Nathaniel R's been revisiting (and ogling) past Lord of the Apes this summer. We've now reached the late 90s...
In our Swing Tarzan Swing series we've now reached the late 1990s. A time in which I, Greystoke-loving Nathaniel who is known to swing enthusiastically on the ropey vines of time between decades, am stunned into something approaching silence. I've sat on this one for over a week, struggling for something to say.
What possessed anyone involved to dive headfirst into a schlocky old school Tarzan plot/adventure while also incongruously connecting itself to the (comparatively) high-brow Greystoke? Early Tarzan films avoided England but for onscreen talking points or origin story allusions. After Greystoke Tarzan films must begin there, goes the apparently unspoken rule. So we first meet John Clayton (Casper Van Dien) as a rich heir happily immersed in all things Jane (Jane March) in England. As with the new 2016 Tarzan, it begins that way before John learns that his former friends are in trouble back in Africa. Into this stew of old and new Tarzan impulses we throw a few other odd tasting ingredients. This 1998 debacle (it grossed 10% of its budget) also wants to compete with the then relatively nascent and still "B" genre of the superhero picture (films like Spawn and Blade preceded it and X-Men was just around the corner). Its CGI, though, looks closer to work done in the mid 80s.
And, speaking of the 1980s, Lost City even lifts from Conan the Barbarian's (1982) snakey shape-shifting finale...
Tarzan himself isn't superpowered exactly but then he also isn't not. In one confusing sequence he seems to have a dolphin's ability to propel himself skyward out of the water. Other times he is wholly human and easily knocked out of commission. The latter is mandatory. If this series has taught us one thing it's that Tarzan pictures must include a scene in which the Lord of the Apes is prone and unconscious.
Someone, usually Jane or an elephant, saves him rather than the other way around. Lost City has done its homework at least.
Though I did not see the picture until just last week, I do remember Casper Van Diem in interviews at the time bragging about his workout / diet and the feat of maintaining a 26" waist (or some such) at the age of 30. He had come to fame the year prior with Paul Verhoeven's cult classic Starship Troopers (1997). Unfortunately for him the breakthrough was the peak. No one to come had as clever a take on his cartoonishly square-jawed Aryan looks.
Tarzan and Jane have great...uh... sibling chemistry.
Good god, why is this two shot cropped so tight. Give the actors some room, please.
Something about the costuming, as baggy and oversized as David Byrne's Stop Making Sense phase, makes the fit actor look scrawny and diminutive as the jungle man. The casting doesn't help either since they've cast tall actors opposite the 5'10" star.
For reasons that are a bit hard to fathom given the picture's clear wish to provide PG rated family friendly entertainment -- "a new Tarzan for a new generation" the ads proclaimed -- Tarzan and the Lost City cast two new stars that were already associated with a NSFW hard "R" - Van Dien with the mondo violence and excessive showering in Starship Troopers and March in the erotic dramas The Lover and The Color of Night.
But the casting doesn't pay off since the filmakers aren't interested in their sexual allure. In fact when Jane and Tarzan, an engaged couple, are reunited after six weeks apart early in the picture their first response is a ...a familial hug? Then they remember to kiss. It's no Weismuller & O'Sullivan or even Lambert & MacDowell is what I'm saying. There's no heat in the picture but for lit torches.
Other than the frequent shots of Van Dien in water (where the issues of his oversized costumes and awful mullet-weave are swept away) this is an unflattering star vehicle.
Jane fares even worse. She is ever present in the picture, following her man to Africa when he skips out on their wedding (long story), but the character as written and as performed never makes a lick of sense. This Jane is caught betwixt three modes: easily awed tourist, shrieking/naive damsel in distress and strong willed sharp-shooting action heroine. None of these are the same woman.
But look at how cute her vintage parasol is!
It all culminates in a final act in the titular city that's right out of Tarzan and the Valley of Gold. Except for one major distinction: this time the tribal chieftain is not a pacifist and he's formidable in battle. He proves of much more use than the protagonist himself in the final action sequence which makes you wonder why he ever send Tarzan that psychic cry for help at the start of the picture.
Not only can Mugambe transform into animals and send psychic messages but he can also summon full size warriors from inanimate tokens in his man purse like he's releasing a Pokemon to fight. Consider this shot of Tarzan, Jane and Mugambe's right hand man (son?) watching Mugambe at work...
Tarzan and Chill. Mugambe's got this.
Tarzan and the Lost City doesn't get worse as it goes along so much as flail about for the blessedly brief running time searching for any identity of its own. The only identity it finds is one shared by thousands of forgotten films: a bad movie.
But I will give it this: I've never seen a hero camouflaged by magical bees in a motion picture before or since.
If only I had a gif of this. It's something.
Next time: the penultimate episode with Disney's animated Tarzan (1999) before we wrap up with a second look at The Legend of Tarzan (2016)