MovieChat Forums > AbrahamAytemo101 > Replies
AbrahamAytemo101's Replies
I think the OP was probably just trying to make some kind of weird joke I doubt it was meant to be serious -- I think at the time it would have been completely innocent but nowadays I doubt they would have done it this way. It's male bonding basically. But, even the title of the movie sounds risque by today's standards tbh
BTW while we're on the subject if you watched the movie, was that really Mike Henry who did the frontward somersault into the water or was that a stunt double
I think it falls into what TV Tropes might call "Memetic Molester" territory. There was kind of an "Eric, do you like movies about gladiators?" feel to it. An IMDB review even lampshades it a little:
" 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!"
A lot of it just comes down to the writing, I think... I think the review is spot on that it would have better served both if their relationship was more gradually developed over time
What I think stuck out was how one scene he'd be clean cut and in either a suit or a uniform and then the next scene he'd be bare-chested on the beach, scruffy unkempt and in some skimpy outfit. Like the scene where he and Katie have this emotional conversation after the movie screening where Katie says "I want us to love each other" and they embrace and then the next scene Hubbell is randomly seen running shirtless on the beach with a slow pan out focused on him running for seemingly no reason. Same thing where when they move to the beach house, the scene prior he was in his military uniform hair all combed and everything then the following scene he's on the beach again in really skimpy white shorts, hair all a mess, setting up a volleyball net. Kind of random tbh
I first saw this as a kid and noticed this at the time, too, although I didn't think much of it other than that it was cool that Cody slept in a hammock. Now watching as an adult it's a little hard to see why they made some of these choices especially considering that not including it wouldn't have taken anything away from his character. He was meant to be an aboriginal apparently before higher ups dictated that he be a blonde white kid... I guess it's very possible he was animated originally as ethnic, in which case there's a greater tendency to exoticize those characters, before just animating him over as a white character in which case it comes off as a little more out of left field. It's nothing against the film, it was just an odd way to introduce a kid protagonist especially given that it was animated by grown adults ...
I've heard rumors that he was apparently a naturist in real life who frequented nudist resorts in Pennsylvania and Connecticut?? I thought this was some kind of joke and then people started confirming it and tbh it would make sense given how comfortable he was with nudity or near nudity in most of his films. In this film specifically not only was there a sex scene where he was naked, but he also was naked in broad daylight while drinking wine in a meadow. Apparently White Thorn is where he used to go...