Just saw this last night, and let me tell you, do NOT see it. Especially if you're a fan of the original.
>tons of historical inaccuracies
>shitty acting everywhere
>tons of asspulls that make no sense
>shitty villains with no redeeming quality
>horrible cgi, everything looks extremely fake for a movie that relies so heavily on it
>shits all over the story of the original
>Tarzan looks like a retard for half the movie
>Horrible action scenes
It's just a bad movie, and not even a funny bad movie like the new Independence Day, it's just bad and not worth watching.
I already bought my ticket
so tarzan actually existed? or was tarzan the biggest historical inaccuracy?
>>71517745
>movie is set in 1910's~1930's
>black man in charge
impossible to take the movie seriously based on this fact alone
>>71517893
haven't seen the movie, but be glad that tarzan isn't suddenly a black man.
>>71517604
Thanks Disney viral marketer
>>71517959
That would be racist.
>>71517893
>>movie is set in 1910's~1930's
>black man in charge
But Sam L's character is based on a real dude
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_Williams
yeah how surprising. even the studio knows this will bomb. there's been almost zero advertising since they're already trying to cut their losses. it's JOHN CARTER all over again.
why is edgar rice burroughs such box office poison?
>>71519264
Hell, John Carter was an abomination of the books, but at least it had decent stuff in it.
>>71519264
John Carter was bullshit, they purposely left off 'Of Mars' just because Mars Needs Moms flopped, clearly that was the problem and not the movie having crap CG and not being well written at all.
I guess we'll see if the "curse" can be broken by whoever remakes Flash Gordon.
I'm surprised this got made at all, to be honest. The books are very much of their time (i.e. not politically correct) and I'm surprised we haven't heard any complaining yet.
>>71519527
>and I'm surprised we haven't heard any complaining yet.
IGN review listed "Great White Savior" as a negative
>>71519584
Yeah, but can you imagine if they'd made him a black guy?
>>71517604
I really want to see this cos the trailer proved to me it looks good - unlike the Warcraft trailers that never got me convinced
>>shits all over the story of the original
I don't even remember the original.. can someone please refresh my memory what happened in the original.
I thought this movie was a remake of the story or did they change it?
>>71519683
If the Rock played Tarzan everyone would be okay with it, cuz he's that special mocha blend of nigger everyone wants to fuck their daughter, in b4 he's not black yeah he fucking is.
>>71519753
literally: boy raised by apes in the jungle. gets found my scientists.
This takes place 10 years after he has been re-habituated into civilisation and he has to go back to the jungle.
>>71519782
How about John Boyega getting down with his brother-ape?
How come neither Tarzan or Jane is black in this version? And racism doesn't exist anymore, right guys?
>>71519802
You have to wonder why they bothered making it in the first place if they just want to change every factor of the story. These days, it's not like Tarzan is massive money draw, is it?
>>71519942
ME WANTZ DAT WITE WIMMIN
>>71519945
what did they change? from what this anon said
>>71519802
that is exactly what the blurb says on imdb: jungle boy returns to jungle after living in civilization
>>71519861
Not as funny as you stink
>>71520041
I doesn't sound much like the original plot:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarzan_of_the_Apes#Plot_summary
Could they not cgi his hairline to be a bit less JUST
>>71519942
Tarzan doesn't work with black people.
>nignog child gets raised by gorillas
How does this differ from being raised by a normal black parent?
>white Tarzan is attracted to black Jane
Why not just fuck a gorilla girl?
