Greystoke (1984) Poster

(1984)

User Reviews

Review this title
87 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
DVD Did Not Do Justice To These Stunning Visuals
ccthemovieman-126 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
After I first saw this, I thought, "Wow, this is the most spectacular movie, visually-speaking, I've ever seen." Since that time, I've seen some that topped it but it still ranks as one of the best in that department. I'm just disgusted the long-awaited DVD was so poorly done, the quality of this transfer hardly better than the VHS tape.

The jungle scenes are filmed in Cameroon, and "lush" is the best adjective to describe what you see. Except for jungle sounds, "seeing" is certainly almost everything in the beginning as there is almost no "hearing," no dialog until Tarzan (Christopher Lambert) befriends Ian Holm and vice-versa....so be ready for that, if you haven't watched this film.

Story-wise, all I'll say is this is not the Tarzan many of us came to know in Johnny Weismuller films.....but that's not a complaint. For those craving action, and don't care about cinematography as I do, you just have to get past that silent introduction period

In this Tarzan version, our hero goes back to Scotland (his roots), adapts to that environment (for the most part....and a little too quickly for credibility, frankly) and then returns to the jungle without Jane. This is supposedly more true to the Tarzan books, written by Edgar Rice Burroughs.

The special effects in here were done by Rick Baker, one of the best in the business. Sharp DVD or not, this is still a stunning film to view and very interesting throughout its 2 hours and 15 minutes.
40 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
not the Tarzan you think of......
dbdumonteil8 March 2003
SPOILERS Edgar Rice Burroughs's famous character was adapted thousand of times for the screen til one's thirst is quenched, notably during the thirties and the forties by Hollywood. Its productors made Tarzan one of the most successful cinema characters. Several years later, Hugh Hudson decided to make a more ambitious version of the monkey-man and it's a more natural, more wild and more down-to-earth Tarzan that he gives away here. Hudson skilfully avoids the clichés that you usually grant to Tarzan such as his famous scream or his friendly pet, Cheetah. Not only, are we far from the designed and invented character made by Hollwood but we are also far from the film set used to make his stories. The movie was partly made in Africa (more precisely in Cameroon). The movie introduces two obvious parts: the first one which takes place in the jungle where Tarzan lives among his adoptive friends, the apes and considers himself as their lord. But he ignores his real origins. The second one in England where Tarzan discovers the English society. Ian Holm epitomizes the link between the two parts and Hudson avoids all that could make the movie falls into the ridiculous thanks to a clever screenplay. Indeed, Holm teaches Lambert basic rules of manners so as to behave correctly in the English society and the result works. Moreover, in the second part, no-one ever laughs at Tarzan and he's even really appreciated. As far as the end is concerned well it's a both bitter and happy end. Happy because Tarzan comes back to the jungle and meets again his adoptive close relatives. But bitter too, because this homecoming means that the Greystoke line won't be ensured and is condemned to disappear... Christophe Lambert finds here, his first (and last?) great role. Sadly, he'll never equal the achievement of his performance in this movie and he'll play in poor and insipide action movies. Nevertheless, as I said previously, a clever screenplay, a performance of a rare quality, some impressive natural sceneries (both the jungle and the English country and we get a gorgeous movie. It's also an excellent rereading from a popular novel. So why is it only rated barely (6/10)?
48 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Excellent novel, good film.
srb6715 April 2002
Greystoke stays close to the first Tarzan novel which makes for a striking contrast between this film and earlier Tarzan flicks.

'Christophe' sticks to his French accent for most of this film, which is a relief as he concentrates on his acting and, for the most part, gets it spot on. His reversion to ape behaviour in moments of emotional stress is funny and touching. Ralph Richardson's potrayal of the Sixth Earl is full of humour and subtlety, only to be expected from a master of the art. Ian Holm, again, a masterful performance. They put Andie MacDowell to shame.

The first half is mainly in the jungle and is fascinating to watch. A huge amount of research about ape behaviour is put to entertaining use. It comes to a close when some amusingly nasty English explorers and a disdainful Belgian appear in the jungle. The second half, when Johnny (Lambert) is introduced to Victorian society touches on what it means to be 'civilized'. He meets his grandfather and is expected to take his place in society but then discovers what society is like.

