Tarzan (2013)

Tarzan (2013)

GENRESAnimation,Action,Adventure,Drama,Family
LANGEnglish
ACTOR
Kellan LutzSpencer LockeLes BubbJoe Cappelletti
DIRECTOR
Reinhard Klooss

SYNOPSICS

Tarzan (2013) is a English movie. Reinhard Klooss has directed this movie. Kellan Lutz,Spencer Locke,Les Bubb,Joe Cappelletti are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2013. Tarzan (2013) is considered one of the best Animation,Action,Adventure,Drama,Family movie in India and around the world.

Orphaned and stranded in the heart of the untamed African jungle, little John Jr--the helpless son of the famous industrialist, John Greystoke--finds a new family in the shape of a mighty female silverback gorilla. Now, almost two decades later, Johnny is Tarzan, or the powerful "Ape without Fur", who finds himself up against the rapacious young CEO of Greystoke Energies, William Clayton, and his evil plan to exploit the unharnessed force of a prehistoric meteor. In the search of the extraordinary celestial body, Clayton will stop at nothing to rob the jungle of its invaluable resource; however, not if Tarzan and the daughter of the late explorer James Porter, Jane, can help it. Will the ruthless invaders desecrate Tarzan's virgin realm?

More

Same Director

Tarzan (2013) Reviews

  • Seemed Unnecessary

    3xHCCH2014-01-19

    The story of Tarzan of the Apes written by Edgar Rice Burroughs had been interpreted in many films since the 1930s. We all remember those classic films starring Johnny Weissmuller and Maureen O'Sullivan as Tarzan and Jane. In the 1980s, there was an acclaimed film version starring Christopher Lambert and Andie McDowall as the legendary couple. In the 1990s, Disney gave us its own take on the story in its traditional 2D animation with a pop musical score by Phil Collins. I was very surprised that this year, another version was being announced on ads. I saw the name of Kellan Lutz, and thought this was a live action film, starring this Twilight actor who just recently took on another classic film character Hercules. It turns out this was another animated production, but using motion capture technology. This incarnation of Tarzan gives the new generation an updated origin story. There is a comet from outer space that unscrupulous power companies are fighting over as an unlimited energy source. Instead of the shipwreck, we have a helicopter crash this time. The young Greystoke here was already a talking toddler rather than a newborn baby. The whole first hour was rather bland and boring. There was a lot of scenes which were dedicated to the romance between Tarzan and Jane. Only later when the villain character Clayton makes his appearance, it was only then that the action picked up. But by then, we can see that this version of Tarzan was very much influenced by the film "Avatar" with its environmental message, the layout of an army of technology, down to the rocky peaks in the setting. A hilarious modern day reference was the presence of a worker who was dressed like Bob the Builder. The quality of animation is not at all bad, to be honest. The story though had already been told so many times, and the modern upgrades were too incredible and too familiarly derivative to accept. This is not essential viewing, only when you have restless kids and nothing else to see at the mall. Only an hour and half long, it will be enough to keep their interest. But afterwards, they will probably still remember the Disney version more.

    More
  • What a waste of my time

    gabseqdu2014-05-23

    Bad plot, awful human animations... in all a waste of my time. Predictable story line you know all the things that will happen before they do. The mix some people are doing on topics is absurd... kind of the Cowboys and Aliens movie !! what a joke and here meteors, extinction of the dinosaurs, and Tarzan?? The other thing that was just enough for me was the gorilla behavior, even they seem to know how to use a knife (and the meaning of it for a kill) and to open a door... truly people?!! This types of movies are a slap to your intellect... please do not waste your time like I did mine, hope producers and writers could give me back the hour I could stand of this nonsense.

