When Edgar Rice Burroughs first created Tarzan in 1912, he couldn’t have had any idea how long a shadow his character would cast over the landscape of popular imagination. The man raised by great apes, who comes to bridge two different worlds, has long proven lucrative fodder for various forms of media. However, those of us who have studied the history of Tarzan can agree that Disney’s telling (25 years old as of June 18, 2024) was the first adaptation to truly do him justice. And with the original Burroughs canon spanning across so many titles, it was a logical next step for Disney to expand upon their own Tarzan universe, as well. Thus, The Legend of Tarzan (September 3, 2001– February 5, 2003) was born.
The show’s premise is straightforward: We follow Tarzan as he copes with leading his gorilla family after Kerchak’s death, and balancing these responsibilities with his marriage to Jane. He must contend with doubts about his ability to lead, European colonial expansion into Africa, and battles with enemies old and new, human and nonhuman alike, supported all the while by the Porters (who have adapted quite well to life in the rainforest), Terk, Kala, and Tantor.
As a sequel, the show works wonderfully, exploring new facets of Tarzan’s life while still remaining faithful to the events of the movie. In each episode, he learns about a different element of human nature from his wife and father-in-law (both of whom likewise learn more about how life in the wild works), and applies those lessons to whatever conflict he faces. In addition, we are treated to some intriguing callbacks both to the Porters’ life in England, and to Tarzan’s own past. I would say that, in terms of continuity and worldbuilding, this is the best pre-Tangled TV spinoff from the Disney Canon.
By the same token, it does a great job of connecting Disney’s franchise to its literary roots, with numerous book characters, such as the punch-drunk and bloodthirsty rogue gorilla Tublat; Queen La of Opar; unscrupulous science professor Samuel T. Philander; Hista the giant python; and the Waziri tribe (to name but a few) appearing throughout; even Burroughs himself appears in the finale.
Speaking of the books, while the showrunners change certain details in the adaptation process, just as the makers of the original movie did (e.g., modeling Tublat’s personality upon the literary version of Kerchak, and portraying Philander as Porter’s academic rival rather than his research assistant), such changes actually make things more interesting. Of course, it should be said that some of the more fanciful elements – both those carried over from the source material, and those created for the show – blend more harmoniously with the naturalistic universe of the movie than others; for instance, I can buy the spirit gorilla Mangani (named for the fictional ape species that adopted Tarzan in the books) and the Leopard Men (here portrayed as actual leopards made anthropoidal by Queen La’s sorcery) quite easily, but the dinosaur-inhabited Hollow Earth of Pellucidar much less so. (Granted, I’ve only ever read the first book, and know of the follow-ups solely from their synopses, so I’m at a bit of a disadvantage compared to the hardcore Tarzan buffs.)
Inevitably, the transition from big screen to small leads to some sacrifices, due to tighter budgets. For instance, seeing Tarzan surfing on a hand-drawn/hand-painted branch doesn’t work quite as well as the mixture of 2D characters against 3D backgrounds seen in the movie. In addition, I was rather unhappy to discover that the vast majority of the characters were recast; if Disney could bring back the original actors from Aladdin, Tangled, Hercules, Big Hero 6, Lilo and Stitch and The Little Mermaid for their respective spin-offs, then why couldn’t they do the same with Tarzan? This especially true of the two leads; while I will grant that Olivia D’Abo makes a great replacement for Jane, and Michael Weiss cuts the mustard as Tarzan (albeit inconsistently), I would have preferred to have Minnie Driver and Tony Goldwyn reprise their roles. On a related note, when the new actors actually try to match the sounds of the originals’ voices, some do better than others; Susanne Blakeslee makes an OK match for Glenn Close as Kala, and vocal chameleon Jim Cummings channels Wayne Knight as Tantor reasonably well, but Jeff Bennett sounds much too different from the late Nigel Hawthorne to make a convincing Archimedes Porter, and April Winchell’s Terk is much more nasal than Rosie O’Donnell’s, so she starts to grate on me after a while. On the bright side, though, the new actors remain true to the characters’ personalities, as is top priority.
Returning to the positives, one particular aspect of this series that I really appreciated was that it never gets heavy-handed in its discussion of such themes as leadership, revenge, environmental protection (discussed quite frequently, for obvious reasons) or relations with Indigenous cultures. (On this latter note, I applaud the showrunner’s sensitivity in depicting the Waziri, as it shows much more respect for African people than Burroughs ever did.) Instead, it approaches these topics maturely and thoughtfully, allowing the audience to see the varying shades of gray in the characters and their actions. Any show that shows this much respect for viewers’ intelligence is a winner as far as I’m concerned.
All in all, The Legend of Tarzan is a worthy continuation of one of Disney’s most stirring and ambitious animated classics. It leads us further into Tarzan’s world, shows us more sides to the characters, and imparts important lessons for both the characters and the audience. But perhaps most importantly of all, it honors the legacy of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ creation, reminding us why Tarzan remains an icon of pop culture more than a century later, and will remain so for generations to come.
**This is a user-submitted post by Jordan Hashemi-Briskin**
