Greystoke: The Legend Of Tarzan, Lord Of The Apes Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
A shipping disaster in the 19th Century has stranded a man and woman in the wilds of Africa. The lady is pregnant, and gives birth to a son in their tree house. Soon after, a family of apes stumble across the house and in the ensuing panic, both parents are killed. A female ape takes the tiny boy as a replacement for her own dead infant, and raises him as her son. Twenty years later, Captaine Phillippe D'Arnot discovers the man who thinks he is an ape. Evidence in the tree house leads him to believe that he is the direct descendant of the Earl of Greystoke, and thus takes it upon himself to return the man to civilization.
| Ralph Richardson | The Sixth Earl of Greystoke |
| Ian Holm | Capitaine Phillippe D'Arnot |
| James Fox | Lord Charles Esker |
| Christopher Lambert | John Clayton/Tarzan, Lord of the Apes |
| Andie MacDowell | Miss Jane Porter |
| Cheryl Campbell | Lady Alice Clayton |
| Ian Charleson | Jeffson Brown |
| Nigel Davenport | Major Jack Downing |
| Nicholas Farrell | Sir Hugh Belcher |
| Paul Geoffrey | Lord John 'Jack' Clayton |
| Richard Griffiths | Captain Billings |
| Hilton McRae | Willy |
| David Suchet | Buller |
| John Wells | Sir Evelyn Blount |
| Ravinder | Dean |
| Hugh Hudson |
6.00 out of 10 (5423 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Did I miss something?
posted on 30 Jul 2008Here's why this movie fell very short of its potential(I don't read much, so I don't care WHAT the novel was like). 1. I think Brendan Frasier copied his Encino man from Lambert's Tarzan. It was stiff, and while his Tarzan call was a little more realistic, he had no humanity. 2. They screwed with the story. Maybe that's how the book goes, but for as long as I can remember the first utterances of Tarzan were "Me tarzan, you Jane". Jane is the first human tarzan encounters. I did like the natives a bit more than the shoepolished midget pigmys in Weismuller's version, but those bows and arrows were a bit cheesy. 3. Tarzan is primarily a love story. I'm sorry, but the love interest enters over an hour into the picture. That qualifies her for a supporting role at best. Supporting roles and leads don't fall for each other, not enough screen time, sorry. Not only was Andie McDowell's vioce over pathetic(most likely because her strong southern accent couldn't be masked) the chemistry scale between Tarzan and Jane was a whopping 0. I never believed they loved each other, which made the Belgian dudes closing voice over, quite frankly, silly. When Tarzan sees Jane for the first time in the jungle, he feels an urge, if you will, a feeling he's never felt before. Jane brings out the humanity in him, and he brings out the untamed side of her. Its this chemistry that compells the story of Tarzan. Not that Lord Greystoke's dying wish is to keep his land whole and that johnny boy is going to do it for him. Even a good face lift couldn't help this movie. It needs massive internal reconstruction. Oh, and could we possibly shoot more in the jungle, or at least use camera angles that don't show off the sound stage like qualities of the place. Final judgement, 4 out of 10. Sorry Tin-man, and by the way, if you want to see real acting, drop Lambert and check out Leonardo Dicaprio.
not the Tarzan you think of......
posted on 18 Jun 2008SPOILERS Edgar Rice Burroughs's famous character was adapted thousand of times for the screen til one's thirst is quenched, notably during the thirties and the forties by Hollywood. Its productors made Tarzan one of the most successful cinema characters. Several years later, Hugh Hudson decided to make a more ambitious version of the monkey-man and it's a more natural, more wild and more down-to-earth Tarzan that he gives away here. Hudson skilfully avoids the clichés that you usually grant to Tarzan such as his famous scream or his friendly pet, Cheetah. Not only, are we far from the designed and invented character made by Hollwood but we are also far from the film set used to make his stories. The movie was partly made in Africa (more precisely in Cameroon). The movie introduces two obvious parts: the first one which takes place in the jungle where Tarzan lives among his adoptive friends, the apes and considers himself as their lord. But he ignores his real origins. The second one in England where Tarzan discovers the English society. Ian Holm epitomizes the link between the two parts and Hudson avoids all that could make the movie falls into the ridiculous thanks to a clever screenplay. Indeed, Holm teaches Lambert basic rules of manners so as to behave correctly in the English society and the result works. Moreover, in the second part, no-one ever laughs at Tarzan and he's even really appreciated. As far as the end is concerned well it's a both bitter and happy end. Happy because Tarzan comes back to the jungle and meets again his adoptive close relatives. But bitter too, because this homecoming means that the Greystoke line won't be ensured and is condemned to disappear... Christophe Lambert finds here, his first (and last?) great role. Sadly, he'll never equal the achievement of his performance in this movie and he'll play in poor and insipide action movies. Nevertheless, as I said previously, a clever screenplay, a performance of a rare quality, some impressive natural sceneries (both the jungle and the English country and we get a gorgeous movie. It's also an excellent rereading from a popular novel. So why is it only rated barely (6/10)?
