Folks, Harry here... I can't even begin to tell you how many theater owners and bookers have called me to find out how PLANET OF THE APES is going to turn out. It's one of the top 3 questions I get asked these days from film fans.. 1. What can you tell me about LORD OF THE RINGS? 2. Is SPIDER-MAN going to suck? 3. What have you heard about PLANET OF THE APES? In truth... not much. Sure Moriarty read the script, but the word from the set was that the film was having constant daily rewrites. We've heard of no test screenings. There was the screening for the MPAA, but as usual those walls don't talk much... yet. And in 2 days, the junketeers are going to be seeing the film for the big press day for PLANET OF THE APES... Which was originally due to move forward today. Inside.Com wrote a scary reshoot, effects not complete piece a day or two back, and the people with theaters have become a bit antsy... Knowing that the public wants the movie to be cool, and hoping that they get what they want... so they can fill their cash registers and have at least one sure fire hit besides SHREK.
Thus far, like everyone else in the industry, the word has been zilch. No real knowledge to base expectations. Till now. Our long term spy, Derek Flint has managed to infiltrate the organization known as FOX Inc and came back with the word. And the word is real good. This is a long as hell review, but with very little spoilers and all twists intact... but... well, you'll see... I'm so happy right now! Bless you Tim!
Harry, your favorite spy has delivered a coup for you. I’ve been able to see what seems to be the nearly completed version of Tim Burton’s “Planet of the Apes”.
The only thing that appeared to be missing were some completed CGI shots, with what was called “low res” renderings in their place. Still, it was clear what was represented by these yet to be refined scenes. I believe this could be the print that the Motion PictureRatings Board looked at when they gave the film a PG-13 (although my friend on the production claims perhaps that particular version didn’t feature the final score, but wasn’t sure).
The only other disadvantage I can disclose during my “viewing” was that I couldn’t see a few of the reels in order, even though I saw everything, but I certainly had no trouble neither following the film nor coming up with a summation.
Never has any movie summer reminded us that the season rhymes with “bummer.” From “Pearl Harbor” to “Tomb Raider” to “A.I.” it seems that the equal the high expectation, the equal the massive disappointment. Most of our hopes have been collectively pinned on Tim Burton, a true artist, to redeem big studio commercial filmmaker this summer with his “re-imagining” of 1968’s seminal sci fi masterpiece “Planet of the Apes.” That term “re-imagining”, which has been exploited relentlessly in almost every press release, is truly appropriate in this case.
Tim Burton is a true original, and his name always encourages us to daydream when we free-associate what his unique vision will bring when coupled with any number of preexisting entities out there.
How would Tim Burton approach “Willy Wonka” or “Superman” brings forth rapturous anticipation from some of us, as well as dismay from others. That’s the mark of being an artist: Not pleasing everyone (while not pleasing anyone is the mark of being Tom Green, I suppose.)
Tim Burton is a whimsical talent, but his own self admitted Achilles’ heel has always been story and structure. His penchant for visual wonders and style can overwhelm a plot…as well as mask, more than any other director, deficiencies that would defeat any other working filmmaker in the world.
I loved “Pee Wee’s Big Adventure” despite it possessing the most slender of storylines. The same applies to “Beetlejuice” as well as “Batman”. I can’t imagine these films entertaining me in any other hands. (Speaking of “hands,” I did love “Edward Scissorhands” where Burton obviously got very, very personal.) So far, my favorite Burton film has been “Ed Wood” which benefited from a solid screenplay and his own more disciplined and conventional approach to the material.
I have to admit not caring for “Batman Returns” all that much and found “Mars Attacks” to be amusing, but not up to Mr. Burton’s immense talents. Before discussing Burton’s “Apes” a mention of his last opus “Sleepy Hollow” applies. Once again, this was a very successful film commerically that I enjoyed solely based upon Tim Burton’s presence behind the camera. I was aware of paucity within the script, but found myself carried along despite of this… as well as the fact that what was wrong with the material would normally defeat any less idiosyncratic director. Burton’s regeneration of long lost Hammer horror films, as well as his innate respect for those films, kept me entranced. The man is a true magician, with an unerring ability to take average material and craft it into something special and singular.
I, like almost all of AICN, love the “Planet of the Apes” motion pictures. I know them virtually all by heart and can perfectly visualize in my mind the countless sequences from the first film that have entered the pantheon of classic cinema. I’m sure many of you can too.
Well, the very good news is… so can Tim Burton.
