Rating: 
Summary: Good movie, packed DVD
Review: Why 5 stars? Well I looked at what everyone else was writing, and as far as their complaints go, they seemed to be frustrated with some dialogue issues and logistics in the characters. I saw most of the original Planet of the Ape films, and while they were fascinating, they didn't quite stack up to this.The dialogue, were it was corny "Get you stinking hand off me" was one of a few inside jokes within the movie that was a referrence to a Charlton Heston line in Planet of the Apes. As I recall this was the first line the Apes spoke in the film (as Attar demonstrated). Heston spoke those same words (from a different point of view) to the apes when he was captured, much to their surprise. There a quite a few inside jokes in the movie. So you need to be familiar with th first film to appreciate this one. It also makes intriguing referrences to cultural issues of the past, in particular, slavery, using humans and apes. Course there is more to the story. Planet of the Apes was always breaching ground for Civil Rights. This was a more emphatic example. The costumes and special affects were stellar. Definitely two Oscars will nodded for makeup and costumes. Tim Burton did a good job in directing and respects go to the screenwriter for his visions. THis was a labor 12 years in the making with numerous names attached (Arnold S. and Oliver Stone at one time). The DVD is loaded with everything you could want. I got some kind of limited edition CD-Rom. Not sure if everyone else got it, but it offers cast interviews as well. I and my parents enjoyed it, so good for the 20- somethings and 50- somethings..
Rating: 
Summary: Not a remake of the original but a totally different story
Review: First let start off by saying that this is not a remake of the 1968 classic but a totally different telling of the story. I respect Tim Burton for not trying to do your basic remake, which consists of updated special effects but the same story. The story in this movie is entirely different than the original. Other than the fact that Apes are involved there are very few similarities. The story is well thought out and keeps you engaged throughout the movie. Tim Burton also knew that Mark Wahlberg is no Charlton Heston, so he kept his dialogue to a minimal. Actually Tim Roth and Michael Duncan Clark have more dialogue in the movie than Wahlberg does. Rick Baker does an outstanding job with the makeup, which allows the actors facial expressions to come through which is key for this type of movie. I will not ruin the ending but will tell you that it is unique and as unexpected as the first one was in 1968. Now onto the DVD, the Anamorphic transfer is flawless and the DTS 5.1 soundtrack is superb. The video shows no signs of edge enhancement, artifacting, or color bleeds. The blacks are deep and rich and all the colors are vibrant. The DTS 5.1 audio track is just awesome; it utilizes the rears and subwoofer frequently. All dialogue is focused on the center channel and is well balanced. The DVD has more special features than any other DVD to date. There are at least 6 documentaries, a "first person" point of view feature, and all the other normal fanfare that comes with a special edition DVD. This by far and wide is Fox's best DVD to date as it pertains to special features.
Rating: 
Summary: And the point was...
Review: The original "Planet of the Apes" was a movie that enthralled the senses and stimulated the mind. On the surface a contemporary re-make must have seemed like a great idea. However, if you strip away the admittedly excellent make-up, the incredibly un-subtle in-jokes and the brief appearances of Hollywood has-beens Kris Kristofferson and Charlton Heston you find the movie has no real substance at all. Enthralling and stimulating it ain't. A large part of the problem rests with the hero, Hollywood never-will-be Mark Wahlberg. Heston's character "Taylor" in the original movie was as real as a movie figure can get; determined but cynical, not without feeling but not prone to ridiculous heroics either. The audience could feel for him because he was so, for lack of a better word, human. Wahlberg's character, by contrast, never developes beyond the superficial, so we never care if he gets home or not. Even if we did care, however, the poor construction of the movie's plot raises too many questions. In the original there was a genuine sense that the ape's society was alien, but similar to our own, with caste distinctions and inter-cultural strife. In the 2001 version, there are no such distinctions, we are supposed to simply ignore the differences between the breeds of apes. Furthermore they use eupemisms popular in our society, so even the most thick-headed viewer can slap his forehead and say, "Oh I get it, the apes are a metaphor for us." A tip; metaphors generally have more impact when they are subtle. One element that keeps appearing over and over is the fact that the apes can leap huge distances from a stand-still. Can anyone explain the physics of 400 lbs of heavy muscle leaping 20 feet in the air with ease? Suspension of disbelief is one thing, but if you want your material to be taken seriously you can't abandon all sense of reality. Perhpas they were hoping latecomers would think they walked into a showing of "The Matrix." Then there is the question of how the apes dominate the humans. The humans can talk, they all seem well fed and clean and they are fairly numerous. Yes the apes treat them like beasts, but there is nothing about them to suggest that they actually are beastlike. Why don't they apply some ingenuity and fight back? At times the movie seems on the verge of showing some class, like when the villian, general Thade, shows his deep reverence for his dying father. No sooner do we see this, however, when we are shown the incredibly disturbing clips of Helena Bonham Cater's ape-character making goo-goo eyes at our human hero. Then there is the hokey, duex ex machina ending, which is too trite to even discuss. George Lucas had "Howard the Duck." Steven Spielberg had "Batteries Not Included." The remake of "Planet of the Apes" simply shows that even a genius like Tim Burton can have his off-days.
