Rating: 
Summary: Far too profound for the average Joe to comprehend
Review: I couldn't agree more with the previous reviewer. Tim Burton's mega-budget remake of Planet Of The Apes, is a stunning achievement in the art of filmmaking. Wells's Citizen Kane and Bergman's The Seventh Seal have dropped their lofty positions at the paradigm of recondite film culture. I, fortunately, as a mensa member and amatuer film historian also possess the cerebral acuity to appreciate Burton's landmark picture. Mark "Marky-Mark" Wahlberg walks the creative line brilliantly as the astronaut protagonist, bravely exploring the emotional razor's edge as no other thespian before him; especially effective in the heartrending "where the hell did my monkey go??" scene. The flaring of only the left nostril must have taken enormous muscle control. Helena Bonham Carter, a Shakesperean actress par-excellance, has eclipsed her acclaimed roles in Hamlet and Howard's End in an unforgettable performance as the "people are people too!" activist chimpanzee. Falling in love with a member of another species within 3 minutes of screen time can't be done by just any actress. I, like the previous reviewer pity those who don't possess the faculties to understand this deep piece of work, but then again, it took the french to appreciate Jerry Lewis :)
Rating:
Summary: Remake that did not to be done! Unworthy remake! lame story
Review: This movie came out last summer. It has a all star cast, but the story is pathetic! This movie did not need to be remade for today's kids! The story starts out as Mark Wahlberg is training a ape to fly a spaceship. After that the ape goes though a strange outer space thing. Wahlberg follows the ape. in the orginal movie with Heston, he and his fellow spacemen were asleep for thousands of years.Wahlberg lands on planet. It is the planet of the apes. There has been many changes that never took place in the first movie.One of the biggest changes is the humans here talk(in the original movie ,humans were mute!). I will not go into detail as I'm sure that the other reviews already tore this movie apart. The only good things is a tons of special effects and the ape make-up! Other than that this movie was a remake that did not need to be done! The ending was funny as I expect Fox to make a sequel to this over $100 million unworthy remake! Rent this movie first unless you are a fan of the original movie,a fan of Tim Burton's dark movies,or a fans of this movie's stars! This movie was one of 2001's worst movies for me to watch! Watch this original instesd of this remake as the issues the first movie talks about are still valid today. I like the first one better than this junk!
Rating: 
Summary: Phenomenal Movie!
Review: I rated this movie 5 stars for very good reasons. First off, it seems reviewers always have to compare a movie or a soundtrack with another previous release. Why is that? The planet of the apes directors from the 2001 and 1968 movies are completely different. Tim Burton has succeeded in creating a far superior look for the apes in his rendition of the movie as opposed to the 1968 rubber mask look with slicked back hair. The plot for this movie was farely well done taking into account the time length of the movie. The visual imagery, landscapes and ape makeup are Grade A 100%. The ape makeup is fantastic from afar AND up close(...). This movie is pure EYECANDY. There is action, drama, plot, and there are three to four scenes in the movie that are revealed to you where you have to say "Oh my gosh, so that's what happened!" (Especially if you've never seen a prior Planet of the apes movie before. Tim Roth (Thade) is a fantastic actor. I first saw him in a movie with Tom Cruise entitled "Legend". Tim Roth is very well known for portraying eccentric characters before :-) (Rocky Horror picture show **AAAAARRRRGGGHHH!!!!!**).
(...)I have to say that the special effects in the new movie as well as makeup is better, but I must agree that the 1968 version had better plot and framework.
