In reality, Williams was the first person who called attention to the horrible human rights abuses in the Congo, writing and publishing an open letter that at least attempted to open the conversation about the overt wrongs being done in that region. He tells him that he suspects King Leopold of a slave trade in the Congo, and he wants to find proof. Jackson) is in that initial meeting when the government asks Lord Clayton to go to Africa, and when he rejects the plea, Williams is the one who talks him into it. Tarzan is not the only hero, though, and that”s where things get really weird. Here, Tarzan is drawn into Rom”s plot, and it turns out to be a very, very poorly considered move on Rom”s part.
This entire film is about Rom”s plan to create the Force Publique, which lasted for almost 80 years in reality until the Congo achieved its independence. He was the head of the Force Publique army, making this a slice of alternative history every bit as pointed as Inglorious Basterds, also starring Waltz. Right away, it”s clear that colonialism is the real villain of this film, embodied by Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), who was an actual horrifying garbage person who actually did commit some massive atrocities in the Congo on behalf of Belgium. They want him to go tour the Congo to explore a financial partnership with King Leopold of Belgium, who controls the region. When the English government comes calling, it seems like a perfect opportunity. She was also raised in Africa, with parents who were teachers, and she misses Africa even more overtly than he does. There are parts of his personality that are still wild, and that”s part of the bond he has with Jane (Margot Robbie), his wife. Is he happy? We don”t spend long enough in England to know for sure, but clearly he”s only become partially civilized. This film actually begins long after Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgard) has discovered his own connection to “civilized” culture and moved back to England to accept his place as Lord John Clayton, and we see that he”s found a sort of peace there. He was taken in by an ape mother and raised among the apes as one of them. Much like Batman, the origin of Tarzan has been told so many times at this point and is so burned into our collection pop consciousness that you can do it in shorthand. The screenplay is credited to Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer, and they”ve made some big choices in the way they”ve handled things, drawing as much from the history of page-to-screen translations of Tarzan as they do on the actual source material itself. There”s no question that this new film has been refigured in a way that is meant to make Tarzan a hero we can feel good about in the year 2016, and for the most part, I think they”ve done a good job of imagining Tarzan through that prism. The thing about Tarzan, though, is that it”s such an elastic idea, and every era has already reinvented Tarzan in ways that reflect all of the changes in society since the first stories were published. It is absolutely a product of its time and the environment in which it was published, and it serves as a record of how things were much more than it offers up any kind of vision of how things could be. When I talked to Shane Black recently about pulp, part of what we discussed is how people almost seem embarrassed by it when it”s done straight these days.
There are things I liked about it quite a bit, and there are some things I think they fumbled a bit, but overall? I think this is about as close to right as anyone”s going to get with a modern take on Tarzan, a property that becomes more and more difficult to adapt the further we get from the story”s pulp origins. Even though I was in the middle of my move into a new apartment on Wednesday, the day I was set to see the film, I saw enough headlines go by on social media to be able to tell that people did not care for this take on the Edgar Rice Burroughs pulp hero.Ĭonsider me the weirdo on this one, then. In the case of The Legend Of Tarzan, though, they evidently gave the east coast a one-day head-start on the rest of us. I want my reviews to be my active thoughts, not a reactive response to something. I don”t want to be put into a position where I”m either defending or attacking someone else”s opinion. I don”t like having anyone else”s take in my head as I”m writing, positive or negative.
When I”m planning to review a film, I try not to read any criticism of that film until after I”ve already organized my thoughts and written and published my own piece.