Jul 02, 2016 03:34 PM
2147 Views
I thought the movie was pretty decent and it was definitely way better than Lone Ranger. It seems like a fairly faithfully adaptation of a couple of Edgar Rice Burroughs' novels with a more modern sensibility of making Tarzan more of an ecowarrior and the story anti-colonial. It is an odd combination of one part Burroughs, one part Joseph Conrad and one part speculative historical fiction(much like Inglorious Basterds)wrapped in a summer CGI blockbuster. The only downsides to the movie was maybe that it comes across like an old fashioned 1940s Western which to me is okay but others may find hokey and the story moves in fits and starts. I thought it never got any real momentum going as it seemed one compelling and exciting scene was followed by others that tapped the brakes.
The addition of the real life character George Washington Smith was quite a good idea and after reading about his interesting life and his campaign to sway world opinion against King Leopold's feudal one man rule of the Free State of Congo you would think that they should do a serious dramatic movie about him and Samuel Jackson should make it happen.
I still prefer 1984's Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan with Chrisotopher Lambert and written by Robert Towne(yes that Robert Towne) except for the part where the movie decides to go back to England for the last 40 minutes which seemed like it should have been in the sequel;Tarzan's Downton Abbey.
