Hi folks! Welcome to my My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analysis blog. A blog where I'm analyzing several Disney films, Disney or Animation in general! These entries are just meant to be my analyses. Not reviews or statements. Just fun analyses! Though I'll make some personal remarks now and then, the content of these entries are meant to be depicted objectively. They're made for entertainment purpose only and the pictures/clips are copyright Disney or other companies.
Make sure to leave a comment if you like this site! And if there's something you think could be improved, please let me know. But in a constructive way, please. And just a note; I'm not a Native English writer, so my incorrect grammar may be notable.
And finally; If you haven't seen the films, beware of spoilers! And the funny lines aren't meant to be nothing than funny. So I hope you won't find them offensive. If so, I apologize
If there's something that Disney is mostly known for and even labeled for, it's for adapting stories. They've always adapted iconic, existing stories and therefore been rich in mythic content. Most of these stories has of course a huge legacy of their own before Disney tapped into them and before Disney even existed. But Disney's versions have often been perceived as the quintessential versions of the stories, so that's why their adaptations have perceived as being pivotal as a whole (regardless of them having been constantly panned for their Disneyfication).
Tarzan`s Iconic Position in Pop Culture
own right! Everyone has an perception of with Tarzan; A wild man with his loincloth swinging through the vines and his distinctive, recognizable yell!
Tarzan has managed to become such an icon that he's been automatically ingrained in our culture and consciousness! And Tarzan is certainly no stranger to cinema, having appeared in TV shows and 64 movies to date!
Tarzan was first introduced in 1912 in a All-Story Magazine issue by Edgar Rice Burroughs. And it was an instant hit and managed to gain a life of his own quickly!
 |
| Since you're a cartoon, you don't smell bad ;) |
Although it would be easy to consider the premise as somewhat goofy, Disney decided to take the challenge, nonetheless. But Tarzan still had to face being among previous features with similar settings. Considering that Disney already had made not only an adaptation of The Jungle Book, but a live-action remake of it and even an adaptation of George of The Jungle, Tarzan had to distinguish itself from them. At least it ended up not being as silly as George of The Jungle, which made Tarzan's directing team panic, and having the studio to make sure that the comedy on both films weren't similar. It's not to slam George. Though it's a personal guilty pleasure of mine, it's no secret that it's rather goofy and cartoony in tone and execution).
Despite that it's labeled for being the first animated version of Tarzan, Disney still weren't the very first to animate the story (remarkably enough there was one version made the year prior). But at least Disney's version was a more epic and polished animated version of Tarzan that could stand out from it's peers. While that being said, it's funny to think about why it took so long to make an animated version of Tarzan in the first place (without taking consideration on the original George of The Jungle cartoon series). |
| Don't worry, Tinker Bell gave me pixie dust ;) |
 |
| Yes, I'm, deliberately shaded. I'm not photogenic :) |
Tarzan`s Position in The Disney Renaissance
Tarzan was the last 
animated feature of the Disney Renaissance and can truly be labeled for ending the millennium with a bang!
It was the most successful Disney feature at the Box Office since The Lion King and the picture first to open as number one at the Box Office since Pocahontas! Critically, Tarzan was pretty well-received, as well. At least until now, it's also an unofficial bookend to the unofficial trilogy of jungle films initiated by The Jungle Book (Although The Emperor's New Groove was technically also set in a jungle, despite that it's never been perceived as among those jungle-films). And to nitpick a little: Though Lion King is placed in the jungle category, it takes mostly place at a Savannah, But since both Lion King relies on similar carnivores, it's comparison to Jungle Book is after all fair.
 |
| They payed us for this. We couldn't be in each other bellies ;) |
History/Disneyfication
Due to it's famous and legendary premise, Tarzan was an interesting and intriguing task for the Disney team to tackle. It started as a television series before it found it's way to Feature Animation (suggested by director Kevin Lima, who never thought that the project should be a B-Movie). 