I can’t think of another filmmaker who has exhibited as much respect, reverence and care for preexistent source material than for what Tim Burton has shown for producer Arthur P. Jacobs’ “Planet of the Apes” film series in his version.
It’s obviously apparent throughout, most evident in how much direct homage peppers the film in visuals, references and even cameos. (Knowing Tim Burton’s clout, I don’t think it’s an accident that the advertising graphics for his version match the original series.) Burton has not sought to “top” the previous “Planet of the Apes” canon, despite all the vast technical advances at his disposal. He has kept his promise to “re-imagine” this archetypal myth, much like a contemporary storyteller passing it along as a fresh tale to a new generation.
I will admit that I found the screenplay, credited to William Broyles, Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal, merely “functional” when compared against the magnificent '68 adaptation of Pierre Boulle’s novel that, I recall, was crafted by Michael Wilson and Rod Serling. This one is rather perfunctory, although there are some smart choices made, and I must admit that there won’t be the cornucopia of “quotable” lines from this version... much of which was reportedly rewritten "on the fly."
Also, I will confess disappointment regarding the lack of dimension given some of the characters. In particular, our human hero, Leo Davidson as portrayed by Mark Wahlberg, feels very much like a “generic” personality. (Maybe this has to do with the fact that Matt Damon was to play the part, only to drop out weeks away from production... so it wasn't properly "Taylored.").
Leo reminds me of someone that, believe it or not, Matthew Broderick would have been cast as about ten or fifteen years ago. Perhaps it’s because the character invokes, to me at least, in some fleeting ways someone Broderick played in a little seen flick called “Project X.” (This review is spoiler free, so I won't say more here.)
In the original film, Charlton Heston’s Taylor represented all of humanity against the superior apes. Since Leo doesn’t have that same exact mantle to shoulder, initially he may seem weaker and even overtly petulant in his situation.
That’s why it’s very important to keep an open mind when approaching Burton’s film, despite the verity that many consider the original “Apes” and its sequels as near gospel.
The film begins with Wahlberg’s Leo being sent on a reconnaissance mission that he’s particularly well suited for. The set up plays very quickly, as before you know it… Wahlberg’s astronaut passes through an anomaly and crashes on an outlying, uncharted world.
The look of the opening is evocative a bit of “Enemy Mine,” without any Burton-esque touches, and plays as a rather customary genre film. (Rumor has it that Fox requested that Leo’s crash landing on the surface be re-shot. It does feel quite visceral, and reportedly Burton continues to collaborate with the same individual who has assisted with his other action sequences from past films.)
True to its mythological roots, Leo’s discovery of the strange realm he’s stumbled upon is treated as a dark fairy tale… underscored by the fact that it takes place in a forest. I know my use of the term “fairy tale” might cause some to bristle, but it’s true.
What ensues is the counterpart to the original movie’s legendary “hunt” scene, with wayward humans being rounded up by the apes. Burton’s sequence is neither as epic, complex or showy. It’s also decidedly not as good, but it would clearly seem that Tim Burton absolutely knew he couldn’t top Franklin Shaffner’s renowned and harrowing depiction of human beings pursued as prey amongst cornstalks, climaxed by Shaffner’s brilliant first reveal of gorillas wielding rifles on horseback. (There are no guns on this planet, which seems ironic since Charlton Heston is in the cast.)
Additionally, we’re faced with a substantial change from the original that everyone is well aware of from the previews: Human beings can speak. When I first learned of this alteration, I thought it was a terrible idea… but seeing it in context, it works and was a wise choice in comparison with doing things differently from the original movie.
Why repeat what you cannot improve upon? Namely, Heston’s incredibly famous line uttered to the apes that signified the first time they’d ever heard a human being speak. This “re-imagining” saves a great amount of time omitting that aspect, allowing for more scope in this particular journey since you don't have at least half the movie dealing with a mute Leo. In fact, you’ll feel like you’re watching an encapsulation of the entire “Apes” saga in one film… since elements of “Beneath the Planet ofthe Apes” as well as “Escape”, “Conquest” and even the decidedly inferior “Battle”, in respect to the tribal elements of the way apes lived together, are all represented here.
While human beings can speak on Burton’s “Planet of the Apes”, they are still an inferior species… but not necessarily just like the role reversal of primitive animals in the original. There’s a degree of fascism in play. Spirituality also continues to be a divining difference, but it’s more pronounced in this version.
Much like conquering explorers who viewed native tribes with xenophobia, the apes here persecute and enslave human beings not just because of their physical difference but also due to their hereditary lack of the same secular beliefs.
