Hey folks... Harry here, and ya know... I had to restart this review after I saw THE IRON GIANT because, it suddenly became a case of night and day. Where because of one film’s beauty of story, it made the luster of another become tainted.
TARZAN is a good film. But while watching THE IRON GIANT I began seeing flaws in TARZAN that I hadn’t seen or noticed before. The first of these problems is with the technological leaps that Disney is making in background animation and how it further isolates the foreground character animation from being part of the same picture.
DEEP CANVAS -- Tarzan has a revolutionary beautiful background thingee that allows the artists to better manipulate and add dimensions to the background. It’s a bit like an ultimate field of thought on the ol Multi-plane camera... but this time you can zoom in and around... but it doesn’t look all computery. It looks gorgeous on screen, and upon first viewing your jaw will hang open and you’ll be quite impressed...
However, the more I thought about it, I realized something. DEEP CANVAS is nothing more than a bit of slight of hand. It’s a distraction, and it does not make you feel as though the characters exist in this universe. They feel... apart from the backgrounds. I believe Disney notices this too, because in every billboard and all the promotional art, you see textures and a roundness to Tarzan that completely makes him a part of his universe. But in the film, this extra layer of effects animation is not employed.
Go back and take a look at the work Disney did in FANTASIA, when Mickey was battling the brooms and the elements and lightning flashed, you saw it wrap round Mickey as though he were a dimensional being. This is an expensive process, but as a result... it completes the illusion. Slight of hand is an important filmic technique, but only if what you are doing in the other hand is invisible and not hot pink, which then calls more attention than the other trick.
I think one of the reasons that THE SIMPSONS work so well is that their universe is so consistent. You never don’t believe in The Simpson’s universe. It’s just evident that that is the way their world is.
Had the foreground characters of Tarzan had the richness and roundness of color and texture that the backgrounds had... My god that would have been something. Moving paintings... It’s coming, someone is going to do it first, who will it be?
Next, I had a problem with characters created to strictly pander to certain age groups. For me, I think Tarzan would have been possibly the greatest animated film that Disney could create... Had Glen Keane been in charge all the way. If every character had been as perfectly animated as his Tarzan... my my my my my... this could have been a true monument.
I’m not saying to Disney, show Tarzan strangling African Natives and slitting their throats... blood gushing out of the emerald leaves above as the natives squeal in horror and run. Though quite often that is the feeling of the original novels. I understand... You want to make a family film. Good, very good. You almost did it perfect, and ya know... this movie is going to be a rousing success monetarily, but you know. I think they sold the characters short. By throwing in Tantor the pink elephant, and Terk the goofy ape friend and Jane’s bumbling father... well you diffuse the story. Sure there is a momentary outburst of giggles, which is cheaply unearned.
It’s like in a horror film when suddenly a friendly non-threatening person puts a hand on the shoulder of a main character and the soundtrack raises to forte fortissimo. That is a cheap scare.
However, the scene up in the tree where Tarzan is figuring out that Jane is... like him. The giggles that form there, the nervous laughs... That is genius. A wonderfully perfect scene. A scene of genuine smart writing. Wonderfully animated and verbalized.
In a lot of ways, it seems you were remaking the old Johnny Weismuller TARZANs or at least adapting from that source material... Which in making a family Tarzan film, you could not choose a better adaptation model.
But you know what, watch how they treated Cheetah the chimpanzee. Cheetah is mischievous, and does get into trouble... BUT at the same time Cheetah cares for Tarzan... He’ll throw himself down in front of a charging rhino to distract the rhino long enough so that Tarzan could get away. And Cheetah would pay for that loyalty and would get rundown by the speeding Rhino. And there would be a tenderness, and an honest feeling of sorrow... and of course Cheetah would survive. But the point is, the character served the story more than in the capacity for annoyance.
Jane’s father isn’t a bumbling idiot, and there is no reason to portray him in that manner. Why don’t you treat the parent as a real human being. As a scientist or explorer that is perhaps too buried in his work to notice his daughter is all grown up. That she’s crying for attention, and finds it in a loin cloth. He should be genuinely fascinated by Tarzan. He should want to bring Tarzan out to the civilized world because it would make his career. He should never condone Jane to live in the jungle with Tarzan, instead Jane should make that decision on her own accord, choosing the love of Tarzan over everything safe in her world.
That would solidify that bond completely.
Tantor? Well, I would have Clayton wound Tantor so he would follow him to the elephant graveyard... The monetary difference between capturing and killing gorillas... vs the monetary worth of ivory is staggering. Clayton is one of the weakest villains in Disney history in that... his whole ‘scheme’ feels tacked on and plainly obvious. He’s not particularly threatening. Often times in the Tarzan series of films, the bad guy’s own scheme sinks him. One does not trifle with nature, of which Tarzan is the human embodiment of.
Clayton spends more time shooting blindly and acting like a parody of Gaston than as a Victorian age villain who thrilled in the act of killing. While Jane and Papa were teaching Tarzan the ways of civilization... perhaps we could have seen Clayton out hunting... killing animals, bagging a few of Tarzan’s friends. Then at the end... Tarzan would realize that he had turned his back on his loved ones, cost the lives of many of his friends... and turn into the king of the jungle that he is destined to be.
And what he does to Clayton should be brutal, not an accident.
But then... perhaps that’s not the movie Disney set out to make. Actually it isn’t. And hopefully at some future date someone somewhere will make a real TARZAN film that fully realizes the character’s potential. Perhaps someone will use Neal Adams’ look at the character and go from there.
Disney’s TARZAN is a fun escapist film. There are moments of profound beauty, but at the end of it all... Like HUNCHBACK and HERCULES... it doesn’t fully take advantage of the great material that was handed to Disney. Though even at this stage... and for what it is... It is, in my opinion, the best of the Disney modern animated films (aka from THE LITTLE MERMAID on....)
Tarzan steps in the right direction, but it still carries alot of the baggage of the formula Disney has been milking for the last decade.
Enjoy the film, but be ready for the real deal with THE IRON GIANT. It is truly magical and earns it’s tears with fully realized characters and storytelling.