But the fun irony is that Edgar Rice Burroughs himself wanted an animated adaptation of Tarzan! One that could achieve Disney excellency! So it's remarkable that it took so long for Disney to adapt it (but it's a pity that he never lived to see it). Of course this Tarzan has been sanitized and Disneyfied to fit to the Disney mold. But regarding various opinions around the final result, Disney wanted to stay true to the spirit of the character and it's premise. And frankly, I think they succeeded with it and it's been praised for it. But considering how the post-Lion King films were 
so blatantly bashed for their Disneyfication, it's baffling that Tarzan got away for it's rewrite. Hence the original novel is awfully brutal, so the creators wanted (in true Disney-fashion) to stray away from the brutality from the get-go.
so blatantly bashed for their Disneyfication, it's baffling that Tarzan got away for it's rewrite. Hence the original novel is awfully brutal, so the creators wanted (in true Disney-fashion) to stray away from the brutality from the get-go. 
However, what's remarkable is that Tab Murphy's (The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Atlantis The Lost Empire, Brother Bear) first draft of the script was surprisingly faithful to the novel. Which really would something intriguing for a Disney adaptation to pull off. However, the screenplay had problems from the beginning, so screenwriters Bob Tzudiker and Noni White (The Lion King, Hunchback) came in to help to balance it out.
The Renaissance Formula
Just as it's predecessors of the decade, Tarzan followed the Disneyformula of the nineties with it's usual stock components. Usually Disney were criticized for being too derivative with this formula during that decade. But whether it was intentional or not, in many ways, Tarzan comes across as an amalgam of The Lion King and Pocahontas. The Lion King due to being an coming of age story set in the wilds of Africa (the second one from Disney) and animal hierarchy. Pocahontas because of the man vs civilization theme; English invaders exploring the nature and a romance between those cultures. But at least Tarzan handles the language barrier realistically (and frankly, better) than what Pocahontas did.
Due to it's aforementioned jungle setting, the comparisons to The Jungle Book has of course been inevitable. But surprisingly enough, Tarzan takes some cues from Bambi as well (Terk acting just like Thumper when encountering baby Tarzan, as well as she and Tantor growing up together with Tarzan). 
Due to the recycling formula being aforementioned, it's needless to cite that Tarzan centers around our titular hero being an outcast (but before accusing Disney for reusing this trope, it's not only just a coincidence, since Tarzan was actually an in the actual novel). Tarzan has not only to convince his family of apes, but his stepfather who want nothing do with him. And though perhaps Tarzan doesn't do anything invigorating with this trope, it is perhaps the most overt of the Renaissance features regarding about belonging. Although Disney gives it an easy resolution at the end, the subject gives the plot weight and depth. 
Heck, the film makes way for the English crew being the first humans Tarzan meets. While some has complained about the lack of Africans in this movie, meeting the English does give the plot a logical sense, since they're after all supposed the first humans Tarzan ever meets. Though I doubt Disney wanted to be consciously racist about it. An African tribe would appear in the The Legend of Tarzan animated series (though I still wonder if Disney will ever consider to make an movie with Africans set in Africa. Yes, I dared to mention it!).
 |
| Don't worry, I like the smell of toes ;) I've grown to certain smells ;) |
Music
What truly sets Tarzan apart from it's predecessors is it's soundtrack. Tarzan is not a Broadway musical where the characters breaks into song and the songs were written and performed by Phil Collins. Though it wasn't his first venture into movie soundtrack business, it was certainly one where he was a completely part of. Despite there's been some people who's whined about his contribution, it's still fair to state Phil is regardless objectively a suitable and inspired choice for this movie. With his melodic and organic music, which pretty much resembles what one could've expect of an African jungle sound (a sound that Collins himself used priorly on his previous records). And of course his distinctive, haunting, yet recognizable voice.
At least objectively, Phil Collins is more perceivable with African music than Elton John ever been. And while it seemed as Disney was duplicating The Lion King recipe with a former rockstar as the composer for the songs, they took it a step further by letting Collins sing the songs in the movie himself!And despite the aforementioned naysayers, it's fair to cite that Collins' songs in this movie are overall excellent and well made. He even recorded the songs in several different languages, cleverly enough.
It's understandable why the crew found it extraneous for the King of the Jungle to break into song. But considering how Disney made a hunchback sing (which also was odd), why not having the same policy for Quasimodo when Hunchback movie was made?
And while it would be easy to label Tarzan as the first Disney film which an unseen narrators voice who sings the songs, Bambi was technically the first. Since none of the songs are sung by the characters in that movie.
