Ever wonder why some shows just... vanish? It’s a weird phenomenon in the streaming era. You’re scrolling through Netflix, you see a title pop up for three weeks, and then it’s buried under a mountain of true crime and baking competitions. That’s basically the life story of The Tarzan and Jane show, a project that tried to reinvent Edgar Rice Burroughs’ famous characters for a generation that grew up on iPhones and environmental activism.
Honestly, it was a gutsy move.
When Netflix greenlit Tarzan and Jane back in the mid-2010s, they weren't looking for a period piece. They didn't want the 1912 version of the jungle. They wanted a "super-powered" teenager with a tech-savvy partner. It was a collaboration between 41 Entertainment, Avi Arad—yes, the guy behind many of the Spider-Man films—and ARC Productions. The result was a weird, 3D-animated hybrid that felt part superhero origin story and part "save the rainforest" PSA. It launched in 2016 and managed to squeak out two seasons before fading into the digital background.
Why the Tarzan and Jane Show felt so different
If you grew up with the Disney version or the old Johnny Weissmuller movies, this show probably gave you whiplash. The premise was wild. Tarzan isn't just a guy who’s good at climbing trees; he’s a kid who survives a plane crash and is "healed" by a shaman using ancient jungle medicine. This gives him literal superpowers. Think super-strength, heightened senses, and the ability to communicate with animals in a way that feels more like telepathy than grunting.
Then there’s Jane.
In this version, Jane Porter isn’t a damsel or even a Victorian explorer. She’s a city girl from London, the daughter of an investigator, and she’s a total tech wiz. She meets Tarzan after he’s been brought to London. It turns the whole "fish out of water" trope on its head because half the show takes place in an urban jungle rather than the actual African rainforest. They fight animal trafficking. They take on corporate greed. It’s a lot to process for a kids' show.
✨ Don't miss: The Little Mermaid 2018: Why Everyone Was So Confused by This Movie
The animation style was polarizing, to say the least. ARC Productions used a CGI style that was common for mid-budget TV at the time, but it lacked the fluid weight of big-budget features. Some fans loved the modern updates, while purists felt it stripped away the soul of the original pulp novels. It’s a classic case of trying to fix something that might not have been broken, but you have to give them credit for trying to make Tarzan relevant to a kid in 2016 who cares more about climate change than colonial exploration.
The creative powerhouse behind the scenes
You can’t talk about this show without mentioning Avi Arad. The man is a legend in the industry for a reason. He basically willed the modern superhero movie into existence. When he stepped in to produce The Tarzan and Jane show, he brought that Marvel-esque sensibility with him. He wanted Tarzan to be a hero for the modern age, a "defender of the environment."
But there was trouble in paradise.
✨ Don't miss: Why the Real Housewives of Atlanta New Cast Is the Reboot We Actually Needed
ARC Productions, the studio handling the heavy lifting for the animation, ended up filing for bankruptcy protection right around the time the show was supposed to be hitting its stride. This sent shockwaves through the industry. It’s one of those behind-the-scenes tragedies that viewers rarely see. When a studio goes under, it’s not just about the software; it’s about hundreds of artists losing their jobs and projects getting stuck in legal limbo. While Season 2 eventually made it to Netflix in late 2018, the momentum was effectively killed.
Critical reception and the "streaming graveyard"
Reviews were... mixed. If we’re being real, the show struggled to find its identity. Was it for toddlers? Was it for pre-teens? It sat in that awkward middle ground. Common Sense Media and other parent-focused sites gave it decent marks for its environmental message, but critics often pointed out that the dialogue was a bit stiff.
- The "eco-warrior" themes were heavy-handed but well-intentioned.
- The 3D models sometimes felt "uncanny valley," especially in the facial expressions.
- The voice acting, featuring Giles Panton and Rebecca Shoichet, was actually a high point. They brought a lot of heart to characters that could have been cardboard cutouts.
Netflix’s algorithm is a fickle beast. If a show doesn't hit a certain "completion rate" within the first 28 days, it’s basically dead in the water. The Tarzan and Jane show didn't have the viral "meme-ability" of something like The Dragon Prince or the massive nostalgia bait of Voltron: Legendary Defender. It just existed. And in the world of streaming, just existing is often a death sentence.
The legacy of a modern Tarzan
So, why does it still matter? Because it represents a specific moment in animation history where everyone was trying to turn classic public domain characters into "cinematic universes." It’s an example of how difficult it is to update a character like Tarzan, who carries a lot of historical baggage. By making him a modern teen with powers, the creators tried to sidestep the more problematic "white savior" tropes of the past, focusing instead on a partnership where Jane was just as capable (and often smarter) than Tarzan.
It’s also a cautionary tale about production stability. When you watch Season 2, you can see the effort the team put in despite the crumbling infrastructure of the studio. There’s a grit there that’s respectable.
What you can actually do now
If you’re a fan of animation or a collector of Tarzan lore, there are a few ways to engage with this specific era of the franchise.
✨ Don't miss: Ay Bay Bay: Why the Hurricane Chris Classic Still Hits Hard
- Check the availability: As of now, the show still lingers in some Netflix territories, but streaming rights are a revolving door. If it’s not on your main dashboard, it’s worth a search to see if it’s been moved to a "Long Tail" category.
- Explore the studio history: If you're interested in the business of animation, looking into the rise and fall of ARC Productions gives a fascinating (and sobering) look at how your favorite shows actually get made.
- Compare the source material: Go back and read Tarzan of the Apes. It is vastly different—darker, more violent, and obviously a product of 1912. Seeing the leap from that to a 2016 "super-teen" tells you everything you need to know about how our culture’s values have shifted over a century.
- Support the creators: Many of the animators and writers from the show moved on to massive projects at studios like Mainframe or Sony. Following their current work is a great way to see how the skills learned on "mid-tier" Netflix shows evolve into the hits of today.
The Tarzan and Jane show wasn't a perfect masterpiece. It wasn't a total failure either. It was a weird, ambitious, environmentally conscious experiment that tried to do something new with a character that was over a hundred years old. Sometimes, those are the most interesting shows to revisit, even if they only lasted for a couple of seasons. It’s a snapshot of an industry in transition, trying to find its footing in a world where "the jungle" is just as likely to be a city street as it is a cluster of trees.