Tarzan the Ape Man (1981)

Strong and Moving!

Fantastic!

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Tarzan the Ape Man (1981): Dir: John Derek / Cast: Bo Derek, Miles O'Keefe, Richard Harris, John Phillip Law, Steve Strong: Shameless dreck right down to its dim photography. Title indicates that the film is about a man with limited social understanding. He may require extreme psychotherapy after this film. Plot doesn't matter because it would make better toilet paper than a script. A escapade through the jungle by explorers who hear various wailings and realize that it isn't a parakeet. The first problem with this stupid film is its advertizing aimed at a younger audience yet it seems more interested in Bo Derek's nude scenes. Director John Derek takes a half hour to showcase Tarzan wrestling a python. The snake drapes down upon Derek who can clearly escape had she used common sense but she is required to coil up in it and scream endlessly. She cleans up Tarzan with hints of sexual activity, which leads to his fondling her. Derek's overacting is backed by horrid work by Richard Harris, John Phillip Law, and Miles O'Keefe as perhaps the worst Tarzan ever. The hidden purpose is to showcase Derek in various sexual positions and exploit the hormones of anyone who likely shouldn't see it due to its marketing appeal to younger viewers. It is not something that she will likely wish to have showcased at any career gala. Frankly, the best place for this film is underneath an elephant's foot. Score: 1 / 10

You know Leonard Maltin once said that for this movie he might have to think of a rating lower than bomb. After seeing this cinematic atrocity, I'd have to rate it as "Nuke" as well. Geez, how the Hell can John Derek take a movie that's basically about a hot blonde's chestal units and STILL make it boring (incidentally you don't even get a glimpse until almost an hour into the movie. But you DO get Richard Harris running around in a skimpy nightshirt as compensation. Yay?)Other lowlights? It takes forever for the film's namesake to even appear in this film (and does nothing) and Bo can't carry the movie by herself since she has yet to learn any other expression besides "vapid." (They could have gotten a blow-up doll to stand in for Bo with little difference.) Richard Harris meanwhile is hammy enough to be packaged by Hormel. And like a ADD-addled child getting Baby's First Camera, John Derek randomly pounds on every "camera trick" button with idiotic resolve! A sloooooow-motion fight with a snake overlayered with dissolving images is the pinnacle of this inept, overlong nonsense.The plot? Basically Jane, Tarzan, and a particularly frisky orangutan have engage in very, very dull foreplay. "Scary" painted Natives intervene for some reason (more nude scenes! Duh!)Seriously people, avoid this atrocity and stick to outright porn. You'll at least get a more coherent plot and better acting that way.