Greystoke: The Legend Of Tarzan, Lord Of The Apes is a reverent retelling of the Edgar Rice Burroughs original, with a 1980s-sensibilities slant.
posted on 22 May 2008The phrase "ponderous, high-minded summer entertainment" rarely comes to mind in the post-Lucas movie world, but the 1984 turkey Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes earns every word of it. Hugh Hudson's ludicrous attempt to update the Tarzan legend for a more savvy '80s audience digs up plenty of crusty fictions as it ignores all of the pulp of the best Tarzan serials. After a clumsy but lush opening passage showing the young boy being raised among the apes -- which no doubt aspires to the poetry of 2001's opening sequence but ends up closer to the ersatz grunts and moans of Quest for Fire -- the movie stalls completely with its stuffy, starched, Merchant-Ivory-style treatise on the "civilized" world. What's left is a sumptuous, embalmed period piece, dotted with infamously inept performances from Christopher Lambert and Andie MacDowell (who, like Jessica Lange and Michelle Pfeiffer before her, managed to survive such an inauspicious Hollywood starring debut).
Tarzan Alive!
posted on 10 May 2008This is--as other reviewers have stated--the most accurate depiction of Burroughs' novel yet to be committed to film. The Great Apes are not chimps, and Tarzan is clearly one of them (although he does feel different): a real departure for Tarzan films. Miles O'Keefe might have the right look for the character; but it's hard to imagine anyone else giving the Ape-Man life, having seen Lambert in the role. He truly is convincing, and that's a rarity in "comic book" movies. A solid B+.
Not as silly as it seems, but close!
posted on 08 Mar 2008I am at somewhat of a disadvantage because I have never been able to sit through this movie from beginning to end. It's actually fairly uninteresting.The problem with adapting a Burroughs book is that they were flights of fancy, in essence the predecessors of modern Science Fiction. So, bearing THAT in mind.. perhaps the Weismuller/Crabbe movies were superior to this one.I feel the Producer didnt know quite which direction to take the story... and WHY dub McDowell's "southern" accent with a plain "American" one, just LEAVE it! Otherwise the casting is well done and the characters of the upper class types are pleasingly muted. If you've ever spent much time in the company of such, you'll understand.
The best film adaptation. Edgar would be proud!
posted on 10 Feb 2008I've read Edgar Rice Burroughs' Tarzan novels and I've seen many film and TV adaptations. This is by far one of the best versions out there, surpassed only by Disney's Tarzan (1999). I don't see why so many people are against this movie. Didn't you read the book? This movie is about 85% true to the plot and outline of the book. By far, closer than anything Johnny Weissmuller or Miles O'Keeffe could have done. Do yourself a favor: rent it and judge for yourself.
Man is not far from primate He imitates
posted on 27 Dec 2007I loved this movie; It was great, and I believe Christopher Lambert's performance was true to the character Edgar Rice Buroughs had in mind.It was sad that those close bonds he established were taken away, and he never had a chance to form a family relationship.What I liked was the phrase he said, "half of me is the Earl of Greystoke,and half of me is wild".In this film, He is torn between the classes that define him: Royalty,yet really animal.We see that behavior, when he rides the horses and runs wild screaming.There is a phrase that you can lead a horse to water,but you can't make him drink.Here we find that to be the case.Tarzan,the Earl,is primative and cannot forget the background he came from.