Rating: 
Summary: Example of how a decent movie can be ruined by a bad ending!
Review: The original "Planet of the Apes" was a brilliant, thought-provoking sci-fi classic, and no remake could ever hope to beset it. Instead, Tim Burton has given us a fresh, entirely new interpertation of the Apes saga, and I for one think it really works very well for its pumped up discussion of the slavery and polotical issues, and it certianly was entertaining enough. While it was never going to be anything to rival the 1968 Apes, and wisely didn't try to be, the hotly anticipated, misguided ending (which I will not reveal here) went and brought the entire movie down a couple notches. Had the last 5 minutess or so been cut, this all would have been a very nice "reimagining," and it does have its good points, but it's clear that the director and his editor didn't know when to finish it. Shame.
Rating:
Summary: Wahlberg is excellent, but the plot is ill explained
Review: The biggest explanation-where-are-you is at the end when Mark Wahlberg's character returns to Earth (Washington DC) and the Lincoln Memorial is now a memorial to ape Thade. And it turns out all the Washngton DC police are apes too. This ending makes no sense. But Mark Wahlberg does brilliantly in the lead just the same.
Rating:
Summary: Planet of sour grapes
Review: Planet of the Apes is the remake of the 1968 blockbuster and sci-fi classic. I read all the criticisms that this movie absorbed prior to seeing it, so I was pre-warned you could say. But I like Burton, I think he's put together some original and well thought out films. However, the critics were right this time: this film sucks. As much as I compliment the exteriors of this film (costuming, Special effects, and visual pleasures) it's one hollow movie that lacks character development and interest. Let's see, what should I rip first? Let's begin with Wahlburg, a poor excuse of an actor. He has no personality, none. No emotion, no believability, no interesting monologues, nothing. He's just there and we're forced to follow him. Heston's character Taylor is the ultimate model of character development. Here was a man who wanted to journey through space because he believed there was something out there better than man. By the end of the movie, he shows some human pride. Nothing like this is attempted through Wahlburg, other than some anti-zoo message. How about the other characters? Tim Roth is fine as an evil general Thade who hates man, but no true explanation is given as to why. Unlike Dr. Zaius in the first one, who had plenty of reasons why he hated man, Thade just hates just to hate. Thade is also a bit over the top with his hatred, making him a mad ape irrational half the time.
Estella who? Talk about a pointless character. She served no purpose, talked like a typical Californian beach babe with air between the ears, and was primarily used to show skin and rub Wahlburg's shoulders. Nova, in the original, served as Heston's talk outlet, even though she never said a word back; sort of like a living "Wilson" in "Cast Away." Warren wasn't even this, just eye candy. Let's talk about the sequences of the film. Like in the original, the main character is captured. He is made a slave in Ape society. But while he's a slave we learn very little of Ape society, unlike the original, which did a masterful job portraying this "upside down" society from every corner. In this version, it doesn't take the time, we get the feeling that the society is just ran by military powers such as Thade and that's all there is to it. In the first one humans were dominated by apes because humans couldn't speak and they lacked intelligence. In this one the humans are quite intelligent, so why are they so inferior to Apes? Why are the humans so far behind if they have verbal communications and tend to display plenty of intelligence? No explanation is given in the film. Again, Burton did not take the time to explain this world and its society which leaves holes unfilled and thereby creates dis-satisfaction. Also unlike the original, where Heston attempted to survive by being confined within ape society, Wahlburg's character is trying to survive by running from ape society. So we don't learn first hand about this society, we can't grow with the character because through most of the film he's running away from Attar and Thade. This is a disaster of a film.
And then, the worst, is the ending. It makes no sense by the way, no explanation, just ends abruptly with no irony. What made Planet of the Apes, the original, so successful was not its make-up or costuming or what have you. What made it successful was its storyline and ironic sequences that made us sympathize with the main character and learn of an entirely different, yet not so different society. This film did not of that. It was an average sci-fi film that lacks an original story, original characters, development of plot and characters, and memorable events within the movie. Tim Burton failed at all these points. This film is a shambles and those of you who think this film is something grand, haven't got a clue what hard work combined with good story telling is until you've appreciated the effort and pay off of the original.
Rating:
Summary: Great Special Effects, Imagery. Story Severely Lacking ...
Review: No matter what pre-cautionary steps a director takes remaking or
"re-imagining" a revered classic film such as Planet of the Apes
(1968), everyone is going to compare the original to "the new
improved" version. You must also take into account the times, and social issues that gaps the original and the remake. Planet
of the Apes (2001) seems to be making a anti-gun political statement. Whereas Planet of the Apes (1968) dealt with racial
issues among numerous others. Since the new Planet of the Apes
was produced pre-911, there was'nt that much happening enough
to make much of a story about. Heck, this new Planet of the Apes
could have had a anti-smoking message instead. All the classic
Apes films storylines were then, current events derivative. So,
for me Planet of the Apes (2001) did'nt have a whole lot to say.
