Lord Of The Apes Movie Analysis

A. Warner Brothers and Village Roadshow Pictures decided to take the classical story of the “Lord of the Apes” by giving it a modern makeover. The Legend of Tarzan, staring Alexander Skarsgård as John Clayton/Tarzan and Margot Robbie as Jane Clayton, recycles an old tale of the beefy white man in a loincloth saving African yet again. The movie starts in 1890, the post era of “King of the Jungle,” roughly ten years after Tarzan left the Congo. Tarzan has been re-assimilated into 19th Century England under the new name, John Clayton. He is a more civilized version of the swinging hero most know and love as he has adapted to life in London along with his wife Jane. As a celebrity, legend and Earl of Greystoke, John Clayton is invited by King Leopold II from Belgian to come to Africa for political reasons. John refuses his invitation, but reconsiders after George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson), African-American US Civil War veteran, informs him that Leopold is suspected of slavery activity in the Congo. So, Lord Clayton and Williams, along with Jane, set off for the Congo. When they arrive, a man by the name of Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) attacks the village they are staying at (which is also the village where Jane grew up). Rom works for Leopard and
…show more content…
The Legend of Tarzan was entertaining to a degree. The cinematography was fantastic! Though the CGI lacked at times, the sumptuous and breathtaking scenery made up for that. I would have enjoyed seeing more action sequences as the story can be very drawn out. I understand that establishing the plot is important, but too much plot development can lead to a super serious and/or boring movie. The production team should have had more fun with it (it is Tarzan for goodness sakes)! More action would have made the movie so much more enjoyable to sit through. Overall, it is worth seeing at least once – especially if you are a huge Tarzan fan –, but this recycled tale just feels

Related Documents