Tarzan of the Apes

1918 "Tarzan did not know why he caressed her... He had never seen a white woman before!"
5.8| 1h0m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 27 January 1918 Released
Producted By: National Film Corporation of America
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

A female ape takes to mothering the orphaned boy (Tarzan) and raises him over the course of many years until a rescue mission is finally launched and the search party combs the jungle for the long-time missing Lord Greystoke. But then, one of the search members, Jane Porter, gets separated from the group and comes face to face with fearsome wild animals. Tarzan saves her from harm just in the knick of time and love begins to blossom.

Genre

Adventure, Action

Watch Online

Tarzan of the Apes (1918) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Scott Sidney

Production Companies

National Film Corporation of America

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
Tarzan of the Apes Videos and Images
View All

Tarzan of the Apes Audience Reviews

Onlinewsma Absolutely Brilliant!
Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.
Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.
MartinHafer If someone watches this film and starts looking for shortcomings, they'll probably find a reasonable amount. However, considering the film was made in 1918, it's an amazingly good film--even with its few mistakes and cheesy touches--which, relative to other films of the day, were few.This original Tarzan film was made in Louisiana. I live in Florida and I could tell by looking at the plants that it was filmed in this part of the USA, but considering that many later Tarzan films were filmed with houseplants all over the set, the backwoods of Louisiana (with all its Spanish moss) was a good choice for a domestic production. As far as the wild animals go, it was a mixed bag. Unfortunately, the elephant was an Asian elephant but I can't blame the film makers too much--the African variety are a lot nastier and dangerous. What I can blame them for, a bit, are the apes that adopt Tarzan. They are clearly people in cheap ape costumes--that look neither like gorillas or chimps--just people in ape costumes! But once again, given the technology of the era, it isn't that bad--plus, Stanley Kubrick did the same thing in "2001" and it's considered a masterpiece!! As for the plot, aside from the addition of a character and a few other small changes, it is essentially Edgar Rice Burroughs' book come to life. It's actually much more accurate than many of the later versions and because it stays closer to the book, it is more interesting and watchable...and less silly. In fact, as far as the writing, direction and acting go, it was all very, very good for such an early full-length film--and a lot better than the gobs of Tarzan films from the 1950s and 60s.Overall, very good and very interesting.
henry_ferrill Ever since I started reading Edgar Rice Burroughs' original Tarzan novels, I've been anxious to get my hands on the different interpretations of Jane's "forest god." Well, maybe silent movies aren't my thing, however, like the guy who said he likes to watch silent movies and imagine what it would have taken to create such a picture with the technology they had at the time, I suppose it was interesting. You think they would have had better cutting of the shot with the lion, seeing as it was touted as an actual lion kill. (Hell, just let the camera roll!) But I guess the stuff of legend is mysterious, cryptic, and inspired by what may have been.I cram to understand how somebody can call this "very interesting," but let it be said that I agree wholly with John G. Olson.
jokk2155 ...because of his already established reputation as a Hollywood strong man (e.g. his role as the Mighty Man of Valor in the 1916 DW Griffith classic "Intolerance").Also, the image of Tarzan in 1918 was not that of a lithe gymnast like Christopher Lambert in "Greystoke", but of a man powerful enough to wrestle lions. Strength equalled bulk.There's an interesting piece of trivia attached to that movie and Uganda (that's in East Africa) where I'm now based. There's a popular myth around here that the 1918 version of "Tarzan of the Apes" was filmed on the northern shores of Lake Victoria. In fact it was shot, I believe, in Louisiana.
Vigilante-407 This original silent version of the Lord of the Apes is perhaps the truest screen representation of the way Tarzan is envisioned in the books by Edgar Rice Burroughs. It is seems very crude but really isn't. It follows the first story (in as much as it can in the limited time of the feature) very closely. Elmo Lincoln, while no Adonis, is very adequate in the role. He's not Johnny Weissmuller...but then Johnny didn't really look all too much like Tarzan should have either.