It's actually pretty astonishing, when one thinks about it, how many types of Tarzan have existed and how many versions of the story have been filmed. In fact, as far as the writing, direction and acting go, it was all very, very good for such an early full-length film-and a lot better than the gobs of Tarzan films from the 1950s and 60s.
It's actually much more accurate than many of the later versions and because it stays closer to the book, it is more interesting and watchable.and less silly. They are clearly people in cheap ape costumes-that look neither like gorillas or chimps-just people in ape costumes! But once again, given the technology of the era, it isn't that bad-plus, Stanley Kubrick did the same thing in "2001" and it's considered a masterpiece!! As for the plot, aside from the addition of a character and a few other small changes, it is essentially Edgar Rice Burroughs' book come to life. What I can blame them for, a bit, are the apes that adopt Tarzan. Unfortunately, the elephant was an Asian elephant but I can't blame the film makers too much-the African variety are a lot nastier and dangerous. As far as the wild animals go, it was a mixed bag. I live in Florida and I could tell by looking at the plants that it was filmed in this part of the USA, but considering that many later Tarzan films were filmed with houseplants all over the set, the backwoods of Louisiana (with all its Spanish moss) was a good choice for a domestic production. This original Tarzan film was made in Louisiana. However, considering the film was made in 1918, it's an amazingly good film-even with its few mistakes and cheesy touches-which, relative to other films of the day, were few. If someone watches this film and starts looking for shortcomings, they'll probably find a reasonable amount.
0 kommentar(er)