Ralph Richardson: his final masterpiece.
posted on 18 Dec 2007Don't let the wildly varying reviews of the movie deter you. You'll love it or hate it according to your own tastes. However, if for no other reason, see "Greystoke" to experience the excitement of a great actor grabbing your heart as he breathes life into his role. Ralph Richardson was not a great actor for how perfectly he could handle Shakespeare; rather, he is to be remembered for his sensitive treatment of every character he portrayed. He was never indifferent to his responsibility as an actor. His reading of the part of the Sixth Lord of Greystoke, his last performance, is to be cherished by all who love the theatre.
As the Clown from Uncle Buck would say, "WHAT?! I'm freakin' 45 years old and I'm still trick or treating! Gimme a 3 Musketeers! I'm a ridiculous cliche run wild!" (cork) (cork) (cork)
posted on 09 Dec 2007I don't really remember much of this film. I saw it year ago when I was a little kid (I can't believe I saw "OVER THE TOP" and liked it back then).Anyhow, here's the part I remember:TARZAN PEES ON AN APE. THE APE GOT REALLY MAD AND CHASED TARZAN.I must have laughed so hard I peed myself.Rent it. Laugh at the peeing part. I did. Oh, two other words of advice: 1) Don't ever rent "OVER THE TOP" (unless you like arm wrestling for child custody) 2) Don't ever bring up the Clown from Uncle Buck with QUANTA666. He really hates that Clown. Seriously.
Best yet!!
posted on 17 Aug 2007Having seen numerous Tarzan movies over the years, I consider Greystoke, one of the best, if not the best. It played with all emotions. Christopher Lambert's portrayal of Tarzan was excellent. I have never read Borough's book, but this adaptation must, in the least, put any Tarzan movie that Johnny Weismueller or Lex Barker played in to shame. I have seen this movie at least 5 times and would watch it again and again.
Tarzan as Burroughs intended!
posted on 25 May 2007If you are looking for a modern film version of Buster Crabbe or Johnny Weismuller's overcoming the machinations of unscrupulous, white safari guides or cunning, black tribesmen, while saving the animal kingdom, this is NOT the movie for you. This is a recounting of the Tarzan "legend" from its beginning in intelligent, adult terms. It is beautifully filmed and faithful to the Edgar Rice Burroughs stories.Tarzan is no action hero, but a man torn between two worlds - the natural and the civilized. In a stunning performance, Christopher Lambert portrays this angst with absolute realism. If he slips up just once the cat will be out of the bag: the audience (especially the adult audience targeted by the film) will laugh, and the film will completely lose its grip. It will plummet into the cheesy depths. But Lambert never lets that happen. (Forget what you may think of him in other movies; when I saw this film at the theater on its original release, I thought he deserved an academy award.)The supporting cast is uniformly excellent, as other commentators have noted. I disagree with most of them in that I didn't find anything wrong with Andie McDowell's performance. I wouldn't have nominated her for an academy award - the role is undemanding - but she is completely up to it, such as it is. I don't know why her voice was overdubbed, either.The cinematography of the African segment of the tale is absolutely beautiful. It captures both the beauty of the African wilderness and the exotic expectation it holds in the collective imagination of those who have never been there. The scenery is lush and exotic, and the colors are vivid.But this is also a "period" film, and the cinematography also magnificently depicts Victorian England - the countryside, the city and the interiors. The costumes are outstanding. The soundtrack is beautiful without being overwhelming or obtrusive.There are some disturbing scenes - especially for animal lovers - but no more disturbing than a few scenes in Dances with Wolves. This is an excellent film about the conflict between civilization and nature, personified in the young Lord Greystoke, convincingly portrayed by Christopher Lambert.
Good, but underwritten!
posted on 31 Jan 2007Seeing Greystoke in its 2.35:! aspect ratio is a joy. This film MUST be seen in widescreen to understand the striking visuals and realistic photography.This Tarzan picture is the best and most realistic. It's such a shame that the film is so underwritten in parts, I really thought that the picture was 75% there, but the 25% was mainly scenes which were never written or cut out completely.The love story is terribly under-written as is the journey to the British Isles. These 2 would've lifted the picture to new heights.Edward Fox's character is bad, hardly adds to the film, very disappointing.The acting is fine, no complaints from me.The technical aspects of the picture are awesome, you really feel that you are in West Africa. The make-up IS amazing!Overall, good, but under-written!See it in wide-screen!