Rating:
Summary: Brainless
Review: You asked for it, you got it, seems to be the Hollywood credo these days, as it unleashes yet another bloated and unimaginative monstrosity on our increasingly docile and sheeplike public. Believe me, I'm getting tired of being so negative, but how else is one supposed to react? What do you call a film that intentionally, studiously, and almost cleverly avoids being smart? What is the word for this? Well, moronic comes to mind. If not, then manipulative, or maybe cynical. Now I understand that this is a science fiction movie and I understand that when I hear these words in combination with one another I must suspend my disbelief to some extent. But one of these words is "science," okay? So, in theory anyway, is it not reasonable to expect a certain semblance to reality? Why is this so difficult? The trouble begins pretty quickly, almost as soon as our hero gets to the ape planet. He runs into both apes and humans immediately, and after toying with us for several minutes, the filmmakers finally allow us to hear that the humans in this world can speak. Whoa! This is a significant departure from both the novel and the first movie, which both portrayed humans as merely dumb animals. In this one, they are intelligent. How were they going to reconcile this with their obviously subservient status? The answer is, they don't. How did these intelligent human beings get into this state? In fact, what is their state? Where do they live? What do they live in? What do they eat? Do they cook? How do they clothe themselves? We never see. We know nothing, except that they appear out of the forest one day, and speak relatively educated English with one another. What is going on here? I guess we're not supposed to know, and apparently, the filmmakers don't believe that we care. This is what is known as intellectual laziness, and it is infuriating. What is really going on is that the filmmakers wanted the space human and the ape-world humans to be able to communicate with one another, quickly, and they didn't care about the huge plot complications that arose because of it. They ignored it. But this is like ignoring, if you will excuse me, the eight-hundred pound gorilla in the corner. From any standpoint you care to look at it--anthropological, biological or even political--the brave new world they have created makes no sense. So they abandoned common sense everywhere. Take the apes. They have obviously discovered steel, but for some reason--even though they are a very warlike society--they haven't discovered swords or spears or shields, or for that matter, even bows and arrows. Instead, they use heavy club-like devices--so they can pummel each other in an apelike fashion--and slings. They are obsessed by the human problem. They discuss nothing else. Some want to kill the humans and some advocate living with them peacefully. This is kind of interesting, but again, is this all there is? As humans have apparently been completely subjugated and are practically helpless, why should they care this much? And they are afraid of water! Terrified even, although they live in an area which is lush with jungly vegetation, has at least two large lakes, and is seemingly darkened by clouds most of the time. How can a creature which requires water to survive be in terror of it? It makes no sense, except that soon enough we see the movie-maker's reason for it: a very clumsy plot device, and one which easily could have been circumvented with even a little imagination. Again, they don't seem to care. As the film continues we find out that the explanation for the ape society is that it was founded by--a chimpanzee. Yes, a chimp. A monkey. But haven't the apes been ridiculing monkeys all along? And how, pray tell, does an ape descend from a monkey anyway? HOW? Nope, they don't care to explain, and this, in a nutshell, is what plagues major Hollywood filmmaking today: the thought and intelligence behind these projects is used entirely to go into the creation of special effects, and is completely uncaring as to the story it purports to tell. The first film, as well as making sense from a plot standpoint, was also truly thought-provoking: our inhumane treatment of dumb brutes as exemplified by our being put in their place; the question of the origin of society and the belief in a superior being; and even racial divisions among the apes themselves are issues that were explored. But in this movie, any thought--and even a rational plot--is subsumed by realistic-looking gorilla costumes; lots of fighting in the new-age, leaping-around, karate-kicking way; amplified growls and shrieks; and wild rides in a colorful outer space. That's it. I myself was bored beyond belief, and appalled by the preposterous, ridiculous ending. I left the theatre feeling insulted that the makers of films like this apparently think that we can be bought so cheaply. But who cares? Judging from the first weekend's box-office receipts, the filmmakers sure don't. Why should they? Sad. We truly are descending to the level of dopey animals if we enjoy watching this mindlessness
Rating:
Summary: NEW FORMULA DIDN'T HELP COCA-COLA EITHER!
Review: Mr. Wahlberg is always fun to watch. Mrs. Carter has the acting skills of bottom feeder. You can't put Mr. Kristofferson into a movie, after "Blade", as a wimp and then kill him off in a flash. Oh! and let's not forget that the humans didn't talk in the 1st movie!! what's the matter? lack of substance! Mr. Heston's performance was embarassing. this truly put a smudge in my mind against all his old greats. Our lead ape, no offense to Jacko, looked like Michael Jackson. the most disturbing scene was that threesome kiss scene...you know? man kisses ape. pauses for effect. man kisses woman who can't act....ah, the old days. the only two things worth giving this film 1 star is the forshadowing scene at the end, that thrilled me more than the entire movie! and Tim Roth's performance was great. Alas, I think Mr. Burton is riding on fumes.