A great adaptation and an entertaining film.
32 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Tarzan as Burroughs intended!
krdement18 July 2007
If you are looking for a modern film version of Buster Crabbe or Johnny Weismuller's overcoming the machinations of unscrupulous, white safari guides or cunning, black tribesmen, while saving the animal kingdom, this is NOT the movie for you. This is a recounting of the Tarzan "legend" from its beginning in intelligent, adult terms. It is beautifully filmed and faithful to the Edgar Rice Burroughs stories.

Tarzan is no action hero, but a man torn between two worlds - the natural and the civilized. In a stunning performance, Christopher Lambert portrays this angst with absolute realism. If he slips up just once the cat will be out of the bag: the audience (especially the adult audience targeted by the film) will laugh, and the film will completely lose its grip. It will plummet into the cheesy depths. But Lambert never lets that happen. (Forget what you may think of him in other movies; when I saw this film at the theater on its original release, I thought he deserved an academy award.)

The supporting cast is uniformly excellent, as other commentators have noted. I disagree with most of them in that I didn't find anything wrong with Andie McDowell's performance. I wouldn't have nominated her for an academy award - the role is undemanding - but she is completely up to it, such as it is. I don't know why her voice was overdubbed, either.

The cinematography of the African segment of the tale is absolutely beautiful. It captures both the beauty of the African wilderness and the exotic expectation it holds in the collective imagination of those who have never been there. The scenery is lush and exotic, and the colors are vivid.

But this is also a "period" film, and the cinematography also magnificently depicts Victorian England - the countryside, the city and the interiors. The costumes are outstanding. The soundtrack is beautiful without being overwhelming or obtrusive.

There are some disturbing scenes - especially for animal lovers - but no more disturbing than a few scenes in Dances with Wolves. This is an excellent film about the conflict between civilization and nature, personified in the young Lord Greystoke, convincingly portrayed by Christopher Lambert.
38 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Finally, a believable Tarzan movie.
Maxta11 June 2000
Warning: Spoilers
Greystoke is without doubt the best tarzan movie I have ever seen. Christopher Lambert portrays a very believable man trying to return to the world of mankind alongside the fantastic Ian Holm. The struggle of John to leave the jungle and the apes who raised him is quite stirring. Some very memorable scenes including where Lambert makes the jungle noises to the romantic interest, and the scene where he witnesses his ape father's death. Tarzans feelings for both worlds is well developed and really makes you feel for him.

An excellent and underrated movie.
19 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the better Tarzan films
barnabyrudge8 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I haven't seen all the Tarzan films, so I can't say if this is the best, but I've seen enough to know that it is one of the better ones. For a start it does away with all these ludicrously elaborate adventure plots that curse the Jock Mahoney and Gordon Scott Tarzan entries, and returns to the basis of the original E.R.Burroughs book, focusing on the life of a shipwrecked child who grows up among apes and begins to act and eat like them.

In the second half of the picture, Tarzan is all grown up (as personified by Christopher Lambert, who is just right for this role) and he is found living with the apes by some European explorers. They bring him back to Victorian England, where he meets his real family and is educated to join the "civilised" society where he should have grown up if he hadn't been shipwrecked all those years ago. In an ironic touch, he realises that "civilised" people are actually more barbaric than his ape family, and in the end he returns to where he truly belongs.

The audiences seem divided over this one. Some love it, others hate it. My view is that it is mainly a very good film, nicely performed and photographed, with an interesting and mostly convincing script. I agree with other reviewers who have pointed out that certain scenes are a touch unintentionally funny, but aside from that I rank this film quite highly.
23 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Best yet!!
halstead16 July 2001
Having seen numerous Tarzan movies over the years, I consider Greystoke, one of the best, if not the best. It played with all emotions. Christopher Lambert's portrayal of Tarzan was excellent. I have never read Borough's book, but this adaptation must, in the least, put any Tarzan movie that Johnny Weismueller or Lex Barker played in to shame. I have seen this movie at least 5 times and would watch it again and again.
18 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Realistic and tragic, and it doesn't shy away
paulijcalderon21 August 2016
Probably the most serious and realistic adaptation of Tarzan I've seen. The first act is great. The harshness and grittiness in the tone was a great way to set the mood. The second half is good and has some better moments, but it doesn't hold up as well as the first half and leaves the film a little anticlimactic.

