| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
|
Buy This DVD and Watch it Instantly
Watch the Amazon Instant Video rental on your PC, Mac, compatible TV or compatible device at no charge when you buy this DVD from Amazon.com. Your rental will expire 24 hours after you begin watching or 30 days after your disc purchase, whichever occurs first. The Amazon Instant Video version will be available in Your Video Library and is provided as a gift with disc purchase. Available to US customers only. See Terms and Conditions.
|
||
 |
 |
From director J.J. Abrams comes the next installment in the Star Trek saga, Star Trek Into Darkness. See it at Cinemark theaters now and pre-order on Blu-ray, 3D Blu-ray, DVD, and the Exclusive Starfleet Phaser Gift Set. Shop Star Trek Into Darkness and more in the Star Trek Store. Learn more |
Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Special Features
Editorial Reviews
Customer Reviews
So, when I heard that 20th Century Fox wanted to do a "re-imagining" of POTA my first thought was "Why?". Hadn't the first film gotten everything right the first time around? Why monkey (no pun intended) with something that was pretty much perfect already? Then I heard that Tim Burton had been assingned to direct and I thought that here was an ideal choice if you were going to re-imagine something as iconic as POTA. After all, he had done a marvelous job of revamping the image of Batman from that of the ridiculously campy to that of the more respectible avenging Dark Knight (only to have Joel Schumaker undermine all of that with "Batman and Robin"). While a re-imaging of POTA wasn't needed, I thought, it still might be interesting to see the results of such an undertaking from the capable hands of a director like Burton. Unfortunately the final product failed to meet my expectations.
The biggest dissapointment here is the script, no real plot and flat, one dimensional characters ... The social commentary, so important to the original, is almost completely lacking here. Early on in the story there are some token nods to racism and human vs animal rights but then the writers never develop them. ... The characters, especially the human ones, are hardly worth caring about. Leo, the lost astronaut (Mark Wahlberg), seems to just wander around through the film in a catatonic trance; never even aware of the romantic interest of the human female (Estella Warren) or that of the chimp female Ari (Helena Bonham Carter). The film makes it obvious the two are interested in Leo but, again, fail to develop it into anything. This movie wants to get up and go but is eventually left spinning its wheels aimlessly for two hours.
However, its not all bad. There are some things that make this film worth viewing. One, is Burton's visuals. Burton is first and foremost a visual director. In other words, the look of the film seems to take precedence over everything else. Unfortunately that's the case here. The script [is poor] but the film itself looks gorgeous. I particularly loved the shots of Ape City built into the huge and forbidding rocky crag, also the views of the long marching columns of the ape army at night. Also, the forest that surrounds the city is one of those typically beautiful but scary Burtonesque fairy tale type affairs. My favorite aspect to this film is Rick Baker's incredible ape make-up. These are simply incredible designs that obviously had a lot of work put into them. If Baker doesn't win an Oscar for his efforts there is simply no justice in the world. Another good thing going for this film is the quality of the performances which for the most part are quite good. In particular Tim Roth as the violently tempered chimp General Thade and Helena Bonham Carter as the female chimp Ari who sympathizes with the plight of the humans. There is also good comic relief in the form of the Orangutan vender of humans played by Paul Giamatti. And Michael Duncan Clarke is an imposing Colonel Attar. I also have to make mention of Charlton Heston's brief cameo as Thade's dying father. In one of the films few good ironic moments Heston's character introduces the concept of guns into the story. Thade's Daddy has been hiding the fact that humans at one time had such dangerous weapons (apparently apes have never developed firearms) and reveals the secret to his son before he kicks the bucket. Finally, mention must be made of Danny Elfman's wonderful score; a nice blending of Jerry Goldsmith's atonal, primitive sounds that worked so well for the original film with that of a full orchestra. I may or may not get the DVD but I will certainly add the soundtrack to my collection.
Ultimately I found this "re-imagining" of POTA a disappointment. There are occaisional moments where this film shows that it has the potential to achieve so much but then turns around and squanders it. When will Hollywood learn that cool visuals and great looking make-up are not enough to make an excellent or even a good movie?
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.
The film has very few interesting moments, a noteworthy exception being when an elderly chimp played by NRA gun lobbyist Charlton Heston (who also played "Taylor" in the original film) expresses terror of guns.
Finally, if you listen to Burton's commentary on the DVD, you may be dismayed by the difficulties he has when speaking his mind: "Just wanted a sort of a clean technology--something not too far in the future--something--uh--very clean, very--uh--but--uh. Circular was always important because I--. That was something I always felt was sort of important to the overall Planet-of-the-Apes mythology. There's a circular-in-nature to the goes-around-comes-around type feeling just in the overall structure, so [I] tried to keep that with the space stuff and--and--you know--keep it sort of clean and technological and--and--you know--that was all very important to set against the brutal--you know--ape world and [I] wanted to make that a real juxtaposition between the two." Get it?
Planet of the Apes is a classic Hollywood movie.
The movie follows the story of a US Air Force pilot who goes after his ape who gets sucked into an... Read more
