Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

I'm going to catch some heat for this, but I've found Tim Burton's Planet Of The Apes to be a far better film than any of the three recent versions. I can't explain it, but there's something so otherworldly and exotic about the production design, makeup and effects, a true storyteller's touch used, resulting in a piece with elements of fantasy and world building brought lushly to the forefront, whereas the newer films just felt somewhat clinical and sterile, going through minimalist motions without any real sense of wonder applied. Oh and another thing: real, tactile makeup on actual human actors, which will win against motion capture/cgi any day. There's also an old world, medieval feel to this planet, as the 'humans being subservient to apes' dynamic has already been in full swing for generations, as opposed to a lengthy origin story that takes up most of the newer trilogy. No build up here, just Marky Mark getting marooned on a distant world dominated by simians, fighting his way through their ranks, sort of falling in love with one (Helena Bonham Carter as a monkey=kinky) and attempting to find a way back to earth. There's various apes of all shapes and sizes at war, the most memorable of which is a sleek, snarling Tim Roth as Thade, a volatile warlord who despises humans. Michael Clarke Duncan towers over everyone as Attar, his cohort and fellow soldier, and seeing already be-jowelled Paul Giamatti as a cumbersome orangutan is priceless. The human faction is led by weathered Kris Kristofferson and his daughter (Estella Warren, quite possibly the most beautiful girl on the planet), leading the dregs of humanity as they exist in hiding and fight for their lives. No expense was spared in filling every frame of this planet with lived-in splendour and atmospheric decoration, from suits of armour and architecture to the overgrown thickets of mountainous vegetation that grow on this world. As for the apes themselves, it's terrific how real they feel. It's the same thing that happened with Lord Of The Rings vs. The Hobbit, and the switch from practical Orc effects to the overblown cgi madness of the goblins in the later films. The human eye is inherently adept at deciphering what is real and what is not, and the effects of the later Ape films with Andy Serkis just felt lifeless and orchestrated, whereas here the makeup prosthetics are organic, authentic and wonderful to look at. Don't even get me started on the ending either, it's completely brilliant and will leaving you in cold isolation as the credits roll, a perfect gut punch to a film that could have easily turned sappy in the eleventh hour. So that's my two cents. Bring on the backlash.

This film, directed by Tim Burton, is a sci-fi work based on a simple script: an astronaut inadvertently falls on a planet similar to Earth, where humans are subjugated to a dominant monkey race. From there, he tries to organize a resistance and create conditions to return to his ship and travel back to Earth. That is, Burton didn't know how to use his famous creativity to show us something new. This story is almost entirely something we have already seen and read (if we consider the origin of everything, Pierre Boulle's book), dressed in new clothes, more modern or different. The work of the actors is generally acceptable, with Marc Wahlberg standing out with the main role, followed by Helena Bonham Carter and Tim Roth. The human characters are downright poor and main character's love interest attempts always seem out of context. Overall, it's a movie good enough to be seen but not enough to be remembered.

I tried watching this film probably about five years ago and gave up the effort about half way through. Figuring I might have been having a bad day I decided to give it a try again. I'm glad I did because there was actually some thought provoking stuff here just as you had in the original film, with ideas explored concerning racial/species intolerance, animal rights, and the concept of equality in general. Some of it was presented in clichéd dialog, which I agree can be a turn off, but if you listen attentively, a lot of it is applicable to the present day. One of the most insightful was the observation that "The human problem cannot be solved by simply throwing money at it".There's an idea that occurred to me while watching the picture I haven't seen expressed anywhere else and it has to do with the names of the principal characters. The anagram of each name has a connotation that intrinsically describes the nature of that character. For example, take General Thade. An anagram of Thade would be Death, and he was certainly the personification of violent, deadly hatred toward humans. Others I came up with include: Semos = Moses, the mythical ape who was considered the savior of his race, having insured the place of apes above humans in a 'Promised Land' of sorts.Ari = Air, as in having an ethereal quality required to bridge an understanding between the apes and human inhabitants of the planet.Even the name of Mark Wahlberg's character has a Biblical reference if you will. Davidson = David's Son, or Son of David, a name often associated with Jesus Christ who was descended from the Family of David. I haven't read the Pierre Boulle novel on which the film was based, so I don't know if these were names he gave his characters, but if this word play regarding the characters is merely coincidental, the odds I think would be astronomical.Anyway, that's what I thought about while watching the picture. And what is good science fiction if not making you think about what you're watching and/or reading? Beyond that, there's no question the time/space implications of the story lend themselves to serious head scratching. Upon first seeing the ruins of the Oberon space station, the representation called to mind the spires on the crown of the Statue of Liberty which signaled an obvious swipe from the original movie. But then we got to the crux of the Calima business, and I thought that was done pretty cleverly.So all in all, I thought the film makers did a decent job here in re-imagining the original screenplay, while offering food for thought in any number of areas touched upon in the script. Probably more so than even the awkward ending with the Thade Memorial, my biggest question was why Captain Davidson left Pericles behind.

I hope that those who complained about this movie changed their minds after watching Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) and all the movies that might follow.The reason i pointed this out is because Tim Burton's effort is the only movie in the franchise that has a decent script, at time almost at Shakespearean heights. In addition to that, the actors played the apes in realistic costumes. Prior to this movie the costumes were funny, to say the least, and the 2011 prequel used CGI.Personally, this movie was a huge improvement, because the only thing worth mentioning in the old movies has been the scene with Charlton Heston confronted with the Statue of Liberty protruding from the sand. The 2011 and 2014 prequels were visually better but scripts were poor.