Pretty faithful adaptation of the classic lore
posted on 07 Jan 2007GREYSTOKE: THE LEGEND OF TARZAN, LORD OF THE APES (1984) ***1/2 Christopher Lambert, Ian Holm, Ralph Richardson, James Fox, Andie McDowall. Incredibly realized adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs' classic tale of an orphaned infant raised by apes in the deepest darkest jungles of Northern Africa that eschews the old Johnny Weissmuller route ("Me Tarzan, You Jane") and instead captures the essence of the story of the man who would be the next Earl of Greystoke Estate of Scotland who cannot escape the upbringing by primates no matter how hard established (and snobbish) society dictates what is proper.
Exquisitely breathtaking cinematography by John Alcott and make up artist/genius Rick Baker's ape creations are indeed a wonder to behold (the apes are the most empathetic I believe since his "King Kong" sympathetic figure). Richardson (in his last screen role) received a Best Supporting Actor nomination as the grandfather of John Clayton (Tarzan), gives a memorable performance. McDowall in her screen debut has her voice dubbed by Glenn Close thanks to director Hugh Hudson's supposed distaste for her unmistakably anachoristic Southern accent (as well as his rewrite of screenwriter Robert Towne's script that promptly led to Towne removing his moniker for the pseudonym of P.H. Vazak, which incidently is the name of his pet sheepdog(!) )
One of the better Tarzan films
posted on 30 Oct 2006I haven't seen all the Tarzan films, so I can't say if this is the best, but I've seen enough to know that it is one of the better ones. For a start it does away with all these ludicrously elaborate adventure plots that curse the Jock Mahoney and Gordon Scott Tarzan entries, and returns to the basis of the original E.R.Burroughs book, focusing on the life of a shipwrecked child who grows up among apes and begins to act and eat like them.In the second half of the picture, Tarzan is all grown up (as personified by Christopher Lambert, who is just right for this role) and he is found living with the apes by some European explorers. They bring him back to Victorian England, where he meets his real family and is educated to join the "civilised" society where he should have grown up if he hadn't been shipwrecked all those years ago. In an ironic touch, he realises that "civilised" people are actually more barbaric than his ape family, and in the end he returns to where he truly belongs.The audiences seem divided over this one. Some love it, others hate it. My view is that it is mainly a very good film, nicely performed and photographed, with an interesting and mostly convincing script. I agree with other reviewers who have pointed out that certain scenes are a touch unintentionally funny, but aside from that I rank this film quite highly.
I HAVE SEEN ALL THE VERSIONS. THIS ONE WOULD DO BURROUGHS PROUD!
posted on 15 Sep 2006I have lived long enough to have seen all the Tarzan movies from Elmo Lincoln to Chris Lambert, and believe me, this one was like watching the pages of ERB's novel come to life on the screen. Rarely does Hollywood stick to a novel when they adapt it for film, but this one did. And all the former comments failed to applaud the primate sequences for their realistic performances. The sequences where Graystoke takes his ape mother, later Lord Greystoke and ape father's hand on his head to try and see if their is still life in them, was a primitive act of real Gorillas that was in the original novel - but never used in the other Tarzan films. A wonderful film and a very good performance by Sir Ralph Richardson, which was his final one. Babe Hardy
A good film for die hard Tarzan fans.
posted on 13 Aug 2006While it comes no closer to the Tarzan of Edgar Rice Burroughs than, say, the Johnny Wiesmuller flicks did it does have it's own peculiar, and entertaining, slant on the story. Its a well done Tarzan movie. Nice scenery, good photography, workable continuity, and a Tarzan yell that echos the one described by Burroughs. The players all perform well. The only bad points I found were, I think, related. It moves slow in places. That slow movement? Makes this picture to long. It could easily have been 15 to 20 minutes shorter, which I think would have helped with the natural flow of the plot line and the character development. But the rest of the film works well enough to carry it over these two rough spots and still leave the viewer satisfied with the flick. Short version of all the above ... Its a very GOOD Tarzan movie.
