Tarzan, the Ape Man

I had heard about this turkey for decades, but finally caught it on TCM in the interest of completeness (I've seen every other sound Tarzan movie, and most of the silents). This one is definitely at the bottom of the heap. What were they thinking?

About the only redeeming feature is Shorty Rogers' musical tracks, but even they sound like they were written for something else (and probably were). Many have commented on the borrowed footage and cheesy effects, with the fight with a toy stuffed tiger probably being the most laughable of all. Denny Miller looks like the original Muscle Beach boy, with his blond searchlight of a brylcreamed ducktail haircut (who does his hair in the jungle?). He says a few more words than Miles O'Keefe did in the 1981 version (zero, in that case), but not many. I think "kill?" and "money?" were his most memorable lines.

Oh, and I do think this is worse than the 1981 film - that one at least had Bo Derek naked. The Jane in this one is probably the least sexy Jane in the entire filmed Tarzan corpus - she remains prim and proper throughout and we never see her our of her ankle-length safari dress. Her impulsive decision to run off with Tarzan at the end is completely unconvincing. As for the villain, he somehow morphs into a nice guy at the end. Well, why wouldn't he be, since he is going to make off with the entire ivory stash from the elephants' graveyard?

For completists only. You have been warned.

(Trivia note: Interestingly, neither Denny Miller nor Joanna Barnes faded into deserved obscurity after this film, but both went on to reasonably long careers playing supporting roles on various television series of the 1960s to 1980s. They even appeared together again at least once, on an episode of "McCloud" - S4,E2.)

After watching this I had to write a comment about it. So many actors played Tarzan, so many directors directed Tarzan, so many actresses played Jane but this one is one of the worst acted and directed Tarzan Movie. Tarzan swings on the Liane to one place to another and then back to the former place. The Movie begins with a hilarious scene about a Watusi on a board of a steamer. We'll never found out what he was doing on the ship and why some wounded leave the ship. I've not seen a Tarzan Movie for a while and of course not all were masterpieces but at least somehow entertaining. This is entertaining but on another way. So bad that's funny and annoying too. There are some bad footage taken from an old BW Tarzan Movie. What did they thought the audience wouldn't recognize black & white scenes in a color movie? There are also other footages taken from other movies. Most of the scenes are terrible hilarious. BTW what is a spider doing on the top of a mountain? Aren't Pygmies people of short stature? Please watch out the attack of the natives. Interesting Tarzan cannot doesn't say many words only the scream in that. The scream is clearly taken from Johnny Weissmuller but I don't think that he would like this movie. Next to the Bo Derek Tarzan this is the worst. Better you don't watch it.

Jane Parker travels to Africa to reunite with her father Col. James Parker. Business has been going badly due to tribal conflicts and he has not been sending money to his daughter. Without money, she got dumped and has no place in society. She helps a local which only exacerbates the tribal conflict. Father and daughter escape. Along the way, they are attacked by rampaging elephants and Tarzan rescues Jane.

Apparently, this was cobbled together from old footage and filming on the backlot. I like a lot of the animal footage which are most likely previously filmed. The footage with the actors is less compelling. The movie deteriorates after the rescue. Holt and her father turn into douches. After getting shot at, Tarzan is incredibly understanding. He should think that Jane had been kidnapped and they're trying to kill him. It becomes a knot of conflicting interest and no happy flow. Characters would fight one minute and work together the next. The writing is messy. Also, the ending has a distasteful aspect. It's downhill slide to the finish.

WE'VE NOTICED FOR some time how the Hollywood crowd loves revisionism. Take for example: in FRANKENSTEIN (1818), author Mary Wollstonecroft Shelley named the main character Victor Frankenstein; yet for some unknown reason, UNIVERSAL PICTURES made his given name "Henry". To further complicate matters, they gave him a friend named "Victor !" In the 1942 Serial SPY SMASHER, Republic Studios gave the alter ego Alan Armstrong a twin brother "Jack" , that he never had in the Fawcett publication's WHIZ COMICS. In 1937, the same studio did a real number of revision in the DICK TRACY Serial by making him a G Man, making a "Gwen" his girlfriend and disposing of Tracy's comic page partner, Pat Patton for a "Mike Mc Gurk comic relief.

AS FOR OUR indictment of Metro Goldwyn Mayer, we call your attention to Tarzan's mate, Jane. In the original stories, author Edgar Rice Burroughs gave us Jane Porter, an American from Baltimore. The MGM version made her "Jane Parker", an English woman of Noble blood. Co figure. (and thanks for letting me get this gripe off my chest!)

AS FOR THIS 1959 remake of the 1932 Johnny Weissmuller/Maureen O'Sullivan original, all we can say is thumbs down. The limited budget shows, regardless of Techincolor; which no Johnny Weissmuller vehicle had. In a way it may have been an indicator of how the mighty Metro Goldwyn Mayer had fallen from its high perch in tinsel town.

TO ITS CREDIT, this film stuck very close to the original story, albeit in a somewhat updated version. The characterization of African Natives was somewhat upgraded, giving so many much more personality than the thin, shallow portrayals in the past. The movie starred newcomer Denny Miller and Joanna Barnes; who had enough talent for the roles. But we needn't remind you that they were no Weissmuller/O'Sullivan combo.

ANY POSITIVES THAT one may find are all too quickly undermined by the extensive use of now tinted, old footage from thr '32 original. In some scenes (particularly when Tarzan fights and kills the giant Crocodile, it is obvious that it's really Weissmuller or a very close double.

This particular Tarzan movie (made by the Metro Goldwyn Mayer studio) has long had a very bad reputation, which may explain why Turner Classic Movies (which has free access to all the older MGM movies) seldom shows it. Is the movie really deserving of its bad reputation? Pretty much so, in my opinion. Made during the start of the long decline of the studio, it's really obvious that the top brass did not give the filmmakers adequate funds or resources. For example, the movie is jam-packed with stock footage, even having the gall to showcase some stock footage that was originally filmed in black and white while the newly shot footage was shot in color. Things aren't much better when it comes to the newly shot footage. The newly shot footage often looks cheap, with (among other things) tacky set dressing and poor special effects. There's also no feeling of great adventure, or even awe and wonder. Instead, scene after scene seems to have been shot with great haste without considering if the scenes would grab an audience. This may explain why the actors seem to be going through the motions. This includes the title character, who comes more like a lucky doofus instead of someone who has skill and knowledge about how to conquer every challenge and danger in the jungle. And believe it or not, Tarzan pretty much comes across as a secondary character instead of being up front and center! It's then a real surprise that Tarzan in this movie doesn't keep letting out a loud shout of pain instead of his familiar yell.