1995 | Tarzan Shame Of Jane

The mid-90s were a weird time. The VHS market had exploded, and rental stores had entire back aisles dedicated to “adult animation.” Studios realized they could take public domain characters (Tarzan entered the public domain in some territories by then) and slap a risqué title on the box. Shame of Jane wasn’t trying to win Oscars. It was trying to get rented on a Friday night by someone looking for a laugh and a cheap thrill.

Is Tarzan: Shame of Jane good? No. Not by any traditional metric. tarzan shame of jane 1995

Have you ever seen Tarzan: Shame of Jane ? Or am I the only one who endured this fever dream? Let me know in the comments—preferably with a therapist’s note. Disclaimer: This film is for adult audiences only and is not affiliated with the Edgar Rice Burroughs estate or any major animation studio. The mid-90s were a weird time

Released in 1995 by a now-defunct studio (often misattributed to low-budget houses like Cal Vista or Video X Pix), Tarzan: Shame of Jane is exactly what the title implies: a tongue-in-cheek, adults-only retelling of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ classic. It was trying to get rented on a

If you grew up in the 90s, you probably remember the golden age of direct-to-video animation. Studios like Disney were dominating the box office, and everyone else was desperately trying to catch the coattail—often with bizarre, low-budget results.

Let’s be honest: this was made on a budget that might have bought a used car. The animation is stiff, with lots of panning over still images, repeated frames, and characters who move like wooden puppets. The jungle backgrounds are surprisingly lush—almost rotoscoped from stock footage—but the character designs are pure 90s adult comic: exaggerated proportions, pouty lips, and vines that conveniently wrap around everything at cinematic moments.