Defending Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes

[johnmiic]

What Burton's remake lacked was a script which had something to say. The original POTA was a very layered story line, one of the benefit's of having Twilight Zone's Rod Serling do a few drafts of the script.

Tim Burton doesn't seem to have any opinion on politics, class system, civil rights, or a social conscience. He's all about art and imagery. His films are self contained and don't seem to connect with real-world human problems. Ed Wood might be the only film of his that did.

The scene in Burton's remake where the 2 apes seem to be engaging in primate sex play was played for laughs but is just a funny scene in the film. By comparison the courtroom scene in he original where the 3 judges do the hear no, speak no and see no evil was a blooper that was slipped in but still resonates with the larger story. It says a lot about why Taylor is on trial, how the trial is biased, the rejection of truth for status quo.

[GlobalObserver]

I really need to watch this film again and re-exam my original opinion from a decade ago.

I watched it again tonight. I dislike it even more than I remember. Mark Wahlberg is the least of this film's problems. I actually think he gives a better performance than most of his fellow castmates.

Helena Bonham Carter and Paul Giamatti are truly horrible, and Tim Roth's performance is just way over the top.

Good actors can't do much with a terrible script and bad direction.

The makeup and wardrobe were excellent for the most part, but the female chimps' appearances were humanized to the point of ridiculousness. They all looked like simian refugees from some bizarre Jennifer Aniston worshiping cult.

Does anyone understand how Thade and the apes took over earth? Unlike the original POTA, the planet that Wahlberg landed on at the beginning of the film clearly wasn't earth. And why was the statue of Thade wearing a curly haired Abe Lincoln wig and 19th century clothing?

[dr_cyclops]

Opinionated Cyclops Warning:
The answer to your Question; "Why do people hate this movie so much"? Sadly I believe I know the answer to this question. I believe it is because so few POTA fans have ever read the novel that inspired the original movie. As I told everyone who claimed Tim Burton's version would be better than the original movie; "That original movie is easily ten times better than the novel that inspired it". Oh yeah, Rod Serling and Harry Harrison, and so many other contributed a screenplay that lives as strong today (if not stronger) than the day it was released. All I expected from Burton was a movie that paid tribute to the original novel. This movie did just that!

[spacecaps]

Walburg really didn't show us any kinda Emotion in this Film ...., but other than The Other Guys, and The Departed , I dunno if He does. I like him as an Actor somewhat...., but he hasn't really stole a Performance, since His 1st Film, where he played that crazy Boyfriend in Fear ...., But that was also the Script ..., Not Walburg.

The Lovely Bones!

[GlobalObserver]

I like Boulle's novel almost as much as I dislike this film.

Burton's film has very little to do with the novel. The only real similarity is that both Ulysse Mérou and Leo Davidson eventually return to Earth, only to discover that apes have taken over.

I do agree that the '68 film is better than Boulle's novel.

[Brazoo]

What Burton's remake lacked was a script which had something to say. The original POTA was a very layered story line, one of the benefit's of having Twilight Zone's Rod Serling do a few drafts of the script.

Tim Burton doesn't seem to have any opinion on politics, class system, civil rights, or a social conscience. He's all about art and imagery. His films are self contained and don't seem to connect with real-world human problems. Ed Wood might be the only film of his that did.

I 100% totally agree with this. It's a great observation - and well said.

I like some of Burton's movies - but "Ed Wood" is the one that most successfully digs deeper. "Edward Scissorhands" might be a close second with a lot of the same themes about being an outsider - and is probably his most personal and emotionally affecting movie, even though it's a broad fable.

"Big Fish" is maybe his only other movie that even tries for deeper things to say, but everything was just on the surface and lacked the insight it felt like it was going for - and felt really awkward to me.

The original POTA is about as near perfect as genre writing gets. The messages are woven so perfectly into the story that they don't beat you on the head or stick out sloppily - but they still have a strong effect. The remake is just a dude on a monkey planet - there's nothing else.

[Chris]

I think the title Planet of the Apes ruined it.

Same thing happened to Wild Wild West

Agreed. The title killed it for me too. I like the flick. It's just not a POTA film. They should have used the working title: The Visitor but what do I know?

Still looking for a Marky Mark MEGO. It is so hard to find!

The POTA novel is a fun read.

[Hector]

I like some of Burton's movies - but "Ed Wood" is the one that most successfully digs deeper.

Ed Wood is my favorite Burton film.

[torgospizza]

Ed Wood is my favorite Burton film.

Bill Murray was great in that. "Do you reject Satan and all his evils?" "Sure."

[Brazoo]

Ed Wood is my favorite Burton film.

Mine too.

I legitimately find this quote inspirational when I feel like I've flubbed something:

Ed: "Really? Worst film you ever saw. Well, my next one will be better."

The irony of it is obviously lost on Ed, but that's what I think is so true and positive about it - sometimes ignorance is the only way to move on from failure.