The Legend of Tarzan

A lovely single summertime watch. The chemistry between Skarsgård and Robbie works, with Jackson and Waltz complementing them in their classic acting positions. It was a very good choice to retell not the origin, but the return of Tarzan to Africa. I’m satisfied with it (although I've never really gotten into any Tarzan, including the statuesque Lex Barker). Lambert's best Tarzan to date has a good successor. (07/26/2016)

Right at the beginning, it would be good to compare this film with The Jungle Book, which also arrived in cinemas this year and I have to agree with most of the users, because I also liked the story of Mowgli and his animal friends more than The Legend of Tarzan. David Yates' film isn't downright bad, but I was probably expecting a slightly better built story and more use of the characters, especially Christoph Waltz, whose villains are top notch. Alexander Skarsgård was more suited to his role in True Blood, Margot Robbie was kind bland, and Samuel L. Jackson's involvement was obviously meant to cater for some of the humour (which, thankfully, it did). It wasn't a bad film from a technical standpoint, but compared to The Jungle Book it's more of a poorer sibling. In short, a film that while offering beautiful scenery of African nature, its stumbling block is its weaker story and especially its untapped potential. (07/16/2016)

The beating heart, wide open eyes, and dancing soul of a former ten-year-old geek who has read everything that could be found about the ubiquitous man from the apes family. You don't forget your childhood loves even two decades later, and David Yates knows how to tell stories about heroes, villains, love, and friendship in such a fresh yet old-fashioned way that I have no defense. Alexander Skarsgård was born for the role of John Clayton, and when Margot Robbie for the first time in her career isn't annoying me, I am most excited after some slight hesitation. The power of the story and its message outweigh any quiet objections about minor physical flaws. I would take a sequel immediately, and even though the creators surprisingly quickly exhausted one storyline (Opar), I have dozens of directions in my head to explore. (07/09/2016)

I would easily call the very beginning of the film brilliant. You tell yourself that this wouldn't be just any movie. But then the genius just disappears. And then it reappears in maybe two or three scenes. So there are as many scenes that are very good as there are scenes where you want to burst out laughing at the ineptitude. Aside from the sometimes rather trite script, the biggest weakness is Tarzan himself. I don't know if it was a poor choice of actor or if he was just written that oddly, but I wasn't impressed at all. I get it, he was raised by animals and had to behave differently, but this just wasn't it. So muscles... fine, he had them. But charisma? None. Too bad. On the other hand, the best thing about the whole movie, from my point of view, was the charming Margot. She had an interestingly written character and she could sell it. Otherwise, I'd recommend The Jungle Book, which came out at almost the same time. That one is much more sophisticated and catchy. 3 stars. (07/24/2016)

That was bullshit. The plot doesn't make any sense, the effects are lousy in places, and the weird slow-motion spoils all the action. Tarzan comes across as bland to the point of being unlikeable, but it's not so much Alexander Skarsgård's fault as it is David Yates' dull direction that trips him up. The weird tree-running is eye-poppingly digital, as are the animals, and unfortunately not even Margot Robbie, who quite illogically spends her days in the Congo wearing a dress that doesn't even shine in the water, can save the day. Christoph Waltz as the villain is incredibly dull. I'm afraid Tarzan will be off the market for a long time. (02/10/2024)