Having an outsider sing the song makes the points of views of the characters flexible, since it jumps from the perspective of each of them. As from Kala's point of view (which she actually sings a little bit, by Glen Close) and afterwards Tarzan's. In many ways, Strangers Like Me is the "I want" number in this movie, The scat-like Trashing the Camp is somewhat of an odd compromise,
since the song was deliberately made for Rosie O'Donell to sing! Which was one reason for her to agree to do the part! It's clever how the filmmakers managed to find a way in the story to pull it off. Though Trashing the Camp may seem out of place within the context of the film, due to it's nature and not being a contribution to the plot itself. And being the closest this film has to a showstopper (Phil himself was bashing things with his drumsticks during the recording).
Tarzan, Our Immortal Hero
 |
| Kaa hypnotized us, so that's why we look like this :) |
Tarzan was Glen Keane's return to the drawing board after being absent from four films since Pocahontas. And it certainly was a quite challenge for him! Though he initially thought the task would be easy since Tarzan's only costume was a loincloth, his bending anatomy proved to be a quite a challenge! At least he took cues from the novel and created a Tarzan which could move and behave like an animal, as he did in the book. And funny enough, making him an Jungle surfer (though the directors deliberately didn't want a surfer dude). Tarzan's movements are a fascinating treat, especially since moves like an amalgam of different animals and rarely stands up as a real human (though Mowgli has some animalistic behavior, he's not as bendable as Tarzan).
But remarkably enough this Tarzan isn't what we would perceive as an typical realistic-looking hero! With his narrow jaw, pointed chin and thin nose, he's designed as being quite cartoony looking, actually! Though it's understandable why such a look would allow flexibility. But realistic men are the toughest to animate after all!
Adult Tarzan was animated in Paris, suggested by Keane himself, who had just completed a year of anatomy study in Paris. Which made Tarzan the first lead animated outside of Burbank, California! And that's due to how the French animators were being able to handle the anatomy! Though adult Tarzan in this movie is confirmed as being twenty years old, Tony Goldwin was cast to make him sound like a grown adult. Tarzan is also an excellent mimic of different animals in this film, but also of humans as well (which Goldwin did much of himself)! And yes, believe it or not: George of The Jungle's Brendan Frasier was originally going to be cast as Tarzan. But was rejected for sounding too modern.
Jane, the Heroine
 |
| Be glad that's the only thing that I'm touching :) |
Her character design happens also to be cartoony as well. Ken Duncan supervised her (though he managed to give her some British features). Although Jane acts like a fish out of water at the beginning, she's fortunately not as grating as she easily could've been. And she has a subtle arc of her own. The directors wanted to give Jane flaws, yet stray away from the prissy Victorian archetype. And several actresses auditioned in a Mary Poppins-style for her. However, the romance was something that the directors didn't want to take the whole center from the get-go and they even considered to exclude the romance completely initially (believe it or not).
 |
| My body said "let's go, but my heart said no" ;) |
It's notable how the humans in Tarzan (besides Tarzan's parents) are in general designed in a quite cartoony way. While the designs of the animals are more realistically and (therefore in my opinion) superiorly, it's notable how Kerchak is the only gorilla who's actually given the color if black. Whereas the other gorilla's are (in true cartoon fashion) given browns (or in Terk's case, grey).
An Successful Amalgam of Various Genres
 |
| It should've come with a warning :) |
 |
| Look at this, Bambi :) |
Either way, personally I thought Tarzan had the typical Disney cuteness and family charm that their productions are known and worshipped for, more than it's two predecessors (And yes, I'll confess this: Personally I think Disney used to succeed more with sheer charm and cuteness with their previous works, more than their current movies. Not to slam this new string of hits, but I'll stand by my statement. Even the semi-neglected Brother Bear had the typical Disney cuteness at times, in my opinion).
The Comedy
 |
| But I'm supposed to like bacteria, I'm an animal myself :) |
Now that the comedy in this movie is being mentioned, not all of it has been praised. And personally, I happen to agree with that. While I consider the situational humor to be funny, the other parts have been executed in a more juvenile way. While Terk (Rosie O'Donnell) has been detested by many reviewers and audiences, I personally had a certain fondness for her. Though the hate of her is after all quite understandable, because of her loud and boisterous nature.