"He... was... my.... faaaaathaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!"
posted on 21 May 2006I mean, what are the odds? (You have to see the movie to get the joke)Fun for:The Christopher Lambert eye candy (at its peak) The story (c'mon -- who's not a sucker for the Tarzan Tale?) The sometimes cheesy beyond belief dialogue (Honorable mention: above quote, as well as "Fam-i-lyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!) The ape interaction with each other and Tarzan... those actors must've had a BLAST, And most of all, seeing Andie McDowell and hearing Glenn Close.And more.Should be a must-see for references and trivia.
Grass roots adaptation
posted on 03 Apr 2006Yet another grass roots adaptation of a classic tale, on this occasion Edgar Rice Burrough's "Legend of Tarzan", which is skilfully brought to the screen by Hugh Hudson, though the end result is not without flaw.Screenwriters Robert Towne (who used a pseudonym) and Michael Austin have perhaps over cooked the plot a little, and as a result it is inherently silly when you boil it down. The whole thing is at times hard to swallow even if Christopher Lambert does a fairly good job of convincing us that he was raised by apes. In the typical naive British manner, "Greystoke" is told too matter of fact, as if recounting an historical event - in other words the audience is expected to accept it all as the irrefutable truth. While one could entertain the possibility of such an occurrence, Hudson has left no room for fantasy in this tale.Therein lies the downfall of this potential epic, which fails to measure up to Hudson's "Chariots of Fire", only because the styles are too similar. The approach was marvellously effective for the 1981 Best Picture, alas not for "Greystoke".This picture is still an enjoyable entertainment though, with spectacular cinematography from John Alcott, splendid Art Direction (Stuart Craig) and set decoration and a regal score from John Scott. Costume design is also resplendent, and the apes are frighteningly convincing.Co-starred Andie McDowell (with a voice provided by Glenn Close amazingly), James Fox and a very strong Ian Holm.Saturday, November 4, 1995 - Video
Splendid Hokum
posted on 08 Feb 2006'Greystoke Lord of the Apes' has received a lot of ridicule over the years and it certainly is a bit hard to take, especially in the first half hour when John Clayton is being the ape boy in the jungle in West Africa. His 'mother' (ape) has facial expressions that cross the line of the ridiculous and is a highly risible thing to view. Aside from that it isn't too difficult to accept the fantasy of this story, which is exactly what it is... fantasy. The fantasy of the perfect human male, 'half Earl of Greystoke, half wild' as John says at the end. Christopher Lambert is wonderful in this role, his international film debut. Beautiful, sympathetic, dangerous and highly appealing throughout. It's a shame the producers decided to dub in a smarmy-sounding Glenn Close over Andie MacDowell's performance. It is the one really huge blot on the film. MacDowell looks wonderful and though she is not the world's greatest actress I can't imagine her vocal performance being any worse than Ms Close's insipid performance. This was also Ralph Richardson's last role and he is an appropriately dotty Lord Greystoke, always a pleasure to watch. The other fine performance is from Ian Holm as Philippe, the explorer who discovers the ape-man and takes him back to England.The cinematography is spectacular, especially in the African scenes. The music is a bit too slurpy but Elgar's tunes fit the mood very well over-all. There are many touching moments in this movie, a real tear-jerker in a couple of places which are not over-done, thanks mostly to the committed performance of Mr Lambert.It's a good one for the kids over about 8 years of age and a good flick to watch on a rainy weekend afternoon when you just can't take any more reality. A good antidote to the recent family-dividing elections that have just taken place.
Masterpiece - An absolutely brilliant, amazing, touching movie
posted on 24 Dec 2008I don't understand why it is so underrated on IMDb.. This movie is just the perfection.. The better adaptation of all times of the myth of Tarzan! As a french, I can say that this is the better role of Christophe Lambert, ridiculous in a lots of movies, but here absolutely wonderful, charismatic, incredible! The plot is great, well told, the story magnificent, the direction, the atmosphere, the music, every things are perfect! How believe these sequences with the Elgar music, just simply perfect..Greystoke is truly an unbelievable movie, underrated here, I don't really know why, but really appreciated