping be-bop, and it's fun.It really is not a musical, thank God.

In fact, I'd characterize the entire film as fun. And it is the best Disney has had to offer in decades.

     All in all this is a big big winner, and blessedly, one I believe that parents will be able to watch over and over. When this thing hits video you know you will have to.

     For pure escapism, try any of the first fifteen novels of Tarzan by ERB. (The last nine or so are comparatively bad.)

     I am especially fond of Korak, his son by Jane. (Korak means "the killer".)

     And for even more excitement, check out the John Carter of Mars series, or the short but quirky Carson Napier of Venus set. The War Chief, Apache Devil, The Cave Girl and the Earth's Core stuff are all fun.

The website is complete, with a long sequence aimed at illustrating their animation techniques for the film.

Amusing, isn't it?

All materials copyright 1999 Ted Baldwin