The development and exploration of John/Tarzan's character is well thought out and the performance was really believable. Ian Holm is fantastic in the film as his friend and the journey they make together should have been explored more. Going into the film i expected to see a film where Tarzan defends his animal friends from evil humans in the jungle, but I got a very grounded and simple film about a man trying to adapt into a life he naturally wasn't raised for. The duality and having to choose between the two lives is an interesting concept, but it leaves it unresolved in my opinion.

There are some very dramatic and sad moments here too. The bond between the apes and the man is felt more than the bond between humans sometimes. The apes have their cheesy moments, but there's also really strong and emotional moments too. The detail in the costumes switches around a bit. The best compliment to the ape costumes I can give is that the eyes where done so well that I actually thought those were real ape ayes.

There are even some scenes that deal with the human beings desire to kill and rip apart other animals, like dissecting, hunting and chaining them up. Seeing those things from Tarzan's perspective was a bit haunting and heartbreaking and you feel the conflict.

Some great performances, great first half, gritty & grounded moments are all strong points, but it loses steam in the second half and drags on a bit for too long and leaves you feeling unresolved. The film also lacked more tension and intensity towards the end which would have picked the whole thing up and made up for the calmer moments. I like calmer films, but it really builds up to something exciting to happen, and it never does.

Still, it's probably the best adaptation of Tarzan I've seen and the one who truly makes you feel the tragedy of this truly sad and haunting tale. It ain't as light as you might expect.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Hugh Hudson creates a thoughtful and sober look at the legend.
ozthegreatat423304 May 2007
Beautifully filmed, acclaimed director Hugh Hudson (Chariots of Fire) creates a story that brings the entire legend of John Clayton, Lord Greystoke and Tarzan of the apes to life with reverence and dignity, and with a scope not heretofore seen in Tarzan films. Christopher Lambert makes his starring debut as the young Lord, raised in the wild by a female gorilla after his parents die in Africa. Later returned to what is to him an alien world, that of class and privilege, he feels totally out of place. Once he learns what has happened to the apes that raised him and their world he realizes that he must go back. A sad but triumphant story told against a background of fantastic vistas. This is one of those films that is a must for every Cinemaphile's collection.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Quite surprisingly enjoyable
Pegasus79 February 2002
Once you get past the first notion of the unlikeliness of the actual events in the story, you'll enjoy this film a lot more. I have seen this movie several times, and still enjoy it. Although i find Christopher Lambert a mediocre actor in most of his films, i feel that he shines here (a good idea to let him speak in his native French accent, cleverly written into the script by means of the Belgian explorer who finds him)instead of making him put on a bizarre accent, and it works well. Ian Holm and Ralph Richardson are fantastic and moving, but McDowell spoils it again and most of her scenes are irritating to watch. Some of this movie was actually quite upsetting (the taxidermy labs and the scene where the ape/father is shot) but very well done. The scenery is fantastic, and the musical score is brilliant and stirring. Great make-up effects for its day. This movie is well worth watching, give it a try, you might be pleasantly surprised!
17 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pretty faithful adaptation of the classic lore
george.schmidt31 March 2003
GREYSTOKE: THE LEGEND OF TARZAN, LORD OF THE APES (1984) ***1/2 Christopher Lambert, Ian Holm, Ralph Richardson, James Fox, Andie McDowall. Incredibly realized adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs' classic tale of an orphaned infant raised by apes in the deepest darkest jungles of Northern Africa that eschews the old Johnny Weissmuller route ("Me Tarzan, You Jane") and instead captures the essence of the story of the man who would be the next Earl of Greystoke Estate of Scotland who cannot escape the upbringing by primates no matter how hard established (and snobbish) society dictates what is proper. Exquisitely breathtaking cinematography by John Alcott and make up artist/genius Rick Baker's ape creations are indeed a wonder to behold (the apes are the most empathetic I believe since his "King Kong" sympathetic figure). Richardson (in his last screen role) received a Best Supporting Actor nomination as the grandfather of John Clayton (Tarzan), gives a memorable performance. McDowall in her screen debut has her voice dubbed by Glenn Close thanks to director Hugh Hudson's supposed distaste for her unmistakably anachoristic Southern accent (as well as his rewrite of screenwriter Robert Towne's script that promptly led to Towne removing his moniker for the pseudonym of P.H. Vazak, which incidently is the name of his pet sheepdog(!) )
21 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
a great film!
kepsam-28 April 2000
I, unlike a lot of you unkind movie reviewers, actually liked the movie. The movie was slow? That it wasn't. If it was, I would have sent it back to Amazon.Com. All of Tarzan's actions in the movie HAD to take place. Like the love scene. You'd be stupid to think that Tarzan would turn into a Romeo and just make love to Jane..duh..he's half ape peoples! If you're in the mood for a beautiful movie, don't listen to the no-brainers, see it, you'll love Greystoke! I first saw it in Theaters when I was 11, and I loved it then & I still love it now. All the actors in the movie did a great job..the jungle scenes are beautiful, and the original score is a masterpiece. 9 out of 10
21 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Masterpiece - An absolutely brilliant, amazing, touching movie
supermaxou1142 September 2006
I don't understand why it is so underrated on IMDb.. This movie is just the perfection.. The better adaptation of all times of the myth of Tarzan! As a french, I can say that this is the better role of Christophe Lambert, ridiculous in a lots of movies, but here absolutely wonderful, charismatic, incredible! The plot is great, well told, the story magnificent, the direction, the atmosphere, the music, every things are perfect! How believe these sequences with the Elgar music, just simply perfect..

