Director: Hugh Hudson Cast: Christopher Lambert, Ian Holm Genre: Drama
Runtime: 137 minutes Release Date: March 30th, 1984 Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
While I didn't find much to complain about with this film, there was one thing that bothered me and got in the way of enjoying the film. That one thing: THE DUBBING!!! Why did they dub MacDowell's voice? For what ungodly reason did they think it would be a good idea to do this? It actually isn't that bad throughout the film and it is hardly noticeable but I know it happened and I can't understand why. What comes off as worse is the dubbing of Tarzan when he yells while in the jungle. It just doesn't sound like a Tarzan yell, it doesn't sound like the man on screen is yelling it and it doesn't seem real which, like I said, is what this version of Tarzan is striving for.
Greystoke is a modern day retelling of the classic story of Tarzan. Ok, fine, it's a mid 1980's retelling of the classic story of Tarzan. But it feels more modern than it actually is. In fact it comes off feeling like a movie that was made in the last decade or so (minus the CGI effects). It is a movie I grew up watching on television, but like so many movies from that era, it seemed to have disappeared from late night showings, early afternoon showings or virtually any time that I have ever flipped through the 100's of channels I have had over the last decade, or more.
As a movie I had watched when I was younger, over and over and over, can you imagine my excitement in finally getting to watch it again all these years later. This time though I got to watch it in a remastered version, without commercials interrupting it every few minutes and in all it's glorious widescreen beauty. And watch it I did, yesterday, and it had me glued to the television.
When a ship crashes in Africa, the surviving members of the ship (a husband and wife) continue to live their lives near a family of apes. 10 months later they have a child, but when the mom dies from malaria the apes kill the dad and take the baby for themselves. The baby is Tarzan and he grows to adulthood, raised by the apes and eventually becoming their leader. When a british archaeology expedition is attacked, Tarzan saves the only surviving member. He teaches Tarzan to speak and about his origins and together they seek off after Tarzan's heritage.
The Good:
Greystoke is an exceptionally well made film. Every aspect is brought to vivid life by everyone involved. Coming out in 1984 it is amazing how good the film looks today. So to discuss what's good about the film is rather hard to do as it was all pretty good. But I'll try anyways and discuss the things that have lingered in my mind since watching it.
First off the apes are amazing here. Sure they are guys in suits (I think) but you can't really tell. Designed by Rick Baker, the legendary man behind such movies as An American Werewolf in London and The Howling, the apes come off amazingly. They are so convincing and real that I am sure he just reused the same costumes and effects for Tim Burton when they collaborated on Planet of the Apes in 2001. Sure he touched up the make-up a bit, made it a bit more modern but otherwise the apes seem the same and the lead ape (Tarzan's ape father) would fit right in with the rest of the apes in Planet of the Apes. He even could be a dead ringer replacement for Tim Roth's Caesar. I didn't watch Planet of the Apes too long ago but I wasn't that impressed by what I saw. I guess what I am saying is that Greystoke has held up so much better in the make-up department and is justifiably impressive.
While some of the acting (particularly in long shots and the dubbed performances) does leave room to be desired the rest of the performances are stellar. Sir Ralph Richardson, in one of his last performances, is absolutely captivating. He is nothing short of spectacular as Tarzan's grandfather. Ian Holm is, as always, a great joy to watch as the Belgian explorer who discovers Tarzan. Andie MacDowell is beautiful here (and is it just me or is this very young version of her a dead ringer for former porn star Sasha Grey?)
Most surprising though is Christopher Lambert as Tarzan. Now I have seen a few movies with this Lambert fella and I tell you I have never been impressed. In fact I find it quiet hard to believe that he has lasted as long as he has in the film industry. But here he is actually really good. His wooden acting style suits the part perfectly. He has a scared and nervous look about him the whole time and his inability to speak well comes off as a character trait rather than wooden acting. Is his performance actually any good? I'm not sure but it worked really well here and was perfect for this film.
Other things that really struck me while watching this film was how beautiful the cinematography was. It captured the jungles and England majestically with perfectly framed shots and great skill and care was put into the lighting and sets in order to give off a very realistic, yet cinematic at the same time, tone.
I also liked how the filmmakers decided to stay away from showing the boat crash. There was no need for it as it was implied, understood and in a sense was not crucial to the story. I also liked how Tarzan was never called Tarzan. Not once did you hear the name Tarzan spoken in the film. Director Hugh Hudson tried to make a realistic version of the story of Tarzan; he tried to make it seem plausible, like something like this could really happen. And for the most part he succeeds which makes the film feel original and unique.
The Bad:
While I didn't find much to complain about with this film, there was one thing that bothered me and got in the way of enjoying the film. That one thing: THE DUBBING!!! Why did they dub MacDowell's voice? For what ungodly reason did they think it would be a good idea to do this? It actually isn't that bad throughout the film and it is hardly noticeable but I know it happened and I can't understand why. What comes off as worse is the dubbing of Tarzan when he yells while in the jungle. It just doesn't sound like a Tarzan yell, it doesn't sound like the man on screen is yelling it and it doesn't seem real which, like I said, is what this version of Tarzan is striving for.
Although I did enjoy the film one hell of a lot, was never bored and felt captivated for the entire 137 minute run time I did think it could of been trimmed a bit (maybe ten minutes in total) to be an even tighter film. And I also thought (although it works really well for this story) that the ending was slightly anti-climactic, just ever so slightly.
The Ugly:
Once again I can find nothing ugly about this film. (It's funny, since I started this format of good, bad and ugly reviews most of the films I have reviewed have been pretty good. Or at least they haven't been that bad and therefore the ugly column has been pretty sparse. Just thought I'd mention that here to spruce this section up.)
The Verdict:
Greystoke is a fantastically realized and very realistic portrait of the classic and immortal tale of Tarzan. It is shot impeccably well, directed with a stunningly assured hand and is well acted by the entire cast. The ape effects are amazing and still look good almost 30 years later and of all the live action Tarzan films to have ever been released I cannot think of one that can trump this one. It is ever so slightly long, and some weird dubbing underscores the rest of the film but otherwise I highly recommend this film to anyone with a thirst for adventure that is interlaced with great moments of drama. It makes for a wonderful and effective two hours of viewing pleasure.
Recommendation: Gorillas in the Mist
Re-playability: 7 out of 10 Directing: 8 out of 10 Originality: 8 out of 10
Costumes and Make-up: 10 out of 10 Acting: 7 out of 10 Editing: 8 out of 10
Cinematography: 9 out of 10 Music: 7 out of 10 Script: 8 out of 10
Production Design (Sets/Locations/Special Effects): 10 out of 10
Total Score = 82%
No comments:
Post a Comment