Yet Terk was the most difficult character to cast and her gender change was suggested by producer Bonnie Arnold. To break off the familiar path of having two sidekicks that were males. Though the casting of O'Donell may seem calculated and created some negative fuzz, at least the executives at Disney supported it.But in test screenings the most liked character. Personally I thought Tantor (Wayne Knight) was more grating than Terk (despite Tantor being endearing as a child). And frankly, the same could be said about Professor Porter, as well (despite him having moments of sincerity and heart).
 |
| Yes, this marriage was made by compromises ;) |
 |
| I'm preparing to be a bird in my next life :) |
Villains
 |
| We're Satan's descendants. In animal form :) |
Another stock element of this movie that has received lukewarm remarks has been the main villain. It's not to imply that Clayton (based on African trackers the crew met on their safari) is completely wasted as a character. Heck, I personally find him superior to the bleak and forgettable Shan-Yu! But his part and motivation is utterly traditional and contrived. It's not to dismiss that Tarzan didn't need an human antagonist in the third act, but Clayton's role seems truly demanded from the 90's formula just for the sake it. 
While the dramatic parts of the climax are truly intense, the climax itself comes across as contrived due to the aforementioned reasons. Clayton has been labeled for being reminiscent of Gaston and may be considered to be a restrained version of Ratcliffe (since both have a similar goal and functioning part). Sabor, however, is more successful and effective in her part, though. For functioning well as an mute, naturalistic antagonist in the first act. And an head-scratching notion (in true Disney fashion) is how some animals are given voices, while others remains naturalistically mute (but don't ask why, it's not as Disney wanted us to ponder about it).
Deep Canvas/The Visuals
While most of the Disney features of the 90's had technical innovations, Tarzan was truly a step forward with it's Deep Canvas system. Which was made to give the backgrounds more depth and dimension, by rendering them through CGI. A technique that allows artists to produce CGI background that looks like a traditional painting. It wouldn't be an understatement to claim that Deep Canvas is truly the star of this show. And though it was used in some movies afterwards and is certainly impressive in Atlantis and Treasure Planet, it's would be fair to cite that Tarzan uses it best! It's a pity that it couldn't be used longer (due to the unfortunate demise of hand drawn animation at Disney and in full-length animation in general). 
It wouldn't be an understatement to state that Tarzan is an visually gorgeous film! Although most Disney films (with the exception between the 60's through the 80's) have been visually captivating and striking, Tarzan certainly filled the bill by having the most stunning visuals to date. At least Tarzan was a return to the classical Disney-esque look, after two culturally stylized movies with Hercules and Mulan. Another challenge for the filmmakers was to differentiate this jungle from the ones in The Jungle Book and The Lion King! But they at least deliberately had that issue in mind and objectively succeeded with that task, despite it taking place in the same continent as The Lion King (funny how that jungle seemed to be completely absent of animals, with the exception of the bugs). The solution was to have a sheer difference between them, since The Lion King's jungle was more exaggerated with it's colors, whereas Tarzan's jungle is more naturalistic and subdued.
This Version of Tarzan Taking Only Place in Africa
A remarkable thing about this Tarzan retelling is it takes only place in the jungle of Africa. It was a conscious choice from the directors from the get-go, as they felt the story lost it's spark and "magic" when the characters abandoned the jungle. Which certainly makes it understandable enough and certainly differentiates this film from other Tarzan versions. But personally I wouldn't mind if Disney's Tarzan actually took our lead to the civilized world of England. At least this film ends with an easy, yet concluding solution to this issue (which superficially would be reminiscent of a reversed conclusion in Pocahontas, just with an happy ending).
The Directors and Producer
 |
| Just an overview to not confuse ya :) |
Animator Chris Buck made his directorial debut and would later on make a certain downright flop about ice and a snow queen and it's sequel (yes folks, note the sarcasm). Bonnie Arnold, who's credits belongs to Blockbusters as Toy Story and Dances With Wolves, was the producer. Though she arrived at the production later than the directors (and also had a gorilla in the film named after her, as well as the directors having a brief cameo in the movie).
 |
| Blame the 90's trend, not us ;) |
Spinoff-series and Cheapquel
Tarzan was also one of the 90's features who received a spin-off series, The Legend of Tarzan (which happens to be the title of 2016 theatrical depiction with Alexander Skarsgård and Margot Robbie), made in 2001. Just as with the spin-off shows for Aladdin and Lilo & Stitch, the series took place after the events of the original movie. It depicted Tarzan and Jane's, now husband and wife, lives in the jungle. Where Tarzan was now an equivalent of a superman who couldn't do no wrong.