I appreciate John Derek's "Tarzan the Ape Man" (1981) because it's so unique and it does inspire the awe of nature, whether scenic, animal, human or romantic. The plot of the film focuses on Jane Parker (Bo Derek), who goes to remotest Africa in search of her explorer father, James Parker (Richard Harris). She joins his party (which includes John Phillip Law) and they climb to the top of a mysterious escarpment whereupon they discover a wild white man, Tarzan (Miles O'Keeffe). Meanwhile the aborigines don't take too kindly to their encroachment.The opening MGM emblem tips off that the film shouldn't be taken too seriously: instead of the lion's roar we get Tarzan's famous jungle yell. The movie is generally serious, but in a comic-book sort of way. There's a nice sense of awe as the party traverses through the wilderness (it was shot in Sri Lanka and the island of Seychelles, 1500 miles SW of Sri Lanka), particularly when they discover the great escarpment and, then, the fictitious inland sea.The animals are great as well, particularly the magnificent lion, the friendly elephant who scoops up Tarzan's body and the playful chimps & orangutan. By the way, the Asian elephant and orangutan present an obvious plot hole since they're not native to Africa. Not to mention James' native babe, Africa (Akushula Selayah), since she's clearly of East Indian stock (although he might've picked her up on a different expedition). Also, the muscular dude who plays the "Ivory King" (Steve Strong) is obviously a white dude painted black. Speaking of the Ivory King, Steve Strong really hams it up with bad acting befitting of a gym rat and why does it take so long to simply wake him up? The second act is kind of boring. It consists mostly of Jane and Tarzan getting to know each other in the jungle. There's a beauty and innocence to the scenes, even a sense of awe, but they're probably too long for the average viewer. Still, the film celebrates this aspect of the human experience much as the Song of Songs in the Bible celebrates the consummation of a man & woman with overtly erotic language (read it and see for yourself)."Tarzan the Ape Man" is reminiscent of 1976's "King Kong" in tone. Remember the sense of awe of that film coupled with the comic booky material? Remember when Kong bathed Dwan via the waterfall and gazes on in wonder? Remember the stretched-out dramatics? This is what you get with "Tarzan the Ape Man". It's an adventure film with a lot of drama and little conventional action. When the action comes -- Tarzan vs. a huge snake and Tarzan vs. the Ivory King -- it's presented in slow-motion, which is strange and hardly thrilling. And, yet, it sets the film apart. "Tarzan the Ape Man" takes its time in telling its story; by contrast, 1998's "Tarzan and the Lost City" hurriedly jumps from one sequence to the next with hardly any room to breath. They're both Tarzan films but from two completely different approaches. I just viewed them both back-to-back and it's an interesting comparison.Of course, "Tarzan the Ape Man" is a showcase for Bo Derek. She's a beautiful woman both inside and out, but she's not a perfect "10" in my opinion. Her physicality is indeed statuesque, but her butt is too flat and her thighs too skinny (sorry if that sounds crude; I'm just being honest).Miles O'Keeffe LOOKS great as Tarzan, but that's it. He has zero dialog beyond Tarzan's patented yell and, worse, zero depth as a character, except that he's benign and heroic. This is disappointing because Burroughs' books presented him as highly intelligent and even a type of Yahweh (the LORD), as in "the Lord of the jungle". But the film focuses on Tarzan when he is first discovered by Europeans (when he knew how to read via kid's books, but not yet how to speak English), so this can be forgiven.One aspect of the film is outstanding and that's Tarzan's kinship with the various animals. An excellent example is the innocent playfulness of Tarzan, Jane and the orangutan in the closing scene.Also, Richard Harris is worthy of note because he gives the role all his heart and is convincing. Despite his constant (and loud) blathering he does have some interesting insights -- like the importance of living life to its fullest and the humility to turn to God when he's totally spent (and it works!). In other words, the film isn't just mindless adventure; it features some gems to chew on."Tarzan the Ape Man" was a modest hit in 1981 but, surprisingly, there was no sequel. It would've been interesting to see O'Keeffe's Tarzan develop as a character and his relationship with Jane. But maybe John and Bo accomplished everything they intended to with this film and found the idea of a sequel superfluous.BOTTOM LINE: "Tarzan the Ape Man" is a unique Tarzan film and worth it for the sense of awe -- the marvels of nature, the amazement of animals, the beauty of the (fit) human form and the wonder of (true) sexuality.The film runs 107 minutes.GRADE: B-

Yes, Bo Derek was (and probably is still) a beautiful woman to look at, but in this day of beautiful young women to me she comes across as more ordinary in a present day viewing of the movie. This is a famously bad movie, designed apparently just to showcase Bo Derek's external beauty, because as an actress she offers very, very little. It is interesting however just to take a glimpse of this lady when she was in her 20s. The most attractive scenes are near the end when she is held captive by dangerous natives and a group of young natives are painting her body white all over.Also there are some very gratuitous shots of her and Tarzan and the Orangutan cavorting on sand or dirt as the credits roll. But overall the movie is dull and slow-moving. Bo Derek is the star as Jane Parker and her father is played by Richard Harris as James Parker. Jane's boy-toy Tarzan is played by Miles O'Keeffe.Brief synopsis, they go into the jungle, Jane gets captured by no-goods, Tarzan comes to the rescue, Jane and Tarzan live happily ever after in the jungle.