Greystoke is truly an unbelievable movie, underrated here, I don't really know why, but really appreciated
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A realistic take on the ape man
Wuchakk8 July 2015
Released in 1984, "Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes" stars Christopher Lambert in the title role with Andie MacDowell as Jane, Ian Holm as his French friend, D'Arnot, and Ralph Richardson as his likable grandfather who's nearing senility. James Fox is on hand as Tarzan's stuffy "high class" nemesis in Scotland.

One thing that sets "Greystoke" apart from previous Tarzan flicks is that the filmmakers were determined to depict him the way Burroughs did in the books, as an extremely intelligent, talented man who happened to grow-up with a tribe of apes and not as a dim-witted wild man who had a hard time construing five proper words in a sentence. Lambert was only 26 during filming (but looks & acts more mature) and perfect for the role. This is a more realistic version of the ape man, moving away from the whole "me Tarzan, you Jane" cliché that (presumably) started with the Weissmuller flicks, which explains why the movie's called "Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan" and not "Tarzan..."

The first half is the best part, shot on location in lush West Africa (and, presumably, some parts in the studio, although you can't tell). While the apes are people in ape costumes they look amazingly realistic, particularly considering "Planet of the Apes" came out a mere 16 years earlier. The progress made with F/X in that short time is amazing (fifteen years later and CGI would take over most F/X). There are a number of great scenes, like Tarzan's fight-to-the-death with the ape leader and D'Arnot's introduction to Tarzan with a couple of curious apes behind him, causing D'Arnot to pass out.

The second half switches to Scotland and this is where most people have a problem with the film. They say it's too slow, blah, blah, blah, and they're right to a point. I think the last discussion at the mansion before going back to Africa could've been cut almost entirely. After all, by this point we've already seen Clayton (Tarzan) confront Fox' character multiple times with intimidating animal sounds. So it was redundant and unnecessary. Nevertheless, I think the second half reveals a lot of character-defining stuff about Tarzan: His loving kinship with his grandfather, his defense of the lowly, his uncanny intelligence & talents, his compassion for encaged creatures, his passion for Jane and his reviling of the pompous.

MacDowell is fine in the role, even stunning, and I didn't even know she was dubbed by Glenn Close until someone pointed it out, which shows they did a quality job with the dubbing. MacDowell is one of the reasons the love scene works so spectacularly, possibly my favorite love scene in the history of cinema. She and Lambert had great chemistry.