    More
  • Solid Entertainment

    ol-112014-02-22

    I have seen this movie today (the German version), and, honestly, I can't understand why this movie is getting such a poor rating on IMDb. Probably it's a misunderstanding: Many reviewers compare it to the Disney-version, and this is obviously nonsense: As it is the case with Disney's "Jungle Book", Disney's "Tarzan" has hardly any in common with the literary template. Disney's "Tarzan" is a movie for kids! This new version ... Well, I am afraid the director & author wasn't quite sure if he wanted to make a movie for kids or for grown-ups; this is one of the problems of this new version. It is certainly a more grown-up-version: There are no talking animals; there are people dying (offscreen, of course), and the mood is generally more somber. Okay, the SciFi-elements were not really necessary, and the evil corporation, yes, that's quite cliché. But all in all this version is much closer to the spirit of the books than the Disney-Version, and having a bit of nonsense in the plot, I think this is okay: There is a lot of nonsense in the books, too. And the animation is quite good; the 3D-effects are well done. If you don't take the plot too serious, you can have fun watching this movie!

    More
  • Very disappointing...

    jonathancolley-885-7048602014-05-16

    When I heard that there was a new Tarzan animated movie being released I was really quite excited because despite my love of big robots and monsters smashing things up and things going BOOM I do have a soft spot for Tarzan, I have fond childhood memories of running around with a tea towel loin cloth and a potato peeler shouting Ahhhh ah ahhhh!!!!! But this, was poor... Very poor... and a little piece of my childhood feels violated :( So, the animation is like something from an average quality PS3 game cut scene and is the style that I would expect to see on a kids TV show (although the motion capture was put to good use, the poor animation at least moves well). The potentially interesting story was diluted to focus on nothing in particular. There was (in my opinion) totally needless narration at certain points to tell you what was in front of your face. If I didn't know any better I would have said that this was developed to promote a new range of dolls for girls (Jungle Barbie and long haired, loin clothed Ken?). Save your money, watch something else or if you really want to watch an animated Tarzan look to Disney's offering which while being a little more childish trumps this one in EVERY way!

    More
  • Derivative and unoriginal, with the good being far outweighed by the bad

    neil-4762014-05-09

    US industrialist John Greystoke perishes in a helicopter accident in Africa while searching for an energy-bearing meteorite which crashed millenia ago: his 4-year old son JJ is the only survivor. Fortunately, the child is found and raised by maternal ape Kala: he calls himself Tarzan after his childhood fantasies surrounding his favourite ape doll. Then, in his teens he encounters Jane, the daughter of his father's colleague and environmentalist Jim Porter. They are both involved several years later when William Clayton (who is now running the Greystoke business) goes in pursuit of the meteorite once again with not a thought for the environment. This is a curate's egg. There is some terrific stuff here, chief among which is the realisation of the jungle environment. And, if you have to update Tarzan's origin, I suppose this is OK (personally, I have trouble if he is not the long lost son of English aristocracy, but that's just me. And quite a lot of other people). There is also some startlingly bad stuff here, too. The kid JJ is whiny, clingy, frightened of everything, and pretty much tied to his cuddly ape doll. He is such a complete wimp (OK, he's 4) that his abrupt switch to muscular heroic teen/man strains credulity, but at least it means that we are out of the overlong introduction. I now know why they go with established names in animated movies - they are good. I hadn't heard of most of the people providing voices here, and they are mostly bad. Les Bubb as Jim Porter is particularly poor, but Spencer Locke as Jane reminds me of Cameron Diaz in harsh nasal mode. She grates. My biggest problem, though, is the meteorite, which carries with it a bucketload of unanswered questions. If they can't find it, how do they know it's there? And how come they can't find it? It's the size of Mount Everest, and it isn't always shrouded in fog. How does the energy thing work, anyway? What is the point in seeking to blow it up? Taking a step backwards and looking from a distance, this isn't actually a Tarzan film at all: it's Avatar, with a bodged Tarzan origin nailed on at the front and Superman Returns' kryptonite mountain nailed on at the end. Maybe kids won't have so many problems with it. The 3D should have been great: it is indifferent.

    More

Hot Search