Forget the polite, grammatically perfect Lord of the Apes. This Tarzan (played with grunting intensity by Rocco Siffredi—yes, that Rocco Siffredi) is all primal instinct and very little loincloth. By Part 2, the plot has become as tangled as the jungle itself. After the events of the first film, Tarzan is grappling with his dual identity: civilized man versus wild beast. But “civilized” is a loose term here.
In a world of polished blockbusters, Tarzan X: Shame of Jane – Part 2 stands as a sweaty, glorious mess. It’s a reminder that the jungle isn’t just a place of danger—it’s a place where good taste goes to die, swinging on a vine and wearing nothing but a smirk. Tarzan X Shame Of Jane Part 2
If you thought the law of the jungle couldn’t get any wilder, think again. In 1995, director Joe D’Amato (under one of his many aliases) unleashed Tarzan X: Shame of Jane – Part 2 onto an unsuspecting world. The first film shocked audiences with its raw, R-rated (and then some) reinterpretation of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ classic. But Part 2? It swings from a higher vine, crashes through the canopy, and lands in a campfire of pure, unapologetic ’90s excess. Forget the polite, grammatically perfect Lord of the Apes
Have you dared to venture into this jungle? Drop your thoughts in the comments—just don’t mention the crocodile. After the events of the first film, Tarzan
For fans of “so bad it’s brilliant” cinema, this is the Holy Grail. The acting is wooden enough to build a treehouse. The dubbing is hilariously out of sync (one character’s lips keep moving for a full 5 seconds after the dialogue stops). And the musical score is just a Casio keyboard set to “suspenseful bongo.”
The Jungle’s Darkest Secret: A Wild Look Back at ‘Tarzan X: Shame of Jane – Part 2’
The title promises Shame of Jane , and it delivers with a melodramatic punch. No longer the wide-eyed explorer, Jane (played by the striking Julia Channel) finds herself caught between Victorian hypocrisy and the raw freedom of the wild. The “shame” isn’t what you’d expect—it’s a bizarre, philosophical twist on guilt, desire, and colonialism. Or, at least, that’s what the producers probably scribbled on a napkin. In reality, it’s a fever dream of leopard-print sets, soft-core choreography, and dialogue that sounds like it was translated from Italian to English via a broken fax machine.