The ending is a turn-off until you think about it ***MILD SPOILER***: Tarzan's rejection of his ancestral estate in Scotland is akin to him rejecting Western Civilization in general. I'm assuming that Jane would decide to later join him in Africa. Too bad there wasn't a sequel (I should add that 1998's "Tarzan and the Lost City" is SAID to be a sequel of this film, but it lacks Lambert and MacDowell in the key roles, plus it's mediocre by comparison, yet still worth checking out if you're a Tarzan fan).

The film runs 143 minutes and was shot in Cameroon, Africa, and England.

GRADE: A- (keeping in mind that Tarzan is my all-time favorite fictional hero)
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Poignant and Primal
cold_lazarou9 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Edgar Rice Burrough's classic character of John Clayton, Viscount Greystoke, aka Tarzan, Lord of the Apes springs vividly to life in the most accurate celluloid rendering of the original novel "Tarzan of the Apes" (given a somewhat more unwieldy title here - the only demerit against this spectacular adaptation).

Christopher Lambert (of "Subway" and "Highlander" fame) heads a cast of luminaries such as Ian Holm, and - in sadly his farewell performance - the late Sir Ralsph Richardson as Tarzan's grandfather, Earl Greystoke. With superb direction by Hugh Hudson following his Oscar-conquering "Chariots of Fire", we are swept from the bleak moors of Scotland to the primal uplands of equitorial Africa and back again as we follow Clayton/Tarzan from his birth to shipwrecked aristos, through his youth amongst the great apes and to his return to, and disillusionment with, Western civilisation. A young Andie McDowall gives her debut performance as Jane Porter (of "Me Tarzan, you Jane" fame, although that line is not uttered here, or indeed, in any Tarzan story or movie much to the amazement of many), with a vocal performance dubbed by Glenn Close.

Some of the greatest performances in the movie however come from the apes themselves, or rather the performers portraying the apes. The scenes of the young Tarzan cradling his dying ape mother, and later the adult Clayton discovering his ape father caged in the back of a museum, are extraordinarily poignant. No wonder Tarzan rejects the bland, soulless and vicious humans to return to the wild life among the apes: the simian characters show more humanity than some of the people on display here.

I have seen some commentators calling this film "pretentious", usually whilst championing earlier Tarzans, such as the Johnny Weissmuller efforts of the '30s and '40s. All i can say to that is, if it is pretentious to actually stay true to the original text and character, then there is something strange going on. That's like championing Adam West's Batman over Christian Bale: baffling.

This is a superb movie, and certainly the best portrayal of Burrough's story and characters on screen thus far. I simply can't see it being bettered any time soon, unless someone picks up the rights and does straight adaptations of Burrough's original novels and stories. I can't see that happening somehow, so i'm more than happy to stick with this.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A great touching tale
Rautus31 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes is based on the classic book Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs and is a more faithful adaptation to the classic book, the film has some great scenery like the Jungles of South Africa to the Greystoke mansion, the acting is also great. Chirstopher Lambert did a great performance as Tarzan, it was also his first English speaking role. The film has some funny moments, sad moments and touching moments that makes this a real classic.

The film sees a boat crashing in the Jungles of South Africa and some time later they have a son named John, the Apes go into the hut and one of them kills the Father. The Apes then take him to where they live and adopt him as one of their own, as the years go by John grows up and learns to be more like the Apes. In his teens his Foster Mom gets attacked by Native Hunters and soon killed by them, years later a group of people are going to Africa on a expedition. After setting up camp they're soon attacked by the Natives, most escape but Capitaine Phillippe D'Arnot is left behind injured by some of the arrows. After hiding he meets John now an adult who takes him to his home and takes care of his wounds, after a while Phillippe starts to teach John how to speak English and teach him that he's not one of the Apes but a person. When Phillippe goes to leave John goes with him, after sometime they arrive at Greystoke manor where the Sixth Earl of Greystoke is shown his long lost Grandson, John is shown his bedroom and picture of his true Mom and Dad. John also meets Jane Porter and slowly as they get to know each other he begins to have feelings for her, when it's Christmas the Sixth Earl of Greystoke slides down the stairs killing himself. John then starts to miss the Jungle and wants to return but Phillipe tells him to stay since everything they had done would be for nothing. John is then torn between his life as a Greystoke and the Lord of the Apes.

Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes is a great classic that should be seen. 10/10
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Excellent Adaptation and excellent performances...
nefastus28 March 2006
..especially by Lambert. This is the essential Burrough's Tarzan that I grew up reading when I was a kid. I have read a few negative reviews on this film and couldn't help but wonder what their issue was. They obviously didn't see the movie I did or they were expecting something that was more akin to the Saturday afternoon serials.

This was the Tarzan that was of the novel and the film makers should be applauded for tackling the source material and taking it seriously. Lambert was excellent. I still think he is one of Hollywood's most under-rated actors. This was a movie that he shines in.

The photography and the apes, done by Rick Baker both were amazing. You definitely felt the since of the jungle. The 2nd half, Tarzan's attempt at being civilized really pulls you into the emotional conflict he had was forced to resolve.

I highly recommend this film
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An intelligent Tarzan, both in the jungle and civilized society
roghache27 March 2006
This is both an entertaining and a touching version of the classic tale, also quite intelligent, not of the 'Me Tarzan, You Jane' school at all.

It's the famous story of a child reared to manhood in the jungle by apes. A titled British couple (the wife pregnant) is stranded in the African wilds after a shipwreck. After the parents' deaths, the baby is raised in the jungle by apes. Twenty years later, this young man (i.e. Tarzan) rescues a wounded Belgian explorer, nursing him back to health. The Belgian discovers evidence that his rescuer is the young Lord Greystoke and returns him to his rightful estate in Scotland, where he must adjust to civilized society.

The movie is sort of divided into two parts. In the first half, we see Tarzan in his jungle environment. Not being an expert, I am unaware as to the realism of its depiction of ape community life, but it is certainly entertaining. For me, the more moving section is the second half, when Tarzan must meet his real family, develop language skills, and adjust to aristocratic British society, all the while wooing Jane (Andie MacDowell). He is portrayed as a 'noble savage', whether in the wild or in elegant Edwardian parlors. By contrast, the upper crust is depicted as often far more barbaric than the jungle Tarzan left.

Christopher Lambert is fantastic in his sympathetic portrayal of Tarzan in both the jungle and civilized environments. He conveys a real sense of his confusion and conflict, torn as he is between the two very different worlds, his original ape family and his new human one. Sir Ralph Richardson, one of the old British legends, is brilliant as always in the role of Tarzan's grandfather, the Sixth Earl of Greystoke.

The film focuses more on Tarzan's struggles in adapting to civilization and his inner conflict than on his jungle exploits. This unusual take on the old classic makes it both the typical dramatic adventure but also, above all, a moving personal story. I wasn't surprised to note here that its director is the same individual, Hugh Hudson, who also directed Chariots of Fire, another brilliant movie.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Easily the best Tarzan film
pugprdctns16 July 2005
There is absolutely no doubt that this version of Tarzan is the closest to Burroughs' vision. While he gladly collected his royalties from the films produced during his lifetime, he frequently made it clear that they were little more than the bastard children of his tales. The film studios' ludicrous obsession with casting Olympic swimmers as Tarzan was beyond laughable. I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that they did not set their sights on shot-putters.

