Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews2
reade-1's rating
The jungle boy Eric gives this Tarzan movie a kid friendly appearance, but that's deceptive. Be forewarned, it is quite violent with natives being speared to death and tossed off cliffs. We also see villages burnt to the ground. True the film is rated G but that only means there is no sex of foul language. Their is, however some borderline nudity as the loincloths worn by Tarzan and his young male costar are prone to wardrobe malfunctions.
I liked the interaction between Tarzan and Eric which seemed quite natural, but it also seemed incredibly rushed. We all expect that, given time, Eric is going to come to accept Tarzan as his surrogate father or big brother, but it all happens so fast. Here we have a kid who has been living alone in a savage environment for years. You'd think he would have a difficult time understanding affection. As a feral child you would think that Eric would not know how to give or accept love. You'd think that Tarzan would have to slowly win the boy's trust and perhaps even "tame" him and establish his position as the alpha male.
But no. Within minutes of first meeting man and boy are happily laughing and playing together in a lake. It's as if they have known each other for years. Eric is completely comfortable being held in Tarzan mighty arms. Keep in mind both man and boy are practically naked. After climbing out of the lake Eric admits that he has been lonely and wishes he had someone to talk with at night. He asks Tarzan to stay with him and keep him company. Geez this kid is probably safer in the jungle then he would be in any big city. Someone seriously needs to sit this kid down and explain to him that he needs to be careful around strange men dressed in loincloths.
So what did movie goers back in 1968 make of this as they munched on their fifteen cent hot dogs and ten cent soft drinks? I imagine to them intergenerational male bonding was all quite innocent. After all what kid wouldn't be drawn to Tarzan? We see things a bit differently today. If you love all things Tarzan then you'll enjoy this movie. If you are a Steve Bond fan (as an adult he modeled full frontal nude for Playgirl Magazine) then you'll enjoy seeing him in his first acting role as Eric. But if you don't fall into those two categories, well this is one movie you could probably skip.
I liked the interaction between Tarzan and Eric which seemed quite natural, but it also seemed incredibly rushed. We all expect that, given time, Eric is going to come to accept Tarzan as his surrogate father or big brother, but it all happens so fast. Here we have a kid who has been living alone in a savage environment for years. You'd think he would have a difficult time understanding affection. As a feral child you would think that Eric would not know how to give or accept love. You'd think that Tarzan would have to slowly win the boy's trust and perhaps even "tame" him and establish his position as the alpha male.
But no. Within minutes of first meeting man and boy are happily laughing and playing together in a lake. It's as if they have known each other for years. Eric is completely comfortable being held in Tarzan mighty arms. Keep in mind both man and boy are practically naked. After climbing out of the lake Eric admits that he has been lonely and wishes he had someone to talk with at night. He asks Tarzan to stay with him and keep him company. Geez this kid is probably safer in the jungle then he would be in any big city. Someone seriously needs to sit this kid down and explain to him that he needs to be careful around strange men dressed in loincloths.
So what did movie goers back in 1968 make of this as they munched on their fifteen cent hot dogs and ten cent soft drinks? I imagine to them intergenerational male bonding was all quite innocent. After all what kid wouldn't be drawn to Tarzan? We see things a bit differently today. If you love all things Tarzan then you'll enjoy this movie. If you are a Steve Bond fan (as an adult he modeled full frontal nude for Playgirl Magazine) then you'll enjoy seeing him in his first acting role as Eric. But if you don't fall into those two categories, well this is one movie you could probably skip.
There are countless people of good faith who require no proof of Jesus' divinity. But Lee Strobel isn't one of them. Strobel isn't the first person to put Jesus' divinity on trial, but why would we want another bite of that apple?
Courtroom trials don't determine "truth", they don't even have much influence on public opinion. J.O. Simpson and Lizzie Borden were both acquitted of murder, but would you be willing to data either one of them? Anne Boleyn was convicted of adultery and beheaded. But most historians will tell you she was innocent and that her only crime was that Henry VIII tired of her.
Strobel says that Jesus rose from the dead, not because it adds value to his life or provides him with comfort. He believes in the resurrection because he can't imagine that eye witness testimony could be wrong or that oral traditions could be corrupted. When people require proof, of what value is their faith?
Courtroom trials don't determine "truth", they don't even have much influence on public opinion. J.O. Simpson and Lizzie Borden were both acquitted of murder, but would you be willing to data either one of them? Anne Boleyn was convicted of adultery and beheaded. But most historians will tell you she was innocent and that her only crime was that Henry VIII tired of her.
Strobel says that Jesus rose from the dead, not because it adds value to his life or provides him with comfort. He believes in the resurrection because he can't imagine that eye witness testimony could be wrong or that oral traditions could be corrupted. When people require proof, of what value is their faith?