Tarzan the Ape Man (1932)

ridiculous rating

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

In a story with which most people are familiar, Jane goes to the Dark Continent, meets the legendary jungle swinger, faces numerous threats, is rescued multiple times, and falls in love with Man at his most primitive. The movie is not the first celluloid adaptation of E.R. Burroughs's famous story, but is likely the best known and, although conflicting with current sensibilities (e.g. shooting pesky animals, heroic ivory hunters, dwarfs in black-face playing villainous pygmies), remains a classic 'pre-code' adventure film and predecessor to multiple sequels, series, and TV shows. Considering the film is based on what was essentially a boy's adventure book, it is very sensual (almost soft-erotic) at times. Jane spends much of the middle part of story soaking wet in a clingy (but opaque), strategically disintegrating, outfit as she and the Lord of the Jungle engage in a long bout of 'getting to know you' flirting. Olympic swimmer Johnny Weissmuller, the titular Ape-man, is perfect as the very fit, very European looking, Lord of the African jungle, as is Maureen O'Sullivan as Jane Parker, the lovely British girl destined to be his mate. C. Aubrey Smith plays Jane's father, James, an old 'African hand' and Neil Hamilton (familiar to boomers as Commissioner Gordon in the '60s campy "Batman" series) is Harry Holt who, as a 'civilized' gentleman, is no match for Tarzan when it comes to attracting Jane's affections. The movie is an excellent blend of location footage and 'Hollywood Africa', and if some of the great apes look like costumed stuntmen and the elephants have prosthetic ears - that just adds to the charm. There are some incredible interactions between the actors and the animals (or seamless switches to wranglers, I couldn't tell) and chimp-star 'Cheeta' has some of the best scenes, both with the humans and when being chased by lions while carrying the news of Jane's current peril to Tarzan. Followed by sequel ("Tarzan and his Mate", 1934) in which Jane wears even less (and sometimes nothing at all) before the Hay's Code clamp down on cinematic naughtiness forced Maureen O'Sullivan to don a (relatively speaking) frumpy jungle skirt for the rest of the series. Great fun from another era.

Tarzan the Ape Man isn't as bad as the overrated porno movie "Tarzan and his Mate", but it's still trash. The worst thing about this movie is the racism. Black people are treated as beasts. It's really hard to watch Tarzan randomly kill innocent Africans, and the movie actually says that white people are worth more than black people. The treatment of animals is also pretty disturbing...are those real arrows and spears sticking out of the elephants? It's hard to tell. The fight scene at the end where Tarzan kills the guy in a gorilla suit is unnecessarily cruel. The way Tarzan treats Jane is also cruel, like she's a ragdoll. This version of Tarzan acts like a stereotypical caveman.There's no real nudity in Tarzan the Ape Man, but sex is implied. The whole movie is kind of sleazy and crude. It feels like you're walking through a dirty back alley with prostitutes and drug dealers.Fortunately, the Tarzan movies improved during the Hollywood production code (or Hays code). Tarzan became a gentleman, Jane kept her clothes on and even the portrayal of black people improved. It wasn't perfect, you couldn't show mixed marriages etc, but hateful trash like "Birth of a Nation" could never have been made during the production code. Watch a good Tarzan movie instead, like Tarzan's Secret Treasure.

I understand that this movie was made with little expectation that it would be profitable. The main idea was to use some expensive film that had been shot on location in Africa for "Trader Horn" but never seen on the screen. It's believable. There's not much evidence of effort having been put into the story or characters. A lot of animals chase each other through the jungle.Maureen O'Sullivan is Miss Jane Parker, the daughter of C. Aubrey Smith. They, an extraneous white guy, and their native bearers are on safari in a part o the Dark Continent where the hand of man has never set foot. They're searching for an elephant graveyard. You know, the place where moribund elephants wander to die among their ancestors' bones? That's how Jane puts it anyway. Why, there must be a fortune in ivory in all those tusks! Of course, it's the devil of a time getting the tusks out of the skulls. In Alabama the Tuscaloosa. I don't care. I refuse to put any more effort into a joke like that than the writers, Cyril Hume and Ivor Novello, have put into the script.And, man, have they butchered Edgar Rice Burroughs' original story and characters. I was addicted to them when I was barely a teen. They were implausible then. Now the story and characters are dumbed down so that a five-year-old can absorb them. Eg., the original Tarzan was a Viscount by birth. You won't find that mentioned here. Somebody might ask, "What's a Viscount?" And, if I remember, Tarzan spoke not only ape language, which apes don't have, but was self taught in English as well. And his English was as good as any Brit's. His lexicon encompassed words like "scarcely" and "width." However, having Tarzan speak English means writing more dialog, which takes time, effort, skill, and money. Better -- and easier -- to have Johnny Weismuller thump his chest, say "Tarzan," then thump Maureen O'Sullivan's chest, at the sternoclavicular notch, and say, "Jane!" There now. Isn't that easier than having him ask something like, "I say, actually, what is your sincere impression of this verdant paradise?" There are so many scenes of combat involving so many different kinds of animals, from hippos, lions, leopards, gorillas, and crocodiles to dwarf humans, that I lost interest after a while. My interest was piqued momentarily as Jane's dress was gradually ripped to shreds by the jungle shrubs, and when she deliberately tore some swaths off to make a bandage for Tarzan's head.That brings up another subject. I don't know what Tarzan thought of Jane, per se, but she evidently grows affectionate towards him after spending some time in his tree house. She comes up with something like, "Oh, Tarzan, you don't even know what a kiss IS, do you?" Well, he may not know how to kiss but he sweeps her up tenderly in his arms and carries her slowly off to his rude budoir. And what does Jane do, you ask? Protest? Hardly. She submissively buries her face in his shoulder and allows herself to be taken away. To do what -- make fudge?The next time we see her, it's day time and she's lying on a leopard skin rug in the tree house, wreathed in smiles of satisfaction. And, at the fade out, Tarzan and Jane wave good-bye to the departing remnants of the safari, content to seek happiness alone in the jungle. (Well, not alone -- all those elephants.) But without benefit of clergy, I might add. I ask you, what kind of movie IS this? Would you let your children watch this salacious filth? What do you suppose they'll learn from it -- that it's fun to swing from the chandelier? How to play doctor in the tree house? No, no. Take us back to the original, where Tarzan and Jane remain pure and Tarzan is articulate enough to say, "Now Tarzan will wage war on the miscreant Gomangani."

Johnny Weissmuller,the former Olympic champion in swimming,makes his debut as Tarzan.The movie spawned a lot of sequels and Weissmuller continued as Tarzan for 11 more films during the next 16 years. I had seen this early and somewhat primitive talkie a couple of years back and found it hard to sit through.I decided I'd give it another chance and was surprised at how much more I enjoyed it.Weissmuller is stunning, he fits the part excellent and looks amazing.There's screen charisma by the thousands.Maureen O' Sullivan as Jane really made the role her own.The African footage, shot during the making of "Trader Horn" is exciting and must have been worth the ticket on its own back in the thirties.There's some bad rear-projection used,but it doesn't spoil the movie if you don't let it bother you. So enjoy this entertaining film.