Having endured his legendary twelve labors, Hercules, the Greek demigod, has his life as a sword-for-hire tested when the King of Thrace and his daughter seek his aid in defeating a tyrannical warlord.
Following his parents' death in Africa, John Clayton has been be raised by an ape, was known by the name Tarzan, but eventually left Africa and for his parents' home in England, along with the woman he fell in love with and married, Jane Porter. He is asked by Belgian King Leopold to go to Africa to see what he has done there to help the country. Initially, he refuses. But an American, George Washington Williams, wants him to accept so he can accompany him. He says that Leopold might be committing all sorts of atrocities to achieve his goal, like slavery. Clayton agrees and his wife insists that she accompany him because she misses Africa. When they arrive, a man named Rom, who works for Leopold, attacks their village and captures Tarzan and Jane. With Washington's help he escapes and sets out to rescue Jane by going across the jungle. Washington joins him despite being told that he might not make it.Written by
While having dinner with Jane, Rom mentions that during his last visit to Europe he attended lectures by the King of France and Henry Morton Stanley at Sorbonne University. Although the French monarchy was abolished before Stanley's 1871 voyages, several men from the Bourbon family were regarded as king by die-hard royalists. See more »
What we have here is yet another Tarzan adaptation. This isn't the Tarzan you know from the Disney movie. No, this time we see him start out in England as a gentleman, celebrity of sorts. People all know who he his and his origin. For a moment I thought the film would be smart enough to know that we, as an audience, also know this origin story. But this ain't that kinda movie. Outside of being a "new" take on the mythical man raised by apes there isn't anything remotely new about this movie. It still tells us his origin in laziest way possible and it still follows a three act structure that we have seen a couple thousand times over.
As I blankly starred at the jumbled mess I was watching on screen I couldn't think of a single thing I hated, nor a single thing I loved. This is one of those movies that just kind of exists. There isn't anything that is glaringly bad about the movie at all. There aren't moments of unintentional comedy but, what's worse, is that there aren't even moments of fun to be had.
The only person that seemed to be committed at all was Sam L Jackson. Who always seems to have a good time regardless of what movie he is in. Which often makes for the only bright spot in some movies, like this one. He alone makes this films dialogue sound almost good. But that is not the case with literally every other actor.
All of which just seem to be playing exaggerated versions of themselves. Either exaggeratedly bored or exaggeratedly upbeat. Neither of which works for this retelling at all. This could be due to just poor directing. David Yates looked to be more interested in putting style into his picture rather than making things natural.
But his "style" only goes as far the basic sequences of chatting. Any other time the shots are either so shaky that things are incomprehensible or the camera twists and turns so much that nausea will come to all. If there was one thing that was consistently worse than anything else in movie was the special effects.
The animals and environments that utilize CG are so obnoxiously noticeable, it's sometimes painful to watch. The second biggest part of the Tarzan tale is the apes and their CG is absolutely the worst. Every time they show themselves on screen resulted in me cringing into the depths of my padded seat.
At the end of day I was actually glad we didn't see the story everyone knows. If we got that movie we would've had to endure more of those dreadful apes. None of which have any personality or presence in the film at all. And, worse yet, is the characters. Who are so bland that even when they talked to each they seemed bored with the others lack luster persona.
What's strange about this movie is that the majority of these negatives, are met with a near immediate positive. Some of the shot compositions are great while others are very by the numbers. Every time I find myself hating a certain thing in the movie something similar would happen but it would be done much better. This left me feeling nothing after it ended. Other than the straight awful characters there isn't anything in this movie to love or hate. As each was met by something that would negate the other.
64 of 119 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this