Rating:
Summary: The absolute worst
Review: I was quite excited to see the remake of "Planet of the Apes" in the theatre- Tim Burton has made some excellent movies, and although they've declined in quality over time I thought this would be entertaining. I was wrong. So very wrong. The story is pathetic, the acting wooden- with Tim Roth left to do nothing but growl menacingly throughout. The plot twists were so pointless that the entire audience was laughing by the end. I felt embarassed that I had asked friends to join me in seeing this, and reimbursed them for their tickets. Tim Burton should reimburse me and everyone else who had to sit through this garbage. If you must see this, know that the makeup for the apes is its only saving grace. For shame, Tim. Could you stand to sit through your own pathetic excuse for a movie? I doubt it.
Rating:
Summary: Boldly going against the grain by saying this is fantastic
Review: All of you people who have blasted this movie need to check your heads. Granted, the film is not for everyone, but any 'real' Apes fan should be kissing the ground Mr. Burton walks on for this phenomenal entry into the Apes universe. It is sad that some of the reviews here seem to be written by intelligent people, but obviously not understanding of what makes a film great. From the opening frames to the very last, completely understandable ending, this film is magic. All who don't understand the ending should be ashamed and those who don't like it, well that's your opinion. I personally like the nod to the original. The apes performances are incredible, especially Tim Roth in the role of Thade. The humans take on a very unanimated feel and i think that may be the only sore spot in the film with me. This movie and the book for that matter, were not straight science fiction and therefore do not deserved to be lumped into such a limited category. Sure it is fiction with scienctific elements, but the movie and the story are moral plays. Moral plays masked as fiction. This film is beautifully shot, and was filmed on many of the same locations as the original. Tim Burtons usual dry humer is very scarce here as is his over the top love interests of past films. Forget watching movies with attitudes guys and just watch for what it is, entertainment. STOP trying to live and die by this medium. Art is beautiful but it is always up to the person interpreting it. I personally love this film, and ask anyone to give it a shot. If you like it, great, if you don't, still great. If you are going to write a review about it, forget about trying to impress your friends with how much you bashed the film and instead, devote your efforts to increasing your brainpower.!!!
Rating: 
Summary: "I hate every ape I see / From chimpan-A to chimpan-Z"
Review: I am a Tim Burton fan, although his standard practice of sacrificing a good story for good visuals gets on my nerves. That wasn't the problem with this movie, though. Well, at least not the main problem. The problem here, and it's the same problem he ran head-on into with the dreadful "Mars Attacks", is that he's trying to make a campy and kitschy homage. But you can't intentionally concoct camp and kitsch; they are unintentionally and organically grown from the best of intentions. And they are especially undermined by a plus size budget. Witness the references and gimmicks he throws at the screen, hoping for a knowing chuckle from an aware audience: an ape yells "Take your stinking hands off me you damn dirty *human*"; Charlton Heston makes a cameo and cries "damn them all... damn them all to hell" again, only this time he's an ape; and a twist ending utilizes a famous landmark for shock value. Taken out of context, these all seem like damn good ideas. But when they're the screenwriters' only good ideas, how much weight can they really carry? Not much, I'd say. My hope going in was that Burton would at least do a fine job creating a contained world, one that we'd never seen before. Well, I'd seen it before... in the first "Apes" movie. Sure, there are more vines on the walls, and most of the scenes in "Ape City" are filmed during dusk or night hours instead of under harsh sunlight, but the basic pod-like structure of the city was too familiar to give any credit to Burton and his production designers. As for the apes themselves, most of the time their make-up looked magnificent. Each character had his/her own distinctive face with a budding personality. Unfortunately, when shot in close-up the make-up tends to look fake, and not nearly enough attention was paid to the women's make-up as the men's. Also, the nature of the apes' social interactions could have been explored further. The film touches on this subject, showing apes quietly grooming each other, or displaying their position in the pecking order with solid punches. But anyone who's read Will Self's satire "Great Apes" (which borrows its central idea from the original "Planet of the Apes") will know that there was a whole spectrum of actions that could have been shown, but sadly weren't. The most grievous error, to my mind, is the fact that Burton had a wonderful cast of actors to work with (I count at least four Oscar nominations in the group), and barely a single, well-defined character to offer them. Helena Bonham Carter gets the most to do. Her Ari, a senator's daughter, is the vocal conscience of the film, aghast at the second-class treatment humans get. She is intelligent (or at least relative to her company), passionate, and strong-willed. Carter also manages to wring some sex appeal from Ari, with either a lingering glance or a gentle nod of the head. Too bad her subtle advances towards astronaut Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg) are never reciprocated. Wahlberg, an actor who I usually like, is as bland as white bread here. He is nothing more than a talk-softly-and-carry-a-big-stick macho guy. I can't remember Leo ever stringing two or more sentences together. He is vaguely heroic, patriotic, stubborn, and simple-minded. These attributes could have worked -- the innocent thrust into a fantastic situation -- but Leo is supposed to be a complicated man with complicated problems; too bad he isn't. If Wahlberg as Leo gets to play three different colors here -- red, white, and blue -- then Tim Roth as General Thade gets only one: blood red. Roth is a fantastic actor, limited to constant anger here. Thade is never allowed to show any humanity (or, rather, chimpanity). He's stuck in fourth gear for the entire picture. And frankly, I didn't find him that menacing. Michael Clarke Duncan pulls off his big and burly silverback gorilla quite well, although it's more of a physical role than an emotional one. Estella Warren is really just around for eye-candy (she has wonderfully pouty lips, and appears to have an endless supply of lipstick!). It's one of the most inconsequential roles I've seen in years. Paul Giamatti, as a human slave-trader, is dirty, grimy, quite real, and terribly funny. He seems to be the only member of the cast (besides possibly Roth) who understands how to perform facial expressions under his make-up. He needed more screen time, if only to help break up the monotony. As the story winds down to its inevitable big-bang conclusion, things get a little muddled. The explanation of the apes' origin was handled quite well; it's the one plot point that the filmmaker's appear to have thought through, and nearly duplicates the surprise end of the original "Apes" movie. But then, we are treated to a ludicrously hokey 'deux es machinas' conclusion to the final battle. And from there, it's only a hop, skip, and a jump to the incredibly illogical conclusion, which is just shock-value for the sake of shock-value, and a bold-faced lie. The filmmakers show the audience one thing, and then expect them to believe another. It just can't happen the way it does. If anyone can explain to me why it can, please do. Otherwise, I will continue to be angered by the deception. And resentful of the memory of this shoddy movie.
Rating:
Summary: What could have been...
Review: This is a remake that had been waiting to happen for years, passed around Hollywood from one big-time director to another before finally (and unfortunately) falling into the hands of Tim Burton. What eventually did get made, as pretty much everyone knows by now, is a sub-par parody of the original Charlton Heston sci-fi classic. The attitude of the entire movie can pretty much be summarized by the ludicrously placed line of dilogue "Can't we all just get along?" (Rather offensive and more than just a bit dangerous, too, when you consider the fact that the line is delivered by an ape.) The whole experience left me wondering what could have been if the project had not fallen out of the hands of Oliver Stone, who was originally slated to direct, and who had intended to cast Arnold Schwarzenegger in the lead role. It is impossible (as well as wrong) to guess how the movie may have turned out, and whether or not Stone may have reworked the plot to somehow tie the events of the story in with the Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy, but it does make you wonder...and wish.
Rating:
Summary: One of the worst science fiction films ever
Review: Don't get me wrong, the action and effects were great, but i bought the ticket (I've only seen the original theatrical release) to see a science fiction story, one that would make you think, like good science fiction does. Plot holes were constant, and I didn't really see a point to the story. I was extremely dissapointed. If you like action and great effects (though the effects appeared only periodicaly throughout the movie, and not constantly like many moviegoers enjoy), then this is the flick for you. But if, like myself, you are looking for good science fiction, I suggest you look elsewhere.
|
