+- WildFact (https://wildfact.com/forum)
+-- Forum: General Section (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-general-section)
+--- Forum: Miscellaneous (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-miscellaneous)
+--- Thread: Tarzan 2016 (/topic-tarzan-2016)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Tarzan 2016 - brotherbear - 02-11-2017
Discrepancies:
movie - Tarzan has blonde hair.
book - Tarzan has black hair.
movie - Kala, the ape that adopted Tarzan had a baby ape clinging to her back when she found the infant Tarzan.
book - the baby ape had slipped from its mother's back while she was high up in the tree-tops and fell to his death. Kala was still carrying her dead baby when she found Tarzan.
movie - two times Tarzan fought one of the mangani and lost the fight.
book - the adult Tarzan could outfight even the biggest and strongest of the apes.
movie - Tarzan is friends with the lions.
book - only one lion was ever his friend; Jad-bal-ja the golden lion.
movie - the cannibals, one of which killed Kala, lived in Opar.
book - those cannibals lived in the jungle. The lost city of Opar is an entirely different story.
movie - Jane grew up in a house in Africa.
book - Jane grew up in Baltimore, Maryland.
movie - Tarzan is at home in London and has bad memories of Africa.
book - Tarzan loves Africa and is perfectly at home in the jungle. He tolerates civilization for Jane.
movie - the story takes place in 1890.
book - Tarzan is born in 1888.
RE: Tarzan 2016 - Spalea - 02-11-2017
@
About #16: great ! You're an expert, a connoisseur of the Tarzan's myth (ie the book) !
But very interesting to discern these discrepancies because they reflect our time rather well, if not perfectly well.
RE: Tarzan 2016 - brotherbear - 02-20-2017
The closest any movie Tarzan has come to the literary Tarzan, with the exception of the 1918 silent film with Elmo Lincoln ( who looks more like a Neanderthal than Tarzan ) are ( IMO ) greystoke ( 1984 ) and this 2016 version. In this movie, your first look at Tarzan shows him drinking a cup of coffee and next to him is an ashtray. In the novels, the two things from civilization that he has grown to enjoy is a hot cup of black coffee and a good cigarette. Well, Liberal Hollywood, in keeping with mainstream political correctness, would not portray Tarzan smoking a cigarette. Both Greystoke and this 2016 movie shows off Tarzan's skill at mimicking the animals. Not only could he mimic any jungle bird or beast, but he quickly learned human languages. Tarzan has extraordinary intelligence. Both movies portray Tarzan as an accomplished fighter, but neglects to portray his physical strength which is far superior to that of any civilized man.
When movie-makers take a character created by someone else; a writer or another movie-maker, and completely change the character, well, I just think its wrong. Not every story is meant to be scientifically and historically accurate. The attempt to put hard-cold realism into age-old stories kills the stories. Pulp Fiction heroes were an entertainment; not an education. In post #1 I gave this movie a thumbs up. That was for a good attempt and for finally giving us another Tarzan movie. But, I could easily lengthen my list of discrepancies.