Customer Reviews

Tarzan and the Lost City

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

I'm puzzled by so many negative reviews, whining about something that I have not even expected in this movie ("no deeper meaning", "unimpressive acting", "superficial characters", etc.)

I have never, ever considered the whole Tarzan idea or any of the books and movies on the subject anything more than an entertainment for children. Also, from such perspective only I am evaluating this movie.

My 7-year old son, who is a big Tarzan fan, asked me to buy him this movie on DVD, so I did. We've watched it together. He enjoyed it enormously and this is, in this particular case, a perfectly sufficient reason for me to rate this movie highly, as I did.

The actors playing the main roles are both very attractive, charming, and play very well, having in mind that the script is about Tarzan and his jungle, not about Hamlet or Brothers Karamazov. The movie is full of lush, wonderful scenes of African nature, exotic wild life. It's also very dynamic, full of action, definitely not boring. The good guys win over the bad ones. And if it's a great and clean enough entertainment for a seven-year old, it should be also appreciated by his, or her parents.

Regarding all that magic at the end, which frustrated so many reviewers. Well, it's no Dostoyevski guys, it's a pure children's entertainment, so why not some magic? Maybe those African tribe leaders really have the power to call back the souls of their long dead soldiers, in case of a realy prominent danger? And those souls return to defend their tribe! And what's wrong with some power from above changing the leader of the tribe into a humongous King Cobra, in the Moment of Truth? Haven't you seen magic like this, and much more, in any other movies? Disney maybe? Is it really so bad?

To me all those whiners look like someone who picked ice cream for a main course at a dinner, and then complained badly that "it was too light, too sweet, lacked any spice or more definitive substance. That's because you've picked ice cream guys! And a good one!

I have read quite a few of the Tarzan books, and the one thing that I have disliked about previous Tarzan films is the fact that Tarzan is portrayed as illiterate and unable to speak in complete sentences. In the books, he taught himself to read, and ended up speaking both English and French. I enjoyed this movie baised on that fact alone. It is refreshing to see a movie that closely follows the book it is based on, which is quite a rarity. If you are a fan of ERB's Tarzan books, and appreciate movies that stay close to the original plot, then you will enjoy this movie. Casper van Dien made a perfect Tarzan, and Jane March was a creditable Jane.

On the plus side of the ledger for "Tarzan and the Lost City," the 1998 revival of the Tarzan character, is the fact that somewhere along the line screenwriters Baynard Johnson and J. Anderson Black actually read some of the original Edgar Rice Burroughs stories. This is because when this Tarzan (Casper Van Dien) is not in the jungle he really is John Clayton, Lord Greystroke, articulate, well read, and fluent in several languages. Of course, this time around his intended, Lady Jane Porter (Jane March), is English and not American, but consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

The film starts days before the wedding when way off in darkest Africa bad guy Nigel Ravens (Steven Waddington), stumbles upon the legendary lost city of Opar. This time around instead of being the forgotten mining colony of Atlantis, Opar is the cradle of civilization (keep in mind that ERB would have thought it was the Fertile Crescent). When Ravens and his thugs start throwing their weight around in Opar, the old shaman sends a mystical message to Tarzan, who comes running back to the jungle. Of course Jane follows her beloved because if anybody is going to get rescued in this film by Tarzan it is going to be her. Above all, Tarzan seems to be a champion of the environment, which is not exactly news to anybody who read the original novels.

Casper Van Dien has the sculptured bronze body for Tarzan, which director Carl Schenkel reminds us of time and time again with lingering camera shots. However, nobody in this film is really motivated to do any serious acting, including the guys in the ape suits. It suddenly strikes me that all the Tarzan novels and Tarzan movies that have come out in the last 100 years have merged into one giant story where bad white men come into the jungle and Tarzan stops them, rescuing Jane along the way. You can change why the bad guys have come into the jungle (gold, slaves, animals, etc.) and change the damsel in distress from Jane to somebody else, but it is the rare Tarzan adventure that violates this formula (e.g., "Tarzan's New York Adventure" turns the jungle into the Big Apple and has Tarzan traveling there to rescue Boy, which would be the exception that proves the rule).

