You’ve probably seen the name floating around the darker corners of the internet. Maybe a weird thumbnail caught your eye on a late-night scrolling session. Tarzan X Shame of Jane isn’t exactly a Disney masterpiece. Honestly, it’s about as far from a "G" rating as you can get without falling off the edge of the map.
It's a strange relic.
Released back in 1994, this movie—directed by the incredibly prolific Italian filmmaker Joe D'Amato—has lived a long, bizarre life in the world of cult "sexploitation" cinema. While most people think of the swinging vines and the iconic yell from the 1999 animated classic, this version is a completely different beast.
The Strange Origins of Tarzan X Shame of Jane
Joe D'Amato was a man who didn't believe in the word "slow." His real name was Aristide Massaccesi, and he churned out over 200 films during his career. He used names like Michael Wotruba or David Hills depending on what mood he was in. For Tarzan X Shame of Jane, he teamed up with Luca Damiano to create something that would eventually become a bizarre viral curiosity decades later.
The film stars Rocco Siffredi. If that name rings a bell, you likely know exactly what kind of movie we’re talking about. He plays the "Ape Man," and his real-life wife at the time, Rosa Caracciolo (Rózsa Tassi), plays Jane.
They didn't actually call him Tarzan in the movie.
💡 You might also like: Why This Is How We Roll FGL Is Still The Song That Defines Modern Country
Basically, the script avoids the name "Tarzan" entirely, likely to dodge a massive lawsuit from the Edgar Rice Burroughs estate. Instead, everyone calls him "Ape Man." It’s kinda funny when you think about it—everyone knows who he is, but the dialogue has to dance around it like a jungle cat.
Why This Movie Specifically?
You might wonder why a random Italian adult film from the mid-90s is still being searched for today. Part of it is pure nostalgia for the weird "golden age" of trashy cinema. Another part is the sheer absurdity of the production.
- The Cinematography: D'Amato actually had some talent. Unlike modern low-budget stuff, there’s a certain "film" look to it that makes it feel like a real movie, even when the plot is paper-thin.
- The Soundtrack: They literally stole the original 1932 Tarzan yell. Just ripped it right out of the classic film and pasted it in.
- The Animals: There are frequent, long shots of monkeys just... watching. It’s awkward. It’s weird. It’s Joe D'Amato.
The plot? It’s basically a romance novel with the heat turned up to a thousand. Jane travels to the jungle, meets the savage hero, and realizes that maybe British high society isn't all it's cracked up to be. There’s a guy named George who wants Jane to come back to "civilization," but the magnetic pull of the Ape Man is just too much.
The Cultural Impact and Controversy
It’s important to realize that Tarzan X Shame of Jane came out during a time when these types of parodies were everywhere. It was a boom for the "adult" parody industry. But this one stuck because of Siffredi’s involvement and the high production value (by D'Amato standards).
Is it high art? No.
📖 Related: The Real Story Behind I Can Do Bad All by Myself: From Stage to Screen
Is it a fascinating look at how European cinema handled the Tarzan mythos? Sorta.
The film leans heavily into the "nature vs. nurture" theme. Jane is portrayed as being repressed by the strict rules of the 19th-century aristocracy. When she gets to the jungle, she loses that "shame" mentioned in the title. It’s a classic trope, just pushed to the extreme.
What People Get Wrong
A lot of people confuse this with the 1975 animated film Tarzoon: Shame of the Jungle. That was a French-Belgian satirical cartoon that featured voices like John Belushi and Bill Murray. That one was more of a "madcap comedy" with adult themes.
Tarzan X Shame of Jane is strictly a live-action melodrama.
The two often get lumped together because of the word "Shame" in the title, but they couldn't be more different. One is a parody of the genre; the other is a full-on embrace of its most titillating elements.
👉 See also: Love Island UK Who Is Still Together: The Reality of Romance After the Villa
Navigating the Legacy
Today, the film is mostly a meme. You’ll find clips of it on social media platforms where people are shocked by the "missing scenes" from their childhood Tarzan movies. Of course, those scenes were never missing—they were just from a completely different, much more "adult" production.
If you're looking for the film for "historical research," keep in mind that it's very much an unrated product of its time. It’s gritty, the lighting is often dark, and the acting is... well, it’s what you’d expect from a 1994 Italian jungle movie.
Actionable Insights for the Curious
If you are diving into the history of Tarzan parodies or the work of Joe D'Amato, here is how to navigate it:
- Check the Director: If it says Joe D'Amato or Aristide Massaccesi, expect high output and very "European" sensibilities.
- Verify the Year: 1994 is the sweet spot for this specific film. Any later and you're looking at sequels or unrelated rip-offs.
- Understand the Copyright: Notice how they never say "Tarzan." This is a masterclass in how 90s filmmakers avoided legal trouble while still profiting off a famous brand.
- Context Matters: View it as a piece of "exploitation" history rather than a legitimate adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs' work.
The fascination with this title likely won't go away anytime soon. As long as there are people discovering the "weird" side of 90s cinema, the Ape Man and Jane will keep swinging through those grainy, low-res frames.
To explore this era of film further, look into the filmography of Rocco Siffredi during his mid-90s "acting" phase or search for the history of Italian exploitation cinema to see how creators like D'Amato influenced modern cult film culture.