Official Synopsis
It has been years since the man once known as Tarzan (Skarsgård) left the jungles of Africa behind for a gentrified life as John Clayton, Lord Greystoke, with his beloved wife, Jane (Robbie) at his side. Now, he has been invited back to the Congo to serve as a trade emissary of Parliament, unaware that he is a pawn in a deadly convergence of greed and revenge, masterminded by the Belgian, Leon Rom (Waltz). But those behind the murderous plot have no idea what they are about to unleash.
For those of you who don’t know, and the young movie going folks out there may not, there was a Tarzan film in 1984 that ran along the same lines as The Legend of Tarzan called Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes (starring Christopher Lambert). It contained some of the same backstory elements as the newest movie and even reached the point where Tarzan returns home and is recovering back into civilization. It’s sort of the prequel to this new Tarzan film, unofficially. I bring this up because Greystoke was the first attempt to bring the story of Tarzan, sans the black and white television series and cartoons, into a more serious shade that didn’t involve goofy Tarzan cries as he was swinging. It was passionate, beautiful, though it suffered from some of the same effects as the most recent attempt. Regardless, it’s a good reference to the newest Tarzan and worthy of your watching.
{media load=media,id=4350,width=720,align=center,display=inline}
Speaking of the new Tarzan, The Legend of Tarzan is an interesting take on Tarzan’s myth. They certainly picked a good director in David Yates to undertake the daunting task of defining Tarzan in this new film, bringing him back to the jungle and putting him against some pretty evil dudes. Yates did wonders for Harry Potter when it came to stories like that, so he certainly understands how to treat a big story and fit it into a small container. It takes a special kind of director to undertake such a task. That’s why I’m a bit surprised that the movie turned out the way it did. There were some beautiful character defining moments in the film, classic Yates, while being supported by a strong story and supporting characters. Sadly, there were moments where the editing decision and the lack of story context hurt the film. Granted, The Legend of Tarzan had more good than bad in the overall package, but it could have all turned out better, especially under the direction of David Yates.
With that said, let’s get right into it.
The Legend of Tarzan starts with Tarzan living back at Greystoke Manor in London, England. While he certainly can’t detach from his African roots, he does his best in London as Lord Greystoke to survive and start a family of his own. All of this goes to pot when he is asked to go on a trip to meet the Belgian King and discuss Belgium’s involvement with the Congo. Rejecting the notion of going back into the wild, he meets an American named George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson), who convinces him that something is very wrong with the Belgian king, as well as the king’s intentions in regards to Congo and its residents, therefore he should go to Congo to see what is up. He takes a leap of faith and finds his way back to the Congo with wife, Jane (Margot Robbie), and Williams, in hopes of going and coming back in one piece.
The first act does its best to set up the story and tries to show an internal struggle for Tarzan in regards to his old roots and new digs. Before that, though, *Spoiler alert begin*, we meet Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) at the beginning of the film, who sets the entire story in motion by striking a deal with Congo native named Chief Mbonga (Djimon Hounsou – love it when this man is in movies) to bring Tarzan back to the wild for some unknown revenges. *Spoiler alert end* Sadly, this one scene sets the tone for the rest of the film and pretty much lays out who the villain of the movie is going to be, what motivation he has and doesn’t really give the story a chance to surprise the audience one bit. I’m not sure I’ve seen a movie be so open about how it’s going to end at the beginning of a film. At least not since Grave of the Fireflies. *sad face*
Anyway, that aside, act one was pretty steady in the story progression department and neat as we see a wild man adapted in modern culture, though still hanging onto his roots. My biggest issue with act one, outside of Leon revealing everything, is the way the flashbacks of Tarzan were presented. You should never spread a flashback out for three acts (it will be the biggest complaint for each act) and wrap up his backstory at the end of the present story. It’s weird timing and it means nothing to the viewer by the end, providing no real chance for character development to make characters more impactful throughout the film. That backstory, as well as any backstory, should be taken care of in the front of the overall story. It should be told and put on the side of the main story, maybe once in a while referencing it as the story progresses. Certainly it should not steal time from the main feature and/or become a distraction, as this backstory did.
Anyway, act two!
Act two has our hero discovering that he was set up by Rom. He finds his village invaded and its chief slaughtered, as well as Jane kidnapped in hopes of Tarzan following Rom back to Mbonga and his angry people. The second act pretty much spends a good amount of time with bringing Tarzan back into the wilds of Congo, as well as chasing Jane, and her captors, and discovering other horrible intentions by the Belgian king and his government. It’s action, action and more action, which I never complain about.
The issue with the second act isn’t the fact that Tarzan pretty much seems like he hasn’t missed a beat in his return to the Congo. Nor is it a problem with Jane being captured or Rom having all of 20 lines in the entire film. The big problem with the second act is character development with secondary characters, who are supposed to support the story in certain places, but mainly mean nothing to the overall scheme. An example of this is Samuel L. Jackson’s George Washington Williams. This character is good, he is damaged and he is trying to make amends. We find all of this out from Williams in the span of 30 seconds when he discusses his own backstory. The problem here is that Williams doesn’t set this up before nor does he deliver any other additional information for us to care about him after the fact. He simply has a paragraph worth of backstory that is never carried over to mean much. There are other characters that go this route, even a villager named Kwete (Osy Ikhile), who is super close to Jane, but we never really get a good backstory for him either. It’s a mess when it comes to secondary characters and distribution of backstories (including Tarzan’s).
And yes, Tarzan’s backstory is still going, which is still a problem as well.
By the third act you’re dying to know how Tarzan is going to take on an army and how he is going to defeat Belgium, as well as the evil Leon Rom. It concludes in a glorious way fitting for a character like Tarzan, and a horrible ending for a character like Rom, but the marks are made throughout the acts and the damage is done, which equals out to a could-have-been-great situation instead of was great. I won’t say anything else beyond that, though.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan had some technical issues that could have been corrected in the storyboard process and the screenplay process. Alexander Skarsgård plays one helluva Tarzan, so good in fact that he should get another crack at the character in another Tarzan film, but his intense acting and beautiful body (me-OW!) can’t save a sloppily edited film, and some parts of the story that feature incredibly underserved secondary characters. This could have been an outstanding movie, folks, but it simply missed the mark. The problems were glaring, so I’m not sure who dropped the ball on this. As always, the poor director gets pinned with the responsibility, but I would imagine there were other hands in this cracked cookie jar.
Still check it out, though. The Legend of Tarzan isn’t nearly as bad as critics panned it for, but it still has issues.
As for the Blu-ray, it looks great within the shots that the film delivers. There is no graininess, no imperfection, as it looks gorgeous on the HD format. I would have loved to seen a movie like this on UHD, as I’m sure it had some gorgeous outside scenes that really would have sparkled in 4K. Anyway, it’s a great release on Blu-ray.
On the special features side of this release, here is what you’re getting:
– Tarzan Reborn
– Battles and Bare Knuckled Brawls
– Tarzan and Jane’s Unfailing Love
– Creating the Virtual Jungle
– Gabon to the Big Screen
– Stop Ivory PSA
Not a bad set of features, in my opinion. Lots of good behind the scenes information and a great PSA that is important. The features fit the feature, so it’s a perfect marriage. In some respects, the features are a bit more entertaining than the film, but not by much. Anyway, it’s good value added to the overall Blu-ray package.