The human beings here are demoralized due to subjugation and oppression, and Leo’s arrival places him in the archetype role of reluctant savior. This “Planet of the Apes” will have you thinking of both “Braveheart and “Gladiator” throughout, as Wahlberg’s defiance of ape tyranny,as well as stories of the vastly different social structure from his homeland, makes him much more dangerous in this scenario that Charlton Heston’s Taylor ever was. He's destroying an established belief system, and the apes aren't intent on cutting out his brain as much as symbolically crucifying him.
Like “Braveheart’s” William Wallace, Leo’s legend grows as he becomes a virtual messiah to the human masses that populate the entire planet. Danny Elfman’s heroic score accentuates this similarity. Heard on its own, you wouldn’t think of it coming from a science fiction film necessarily… especially the latest reinvention of the “Planet of the Apes.” In given the rather more complicated role Leo plays in this “Apes” saga, the hierarchy of the simians themselves has changed in significant, and very logical, ways.
The chimpanzees are once again the intellectuals, but without the timidity that chimps like Cornelius and Zira exemplified. Tim Roth portrays Thade, the chief (as well as chimp) adversary, with classical villainy right out of Shakespeare. (A scene where he confers with a dying elder is also incredibly evocative of “Braveheart” as well.)
Paul Giamatti is Limbo, a scrappy orangutan who traffics in humanity. It goes without saying that across the boards, Rick Baker’s makeup is extraordinary and it’s a safe bet that both he and his collaborators should already have his Oscar acceptance speech written. (The manifestation of a senator played by Burton veteran Glenn Shadix is staggering.) Still, what Giamatti does with this character is truly the actor not just relying on the mask to create an indelible portrayal. He’s quite wonderful.
I was mostly surprised by the depiction of the gorillas,which weren’t just the savage militaristic brutes we’d expect from past films. Trust me, those aspects are there…but Michael Clarke Duncan’s Attar, a mighty warrior, possesses a certain innocence in many ways. He even has self-doubt and introspection, mostly through Tim Burton’s unique directorial style.
Some of Wahlberg’s relationships amongst the humans will remind you of “Stargate.” His romance with Estella Warren, who isn’t just another pretty face and can fight quite fiercely, is one of those elements I’d called obligatory… but direction and performance make it feel much better than it actually is. Kris Kristofferson as Karubi works quite well, as an elder statesman of the human tribe who recalls a much different time on this planet.
The character that echoes most closely a portrayal from the original is Helena Bonham Carter as Ari, who seems like a direct relation to Zira. This was the makeup that I found particularly strange from stills and also the trailer, but the delicate, almost porcelain doll, features she possesses works very well within Burton’s vision.
You can feel the director’s great fondness for this character, and Carter exudes terrific humanity and courage that would no doubt make Kim Hunter proud.
The Forbidden Zone on Tim Burton’s “Planet of the Apes” is a quest of great consequence here. Some of the quasi-Asian appearance of the simians, as far as their armor and the like, come into play here. (I’m not revealing anything in this spoiler free review, but in dealing with a certain “spirituality” this version carries… that look hasn’t been chosen necessarily just for “show.”)
There’s even some feeling of “Crouching Tiger” as Burton has his apes fly through the air and swing from trees. His battle scenes are impressive, not just in their breadth and cutting, but in the amazing movements these ape actors were able to achieve.
Some may not like the third act of this film, but I did. Unlike the original “Apes” series, this didn’t feel like Tim Burton helming an attempt to re-establish a whole new line of sequels. He is the key ingredient in this “Planet of the Apes” and without him, there’s no point even revisiting "either" place.
As far as the much-ballyhooed finale that has been hinted at throughout the production, nothing can top the Statue Of Liberty protruding from the beach that climaxed the 1968 classic. Nothing... and it would seem that they wisely didn’t try. Still, itt pays to pay homage, and if you’re familiar with Boulle’s original novel… I think both he, as well as the late Arthur P. Jacobs, would be quite pleased with the way Tim Burton wrapped his tale.
Whenever someone reads a book aloud to others, particularly fairy tales, they do so in their own unique style and “voice.” Tim Burton has done that with his retelling of “Planet of the Apes.”
As long as you keep an open mind, he’s great to listen to…and I envy all the kids that have never seen an “Apes” movie experiencing this film with fresh eyes and ears.
This film will cause a great deal of debate, especially here on Ain’t It Cool News, but it will also make a fortune.
To Hollywood executives, that means a happy ending.
Your man,
Derek Flint