Mark Wahlberg was badly miscast. Then again I can't think of
any current actors today that could match up to Heston's stature
as a spokesman for mankind.
Planet of the Apes (2001) was beautifully photographed, the
special effects were dazzling, and of course Rick Baker's
Apes makeup was terrific. All eye candy with little else going
for it.
No matter what "innovations" or "re-imagining" new Hollywood
comes up with on the "new and improved" Planet of the Apes series, I'll remain a loyal admirerer of the originals.
Who knows, maybe the next installment of the Apes series may
have a anti-obesity message centering on the Orangutans as the
lead Apes characters.
Rating: 
Summary: Should have spent more time apeing the original.
Review: This has got to be the worst Tim Burton movie he's made so far. Alright, we can suspend disbelief thus far because it is a sci-fi movie, but geesh! The ape culture was apparently based on Roman and ancient Egyptian civilization. Socities with a high degree of sophistication, but still slave-owning cultures. Although don't think that this movie gives any great anthropological insight. The original movie was very much a product of it's political times, conscious of the civil rights movement, Vietnam and the propensity of the world to blow itself up through nuclear war. The only politics this film was concerned with is how much money they were going to make on the opening weekend. Maybe this had something to do with a tight budget schedule. The crew started filming this massive manpower movie in November and it was released the following July! It has to be said that the film's make-up and costumes were pretty impressive (but why do some actors make-up e.g. Bonham-Carter, give them more scope for facial expression than others e.g. Tim Roth). But I suppose that really sums up the entire project, the time and effort put in to making it look spectacular overshadowed all other concerns, mainly script and acting. Some funny in-jokes include NRA spokesman Charlton Heston (who plays Tim Roth's dying ape father), who looks at a gun and states that it's "more powerful than a thousand spears". The rest of the actors don't have a lot of time on screen to do anything else but react to certain situations.
Rating:
Summary: Waiting for part 2?
Review: An excellent remake of the original Planet
of the apes.An outstanding performance by
Mark Wahlberg and Tim Roth. They left this movie open for a part 2.
I am asuming the second one will be the
remake of Escape from the Planet of the apes.
It's been a couple year's since they have not
made part 2 of this movie.When will we ever
see the new version of Escape from the planet
of the apes.You can't just end a movie and leave
it open for a part 2.Hopefully we will see part 2
in 2004 or in 2005. Although alot of people like the original
Planet of the apes better than the remake.
The remake is a must own for every fan.
I think it's better because the special
effect's are better.Of course they didn't
have special effect's like this back then.
It's still very entertaing with lot's of action. This is a must own dvd to add to your Planet
of the apes collection.
Rating:
Summary: It WON'T Make You Sorry You Were Born a Human
Review: The detailed review: There are only two commendable aspects of this 2001 "re-imagining" of the classic Sci-Fi allegory: The first is the musical score by composer Danny Elfman, which is simply excellent (as is nearly always the case with his work); the other--and the best--is the outstanding simian make-up work of Rick Baker and his crew. The make-up FX for the apes in this film looks even better (i.e., more articulate and realistic) than the groundbreaking and influential make-up that John Chambers created for 1968's original PLANET OF THE APES, and had auteur Tim Burton and his crew stuck closer to the basic plot and overall socio-political subtext of the first film, they could have created a thought-provoking and aesthetically breathtaking update of what author and film historian Eric Greene calls the American myth of the 20th century. Instead, Burton's take on PLANET OF THE APES is a tepid piece of celluloid that, while still visually stunning, is a travesty at best. Okay, then, the film itself is pretty lackluster. But what about the DVDs? In this day and age when technology allows tons of information to be packed onto one or two little plastic-and-aluminum discs, many lousy films are marketed with bonus extras that are actually better than the film itself. And the 2-Disc Special Edition of 2001's PLANET OF THE APES is a prime example. It is loaded with lots of cool bonus features like commentaries (one by Burton; the other by composer Elfman) and deleted scenes, but the real treats are the featurettes that take the viewer behind the scenes in several aspects of the making of the film. Just a few of the items discussed: The creation a special "school" for the actors so they could learn to move like an ape; costume design and creation; make-up FX; music for the film; and much more. Even for a rather dull remake like this film, learning a bit about how the cinematic illusions are created is fascinating. This alone makes the 2-Disc set worth purchasing. (Note: the 1-Disc version that is also being marketed offers extras, too, but this includes only the two feature commentaries and some very limited behind-the-scenes stuff that can be accessed while viewing the flick.)
The compendiary review: Tim Burton's "re-imagining" of PLANET OF THE APES is a pale shadow of the original. However, the 2-Disc Special Edition DVD from Fox Home Entertainment has some outstanding extras that actually make the package worth purchasing.
The ratings: Movie rates at 2 stars; DVD with extras deserves 4 stars. So the average rating for the movie and feature-packed DVD set is 3 stars.
| 