Prior to this film, the most faithful adaptations were in comic strips and comic books. As fine as some of these were, we had to wait seven decades for a filmmaker with the integrity to respect the character as he had been created.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Greystoke: The Legend Of Tarzan, Lord Of The Apes (Hugh Hudson, 1984) ***
Bunuel19766 January 2009
This begins a series (which I'll hopefully keep up every week-end) of films that came out during my childhood – in this case, it's one I've only managed to catch now. It was clearly intended as the last word on the subject, which basically had been debased to the level of hokum over the years; however, in its uncompromising striving for a serious-minded approach (a sure measure of which is that the protagonist is never once referred to by the name he's been known all this time the world over!), the film-makers rather lost track of the fact that the thing was intended primarily as entertainment! Consequently, we get a decidedly staid representation of events – with more care given to meticulous period reconstruction than in providing a functional thematic environment for its mythic jungle hero! Even so, Christopher Lambert rose to stardom – as did another debutante, Andie McDowell, playing his love interest (named Jane, of course) – with the title role, which he handles creditably enough under the circumstances. However, Ralph Richardson (to whom the film is dedicated, this being his swan-song) steals every scene he's in as Tarzan's natural grandfather who, in spite of showing obvious affection for his long-lost kin, can't bring himself to forget tradition in an effort to understand his predicament; the hero, in fact, is much more comfortable interacting with primates (even contriving, after having gone back home, to save his adoptive 'dad' from captivity). The film is otherwise very good to look at (with cinematography by Stanley Kubrick regular John Alcott, no less), features an appropriately grandiose score as well as remarkable make-up effects (by Rick Baker) – and, while essentially disappointing as a Tarzan outing, retains considerable value nonetheless as a prestige picture of its day.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Better than Burroughs
skoyles30 July 2003
Where this movie is faithful to Burroughs' vision, it is excellent; where it departs from Burroughs, it is superb. It is a tale of family, of the seeking of a father by a real and emotional orphan. Lambert's speaking of one of the most anguished lines in all of cinema "He was my Father!" is enough to bring tears to the eyes of the most cynical critic. Not a perfect motion picture - the notorious over-dubbing of McDowell's voice by Glenn Close is unconscionable and only explicable in terms of a very British error - but a fine if flawed masterpiece and a noble farewell to Sir Ralph Richardson.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
great
shadow-9829 July 1999
The greatest Tarzan ever made! This movie is done in a way that no other Tarzan ever has come close in doing. It has every thing in it that you would want in a Tarzan movie. No other Tarzan movie ever has or ever will portray the character this well. I would say that if you have seen a Tarzan movie and liked it you should see this one you will love it, and if you have never seen Tarzan you should see this one and forget the rest of them.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Ralph Richardson: his final masterpiece.
gkearns10 December 2000
Don't let the wildly varying reviews of the movie deter you. You'll love it or hate it according to your own tastes. However, if for no other reason, see "Greystoke" to experience the excitement of a great actor grabbing your heart as he breathes life into his role. Ralph Richardson was not a great actor for how perfectly he could handle Shakespeare; rather, he is to be remembered for his sensitive treatment of every character he portrayed. He was never indifferent to his responsibility as an actor. His reading of the part of the Sixth Lord of Greystoke, his last performance, is to be cherished by all who love the theatre.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good, but underwritten!
darth_sidious19 February 2001
Seeing Greystoke in its 2.35:! aspect ratio is a joy. This film MUST be seen in widescreen to understand the striking visuals and realistic photography.

This Tarzan picture is the best and most realistic. It's such a shame that the film is so underwritten in parts, I really thought that the picture was 75% there, but the 25% was mainly scenes which were never written or cut out completely.

The love story is terribly under-written as is the journey to the British Isles. These 2 would've lifted the picture to new heights.

Edward Fox's character is bad, hardly adds to the film, very disappointing.

The acting is fine, no complaints from me.

The technical aspects of the picture are awesome, you really feel that you are in West Africa. The make-up IS amazing!

Overall, good, but under-written!

See it in wide-screen!
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Tarzan Forever
psp2292924 May 2020
A great retelling of the Tarzan tale with the first half dominated by his childhood and rearing by the "apes". Stunning visuals make the apes generally seem almost human - which of course they are!

I am surprised that there have been few if any comments about young Tarzan played by Eric Langlois. Apparently his only film role. But his acting with the apes was brilliant and he , as well as Lambert must get an A+++ rating for their ape mannerisms. Just brilliant in what was for Langlois surely not an easy role, running naked through the jungle throughout! And yes I must agree that the second half does drag a bit but is rescued by Richardson, Holt and Lambert to at least a watchable standard. Photography was excellent & the storyline good. The most realistic Tarzan ever!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed