The Legend of Tarzan

The Legend of Tarzan

Starring Alexander Skarsgard, Margot Robbie, Samuel L. Jackson, Christoph Waltz

Directed by David Yates

The Story:
After the Berlin Conference, the African nation of the Congo was divided between Belgium and the United Kingdom, the former suffering bankruptcy and going into debt due to their desire to build a railroad.  The Belgian King sent an envoy led by Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) to find rare diamonds known as the Opar, and he comes across an aggressive tribal leader, Mbonga (Djimon Honsou), who kills his men but makes a deal - he will allow Rom to harvest the diamonds in return for his most hated foe: Tarzan.

Back in London, Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgard) is now a civilized man, and goes by his birth name - John Clayton III.  He's married to Jane (Margot Robbie), who is a no-nonsense woman, and when the British Prime Minister invites Tarzan to go back to his African home to do some surveying work, he declines.  Then George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson) insists he goes, so he can report on the possible enslavement of the African people.  Tarzan relents, and Jane insists to come along as well.

Back in the Congo, Tarzan and Jane fall for Rom's trap, and Jane is taken.  Tarzan and George go on a trek through the African wilderness to retrieve her, and along the way comes across his old family - a group of apes, where he is seen as a traitor.  However, with a bigger foe, Tarzan unites with the animals of the wild and African tribes to prevent Rom from fulfilling his mission and enslaving the African people.

The Synopsis:
Lately, Disney has unveiled that they plan on releasing their classic animated masterpieces into live-action spectacles.  This worked well for films like "The Jungle Book" and "Maleficent," both met with critical and audience acclaim.  Their most historically known figure - based off a book from 1914 written by Edgar Rice Burroughs - is also their biggest enigma: their 1999 "Tarzan" animated film was met with ridicule and ire, especially the way Tarzan would glide down vines like he was skateboarding.  Having done several different styles of films with different Tarzan incarnations, it was a test to see if this Tarzan would appeal to modern audiences.

The result?  The film didn't fare as badly as Disney's other live-action film based off an old story ("The Lone Ranger"), but it came pretty close.  It didn't receive the acclaim that others like it received, and even though some of those dissents are valid, it wasn't as bad as people made it out to be.

At the heart of the film is the director, David Yates, who is best known for directing the last four "Harry Potter" films.  He took a more literal, more instructional, view of Tarzan than other directors before him.  Much like Shakespearean actor-turned-director Kenneth Branagh did to "Thor," Yates made Tarzan into the literary hero he was written to be.  This included a very long typed-up story at the beginning of the film that established what was going on, and to say it was boring would be an understatement.  Tarzan himself doesn't appear until about twenty minutes in, and if you were expecting Alexander Skarsgard in his loin cloth, bare-chested glory, you'd be sorely disappointed (in fact, he doesn't wear a loin cloth at all in this film).  Instead, Yates goes beyond the traditional origin story and already establishes Tarzan as a national hero - and he doesn't want to go by Tarzan anymore.  He also includes a story involving slavery, colonialism and pilfering of African resources that makes you feel like you were sitting through a boring history lesson in high school.

What Yates does that I appreciated here is to tell his origin story in timed flashbacks, correlating to events that are happening to Tarzan in real time.  This adds a deeper sense of emotion to the character and draws you deeper into his story - because Skarsgard is really bad at making you feel anything for his performance.  This is his first real test at being a leading man, after being locked into the typecast of his "True Blood" character, and this film proves that he cannot hold a film on his own shoulders.  His performance is incredibly wooden and uninspired, even as Jane gets kidnapped, he nary raises his voice or shows much emotion at all.  One scene involves him communicating with a tribe as Jane and her captors are sailing away, and he could've easily just gone after them and saved her, but instead he doesn't because...plot?  In any event, portraying the main character in the movie is a big deal, and here he resorts to being almost a background character in a film filled with better actors.

Those actors are Margot Robbie, Oscar nominee Samuel L. Jackson, and Oscar winner Christoph Waltz, who each steal each scene they're in, reducing Skarsgard to a wide-eyed fanboy realizing he's in way over his head.  Robbie's take on Jane is that of a 21st Century feminist who doesn't need saving, isn't your typical damsel in distress, and treats danger like its an epic adventure.  In one of the most memorable scenes in the film, Jane is eating dinner with her captor Rom (aka THE most awkward dinner ever), and he tells her the story of how he got a special rosary, given to him by a priest at a young age, to which she replies "sounds like you and your priest were really close."  Pretty sure conversations like this didn't exist in the late 1800s, but what a way to make a statement about today's Catholic problems!

Samuel L. Jackson plays George Washington Williams (who was a real American Civil War soldier, who really traveled to the Congo and really wrote a letter to King Leopold about the suffering of the people of the Congo...history rules!), who exists purely for comedic value as well as it being...well...Samuel L. Jackson.  If you've seen any of his films (especially "Pulp Fiction," "Django Unchained" and "The Hateful Eight"), you'll know what I mean when you see him here.  He's easily one of the best characters in the film.

Christoph Waltz returns to his Oscar-winning role in "Inglorious Basterds" here as the main villain, who is both equally insane and yet charismatic and charming at the same time.  If you played his roles here and in "Basterds" side-by-side, you'd see a mirrored reflection of how he handles the villain role: and it is glorious.  Yet even with Leonard Rom, Yates brings in a real-life story.  Captain Rom is based on Leon Auguste Theophile Rom, a Belgian soldier in the Congo during the late 19th century.  He became controversial for his brutal treatment of Africans and is even said that he used severed heads of twenty-one Congolese to decorate his flower beds (thanks Wikipedia!). 

As far as the story itself goes, there's a lot going on in such a relatively short timeframe.  There's the strife between Tarzan and Mbonga; Tarzan rehabilitating himself to his jungle ways; investigation into the slave trade; Jane's kidnapping; tribal decimation; Tarzan's reunion with his ape family and the struggles he faces there; the flashbacks to Tarzan's youth; stopping an army from invading the Congo.  I'm sure there's more plots, but those are just some. 

It sounds like I'm really dissing the film, but I still enjoyed it mostly.  It's not a fun, exciting Tarzan film, but it has its moments, especially in its CGI of the apes especially, and the few Tarzan yells that hearkened back to the classic Tarzan of old, as well as establishing the historical aspect of the film with a use of a special filter that gave the film an heir of history.  Plus the film allows you to suspend your belief in the possible, as you see Tarzan leaping great distances, grabbing vines to swing across in ways that are physically impossible, but still exciting.

The Summary:
Bringing Edgar Rice Burrough's classic Tarzan to life once again, Disney tried to re-capture the lore and mystery of the man for a new generation, but it wasn't as exciting as it could've been.

The Score: B+