To be fair, this film is aimed at kids, who could still be intrigued by the idea of Tarzan and not know what they are missing in terms of the character's rich legacy. There is lots of action, which is always a good thing in a Tarzan movie, and the scenery is pretty good. Not quite as good as "Greystroke: The Legend of Tarzan Lord of the Apes," but still way above average for a Tarzan movie. The violence is acceptable for kids, although the final fate of the villain might be one of those scenes too intense for small children. If the standard is all the Tarzan films that have come before, then this one is average and in color.

...I don't think it is totally correct to say this film had no entertainment value or was not enjoyable. I grew up with Tarzan and have waited for years to see him come back to the big screen as a hero that my kids could associate with. Unfortunately, they are now grown and the attempts of Hollywood in their generation have fallen miserably short. I have read almost all of the Tarzan novels and I wish someone would actually take some of them and make a good film from say "Tarzan the Magnifcant" or "Tarzan the Terrible" where Tarzan is involved in adventure and fights against those who would invade his jungle and people he has vowed to protect. Why can't Tarzan be a hero for this generation? I enjoyed Casper Van Dien as Tarzan and would like to see him try again with a better script and director. Either that or give Joe Lala more to work with and get him away from that made for TV look and silliness.

I have read quite a few of the Tarzan books, and the one thing that I have disliked about previous Tarzan films is the fact that Tarzan is portrayed as illiterate and unable to speak in complete sentences. In the books, he taught himself to read, and ended up speaking both English and French. I enjoyed this movie baised on that fact alone. It is refreshing to see a movie that closely follows the book it is based on, which is quite a rarity. If you are a fan of ERB's Tarzan books, and appreciate movies that stay close to the original plot, then you will enjoy this movie. Casper van Dien made a perfect Tarzan, and Jane March was a creditable Jane.

I would like to be more enthusiastic about this movie than I actually am .As an avid Burroughsian ( Edgar Rice,that is and not the unedifying William Burroughs,whose books can only be enjoyed by those of dysfunctional social tendencies)I was pleased to see a movie adhering so relatively closely to its fictional original.
Casper Van Dien is a quite capable actor and,lack of inches not withstanding,physically right for the part
Yet it never quite got going for me .The problem I think lay partly in the acting.Jane March is a dull Jane and the villains not sufficiently menacing
So it was that the story of Tarzan's bid to foil a planned raid on the lost city of Opar never became the tale of derring-do and excitement it could and should have been It simply failed to involve me at any stage
Put it down to some dull acting and slack writing.I remain convinced that there is room for a good live action Tarzan livelier than this and miles away from the ponderous parade of piffle that was Greystoke.

What a waste of money and time. The scenery was beautiful, but except for the villian, the rest of this movie was a real downer. The biggest drawback is Casper Von Dien. He looked like a teenage boy wearing his Dad's loincloth. Jane wore one of the most lacklustre costumes of any female lead in the Tarzan movies. Yuccky slacks and a white blouse and that's supposed to be a heroine's costume?Tarzanis supposed to be heroic, bigger-than-life, a knockout torso! Casper should have waited and played Bomba, the Jungle Boy or wait for a remake where he could play Boy. He never struck me as any kind of a Lord of the Jungle. Maybe Lord of Baywatch. Give me Buster Crabbe anyday, the greatest looking of all Tarzans. OR even Johnny Weismuller in his early Tarzan films before he developed that spare tire around his once beautiful waist. This would be good for kids--but for adults, wanting an hour or more of fantasizing about Tarzan and the Jungle, this one is a real dud!

good film for kids, nothing is overly graphic. some commentary has been made about van dien's stature by goobers like leonard martin, who ake it their job to get burned out on movies. didn't notice to tell you the truth; it's good but light family entertainment.

I saw this movie out of duty pretty much. It was much better than I dared expect. While not as perfect as THE PHANTOM starring Billy Zane, this film did a great job. I never expected it to be so impressed and Casper Van Dien presence and acting ability in bringing the role to life amazed me.

Casper Van Dien proves to be the sexiest and most charming of all Tarzans. With his muscular physique and 29-inch waist, he brings out the word "ape" in ape man. Jane March is an extremely beautiful (and capable) actress...as well as funny. Steve Waddington, as always, has outdone himself as the villain. I have only one question about the box. Why is Tarzan, a friend of all African animals, pictured wearing a leopard skin loin cloth?