As with the Aladdin show, the themes from the original score from the film were included to the series. Tarzan also received an midquel about his childhood in Tarzan II in 2005 (yes, the title was misleading, since it wasn't a true sequel) And it's remarkable how that movie somewhat duplicated the Deep Canvas system and even had Phil Collins returning as the composer (oddly enough)!
Disney`s Fate After the New Millennium
It would be truly fair to state that Tarzan was truly something of a last of it's kind. And that it truly ended the Disney Renaissance with a bang! The following years would be crucial for Disney, since unfortunately none of the following hand drawn efforts broke the Box Office (with the exception of Lilo & Stitch). It's certainly a pity that those films were labeled as failures by the majority, also because them being complete departures from the Renaissance era (though that's an another discussion for now)! But note how the following Dinosaur would duplicate components from Tarzan blatantly!
Summary of Being a Solid Movie/Dark Components/Script
Regardless of the different opinions about Tarzan, it's fair to objectively label it a solid and engaging film. Perhaps the most solid of the post-The Lion King films. While it lacks the adult-in jokes of it's two former films, Hercules and Mulan, it's not a big miss (in my opinion). Some components of Tarzan are truly great. But personally I wouldn't mind if Tarzan was a darker and grittier take on the story. I'm not implyoing that Tarzan should've been entirely grim and gloomy. While it does have it's fair share of drama and darkness, it feels overall sanitized as a whole. To give an example; We only see glimpses of the dead corpses of Tarzan's parents. Yet we'll never see Sabor actually killing them. The same goes for Kala's baby.
Eisner suggested the latter issue to give an emotional arc to Kala, which also was something taken from the novel. The film concludes the issue by giving Kala a new child to love, to give an emotional resonance. Though the losing a child-incident made the crew skeptical at first (guess Eisner must be a fan of controversy, since he pushed Hunchback to be grim and shocking). For all the flack Disney receives for orphanage and the absence of mothers, Disney usually happens to do mother characters pretty well when it's needed. And Kala was one of the most crucial Disney mothers in a long time.The screenplay, however, can come across as somewhat overloaded, incorporating Tarzan's whole life story into a 88 minutes. It's not to imply that it's an hampering flaw, but the script do comes across as being too busy at times. As the directors mentioned in the Audio Commentary; If the events of their movie were truly stretched out, it would have made for an two-hour film!
Epilogue
No matter what, Tarzan is objectively an successful Disney-adaptation of the classic Lord of the Jungle! And a film worthy of it's success! Though perhaps it's not Disney's highest rated film in the Pantheon, it still has a high ranking in the Disney canon, nonetheless (which it had for a time after it's release) and a huge fanbase.
Apparently Burroughs grandson, Danton (which the crew worked closely with, certainly thanks to Arnold) loved the film. So Tarzan is a proof that some Disney-adaptations can be praised by their author's descendants after all.
Aaaayaaayiah!
Swing into my updates on https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100035703494050 and https://twitter.com/NerdyLunada.
References:
The Tarzan Chronicles (Howard E. Green).
Mouse Under Glass (David Koenig)
Tarzan Collector Edition DVD.
Disney Magazine Summer 1999
Disney.com/Tarzan
Starlog Magazine June 1999
Starlog Magazine July 1999
Movie Surfers; Tarzan (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsHmWyLA5iA)
http://web.archive.org/web/20030412160158/http://www.animated-movies.net:80/Tarzan.html
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tarzan
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120855/criticreviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
http://www.dvdizzy.com/tarzan-bluray.html
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/tarzan-1999
http://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/Tarzan
http://www.nytimes.com/library/film/061899tarzan-film-review.html
http://tech.mit.edu/V119/N29/Review-_Tarzan.29a.html
http://theshrubbery.com/0799/movie2.html
http://www.tollbooth.org/movies/tarzan.html
http://www.avclub.com/review/tarzan-19629
http://www.imdb.com/reviews/188/18866.html
http://www.imdb.com/reviews/188/18890.html
https://letterboxd.com/sailordanae/list/tarzans-complete-list-of-films/
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar