Tarzan and the Trappers
Tarzan and the Trappers
NR | 01 January 1958 (USA)
Tarzan and the Trappers Trailers

Tarzan goes up against a baddie by the name of Schroeder, who is trapping animals and selling them illegally to zoos. A twist is thrown into the plot when Schroeder's brother, with the help of money-hungry trader Lapin, hunts a different kind of quarry, human game. Now Tarzan must not only fight to save the animals of the jungle, but he must also save himself. Three episodes of a failed TV series edited for theater release.

Reviews
BootDigest

Such a frustrating disappointment

... View More
Actuakers

One of my all time favorites.

... View More
FirstWitch

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

... View More
Humaira Grant

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

... View More
gridoon2018

Gordon Scott has a truly magnificent physique ("lucky Jane!" is all I can say), and is an excellent brawler, but his acrobatic ability is questionable at best: nearly all of his vine-swinging is filmed in long shots and appears to be stunt-doubled. Eve Brent is a stunning Jane, but she's barely in the film. The story itself is generic. ** out of 4.

... View More
Eric Stevenson

When I first heard the title of this movie, I thought it was going to be about Tarzan stopping some trappers, that is, people who were trapping animals. It turns out I got exactly what I expected...and not much else. I hate this if only because it was just so boring. There's relatively nothing of substance here at all. I haven't seen all the Tarzan movies so maybe this goes back to the classic days of the Weismuller era. You know, like how it takes place in that continuity. Tarzan was one of the few film series in Leonard Maltin's movie guide I was fully aware of when I first read it.It's vaguely like "The Most Dangerous Game" with one hunter talking about how he wants to take on Tarzan. At its very short length, it's mostly just a B-movie. There is very little going on at all. This would have been a great movie to feature on "Mystery Science Theater 3000". I'm used to films like this being shown there. I got bored without any riffing. *1/2

... View More
clh-1

Gordon Scott made an excellent Tarzan, he brought an interesting flair to the role, that was almost a compromise between the smart Tarzan of the books and the ignorant Tarzan of most of the films. In this film, he actually picks up a book and tries to read, but still speaks in a broken manner, however he is still full of wisdom that comes from life in a dangerous jungle. This actually one of the better films, despite some negative publicity from "purists" (read Weissmuller fans). It is entertaining, the jungles all look real, and the double point of anti-poaching/anti-grave robbing is especially poignant. If Tarzan really did exist, that would be the kind of life that he would lead.Excellent ****/****

... View More
dinky-4

The Tarzan you grow up is likely to always be "your" Tarzan, so for the generation which came of age in the 1950s, that means Gordon Scott. He might not have been the best Tarzan, (that's always a matter of debate), but he was certainly a good one. His "Tarzan and the Trappers" is a minor work, apparently stitched together from some TV episodes, but it demonstrates how the Tarzan character reflects the changing moods of the times. In this case, the times are the Eisenhower Years and so Tarzan, Jane, and Boy come across here as a typical suburban family not that far removed from, say, "Ozzie and Harriet." Of course, the father in this particular family seems to speak with a third-grade education and he must spend an awful lot of time in the gym, but these are minor points."Tarzan and the Trappers" also reflects the prudish morality of the 1950s. Tarzan and Jane, for example, seem to have two side-by-side but separate treehouses which allows for "proper" sleeping arrangements. Care has also been taken to downplay Tarzan's sexuality, moving him away from his powerful masculinity toward a tamer, almost neutered status. Gordon Scott's loincloth, for instance, rides high enough on his torso to completely hide his navel, which must have caused some problems during filming. ("Sorry, Gordon, you'll have to do it again. We saw your belly button.") And in that inevitable scene in which Tarzan is captured and put into bondage, his arms stretched up and tied high above his head, we see that Gordon Scott's armpits have been carefully shaved. Apparently male body hair, either on the chest or in the armpits, was a "no no" because it emphasized the actor's sexual nature. Despite these efforts to "housebreak" and "domesticate" Tarzan, however, Gordon Scott still manages to exude an undeniable appeal and for us Eisenhower kids, he'll always be "our" Tarzan.

... View More