AboveDeepBuggy Some things I liked some I did not.

Rpgcatech Disapointment

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Catherina If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Francis Freespirit Riviere Miles O'Keefe was not only the most spectacular looking Tarzan ever,a and he acted for all what were required from the Tarzan's standards with a realistic touch of goodness, innocence and playfulness. His role was mute and that credit(or blame) should go to the film director With a different movie script, using some of realistic story line, Miles ability would have been shown in the best Tarzan movieMiles is also absolutely gorgeous and magnificent in SAS in San Salvador as Prince Malko and special agent. he was excellent in the role. He exudes seduction and sexiness and at the same time He was elegant, relaxed, mysterious, and decisive in actions . I thought he outplayed the character of the most sexy special agent ever played !

Python Hyena Tarzan the Ape Man (1981): Dir: John Derek / Cast: Bo Derek, Miles O'Keefe, Richard Harris, John Phillip Law, Steve Strong: Shameless dreck right down to its dim photography. Title indicates that the film is about a man with limited social understanding. He may require extreme psychotherapy after this film. Plot doesn't matter because it would make better toilet paper than a script. A escapade through the jungle by explorers who hear various wailings and realize that it isn't a parakeet. The first problem with this stupid film is its advertizing aimed at a younger audience yet it seems more interested in Bo Derek's nude scenes. Director John Derek takes a half hour to showcase Tarzan wrestling a python. The snake drapes down upon Derek who can clearly escape had she used common sense but she is required to coil up in it and scream endlessly. She cleans up Tarzan with hints of sexual activity, which leads to his fondling her. Derek's overacting is backed by horrid work by Richard Harris, John Phillip Law, and Miles O'Keefe as perhaps the worst Tarzan ever. The hidden purpose is to showcase Derek in various sexual positions and exploit the hormones of anyone who likely shouldn't see it due to its marketing appeal to younger viewers. It is not something that she will likely wish to have showcased at any career gala. Frankly, the best place for this film is underneath an elephant's foot. Score: 1 / 10

Neil Welch If you are married to a beautiful woman and you have Hollywood connections (if, for instance, you once used to be a second division matinée idol) then, I guess, it is not out of the question for you to give some thought to assembling some sort of vanity project movie to showcase her looks. There is a precedent for this (Pia Zadora leaps to mind, which is probably some sort of commentary on the idea in and of itself).But, you see, the problem is that Bo Derek had already been showcased in Blake Edwards' "10", which did the job perfectly - it required her to be gorgeous, scantily (or less) dressed, and vacuous, all three of which she managed perfectly.Then husband John Derek picked up that particular ball and ran with it, and the first place he ran to (others followed) was Tarzan, The Ape Man.Miles O'Keefe is a perfectly serviceable Tarzan in this, his only Tarzan film. He certainly looks the part, and he runs, swings, swims, and looks mystified in all the places where he is required to do so.The problem is that this isn't actually a Tarzan film. It isn't even a Jane film. It's a Bo Derek film.There is some beautiful scenery and a rather perfunctory performance by Richard Harris in a slow and boring 30 to 40 minutes. And then Bo starts to get naked, a state in which she spends most of the remainder of the film both before and after Tarzan arrives on the scene.Now I have no great objection to Bo Derek naked. Bo Derek naked is, in my shallow and superficial view, a Good Thing. The problem, though, is twofold. One, the poor girl is woefully exposed as having no acting ability whatsoever, apparently being under the impression that gently nibbling an immaculately manicured fingernail amounts to emoting (to her credit, she has made films later in her acting career in which she shows that she has worked and made progress in this area). And, two, someone forgot that a movie like this actually needs a story. There is some tosh about natives painting her white, but this is hardly a story.So you might get some mileage out of scenery, and boobage, and poor old Miles O'Keefe's big break being a bit of a non-starter, but you can forget anything else.

jlpicard1701E There have been so-so Tarzans, then there have been dull Tarzans, and again, there were some very good ones, but this beats them all in being the worst transposition ever.No wonder that the Rice Burroughs Foundations sued the Production.Mind you, I always found that Tarzan was somewhat of a cartoon character out of a mediocre literature piece to start with, just like Superman and Batman of yesteryear.There has only been one good movie about the subject and it was not a Hollywood production, but rather a French one by Francois Truffaut in "The Wild Child" (1970), which connects to Rudyard Kipling's "The Jungle Book" and as here, with the Tarzan saga (in some aspects).The rest is the fruit of their times and the mentalities of people living in those days. As such, they are all dated and show their age.The only interesting factor in such movies are the locations (although in many cases just stock footage), which document a world gone by, if not animals that are almost extinct by now.In John Derek's attempt at making an erotic art movie, all you get to see is bad acting (even by seasoned actors such as Richard Harris who really seems bored with the entire subject), if not truly amateurish romancing by Bo Derek which seems more lost than present throughout the movie.The beau, the mighty Tarzan himself, in the person of Miles O'Keeffe, is just a bad excuse of the male sex symbol and thus reduced to the animal he seems to be.It is a simplistic and very primitive view of the world he lives in. It is escapism in the purest form. But this does not excuse the stupidity that pervades the entire movie.If Caligula has been turned in a soft porn movie by Bob Guccione, disappointing all the cast members that were hired in it, this Tarzan is not even that. It is just a feeble attempt to show off John Derek's wife attributes.Pure exhibitionism, nothing else.If a lesson can be learned, it is how not to make movies like these, ever.It seems that John Derek never learned anything from masters like John Ford, Cecil B. DeMille or Orson Welles. Nor did he even consider going to school with John Gullermin or other directors of the Tarzan Series. He would probably have benefited of their experiences and decided to actually do a good movie.Vanity was all he was interested in. How empty, how sad and how desperate a man must be to come to such a conclusion.In my opinion, this in one of the most forgettable movies ever made and even if its traces were lost, it wouldn't be a terrible loss for humanity. Actually, it would be nice if it would disappear completely...We already have enough good movies to care about, and this is certainly not one of them.