The Legend of Tarzan fails to build on the myth

Last updated on: October 11, 2016 at 1:40 pm by Andrew Collins

The Legend of Tarzan fails to build on the myth 2016-10-11T13:40:22-06:00 Andrew Collins

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Review of The Legend of Tarzan, Directed by David Yates

Before any discussion of The Legend of Tarzan can begin, we must first make one thing clear: it isn’t a Disney film. Expectations should therefore be adjusted accordingly (which means downwards).

Legend tells the story of Tarzan in reflection, almost like a sequel, except rather than building on a prior film it relies on flashbacks and the audience’s familiarity with Edgar Rice Burroughs’s Tarzan of the Apes. This time around, Tarzan’s vine-swinging and howling and animal-whispering takes place as the result of his return to the Belgian Congo to foil the devious ambitions of one Leon Rom (Cristoph Waltz), who intends to enslave and plunder the land’s populace and natural resources in the name of the Belgian King Leopold.

(Fun side note: Leon Rom is an historic figure; he was a Belgian soldier who had a prominent role in the Congo Free State in the late 1800s when the film is set. It’s been argued that Rom was part of the inspiration for the character Mr. Kurtz in Joseph Conrad’s famous novella Heart of Darkness. In Legend he doesn’t end up quite so crazed, but it’s an interesting tidbit all the same. Come to think of it, it’s the most interesting thing about the movie.)

The film’s problems begin almost immediately. We first encounter Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgard) as the aristocratic John Clayton, sipping a cup of tea, staring serenely and contemplatively at a table of elderly British businessmen and politicians. His character arc from feral child to noble savage to English gentleman has already been completed.

What kind of story is left to tell? The film itself isn’t sure, and so it isn’t clear what it intends to be. Is it a fun, lighthearted action flick? Is it a live-action adaptation of a beloved Disney animated feature? Is it a weighty meditation on colonialism and the horrors of the “white man’s burden” mentality? Is it a semi-serious bit of historical fiction?

The answer is that it’s a bit of each. There’s a saying in the communications world that you can tell the difference between a mission statement that was written from the heart – from an individual’s vision – and a mission statement put together by a committee. Legend feels like it was put together by a committee of corporate storytellers. It’s full of canned moments, flat characters, and predictable twists.

For example, with all due respect to Margot Robbie, almost every line of Jane’s is a cheese ball, and while Alexander Skarsgard is a perfect physical specimen for the role, as a character his Tarzan appears contemplative without demonstrating much depth. When the feral side of him comes out it feels forced rather than like a natural return to some primeval identity or suppressed nature. Christoph Waltz, is excellent as always as the villain Rom, but in spite of Waltz’s prodigious acting abilities the character falls flat in the end. If you want to see a film that puts the full talents of Waltz (and, incidentally, Samuel L. Jackson) on display, try Django Unchained instead.

It’s a shame, because from a conceptual standpoint, the sequel story is not a half-bad idea. The contemporary audience knows the legend of Tarzan, so why not leverage that knowledge? The film doesn’t simply revisit the fairy tale (like Disney’s recent live-action remakes of The Jungle Book and Cinderella), it revisits the tale within the world of the story itself. Tarzan is a legend among the characters in the movie – a tabloid celebrity in Victorian Britain. Can he really talk to animals, they wonder? The supporting cast rediscovers Tarzan along with the audience as we watch the movie, with Jackson’s character, a swashbuckling American envoy named George Washington Williams, as our guide.

Sure, there are moments when Legend feels inspired, especially in the flashbacks, because that’s when it taps into Burroughs’s original vision. These scenes evoke emotion. They are primal and almost dreamlike, undergirding the “legendary” nature of the story. But ultimately they aren’t interesting because the future has already been given away. It shows us too much upfront, and all that’s left is the expected clichés.

Previous Post

October 7, 2016

Voyage of Time: The IMAX Experience Condenses All of Time to 44 Minutes

Next Post

October 14, 2016 Cameraperson Points Its Lens at Both Death and Life

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Action AFI Top 100 Animation Best Picture Winner BFI Top 250 Biography Biopic Books Childrens Christian Classics Classics Comedy Crime Documentary Drama Editor's Choice Family Fantasy Fantasy Films Foreign Historical Historical Fiction History Horror Horror IMDB Top 250 Indie Memoir Modern Novel Musical Mystery Non-Fiction Oscars Philosophy Poetry Popular Literature Reading and Writing Reality Romance Science Fiction Science Fiction Silent Sports Thriller TV Show Uncategorized Western Westerns Young Adult

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 June 2017 January 2017 December 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the mother of Samuel?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Sarah Hannah Deborah Mary