"Planet of the Apes" (105) Tim Burton-style
Planet of the Apes (2001)
Directed by: Tim Burton
Starring: Mark Walhberg, Helena Bonham Carter, and more
It's not as if anyone was really begging for a remake of the 1968 "classic" original film, but if it was going to be done, I cannot think of anyone better to re-imagine it than the one and only Tim Burton. Except, his recent films have really kind of been a disappointment.
Let's take a quick peek at his career:
Pee Wee's Big Adventure ('85) CLASSIC
Beetlejuice ('88) CLASSIC
Batman ('89) OKAY
Edward Scissorhands ('90) CLASSIC
Batman Returns ('92) CLASSIC
Ed Wood ('94) OKAY
Mars Attacks ('96) DISAPPOINTMENT
Sleeply Hollow ('99) OKAY
Planet of the Apes ('01) OKAY
Big Fish ('03) CLASSIC
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory ('05) DISAPPOINTMENT
Corpse Bride ('05) GOOD
Sweeney Todd ('07) DISAPPOINTMENT
Alice in Wonderland ('10) DISAPPOINTMENT
Dark Shadows ('12) DISAPPOINTMENT
Frankenweenie ('12) GOOD
It's rather clear that he's found a muse in Johnny Depp ever since "Edward Scissorhands" but his last 4 movies have starred Johnny Depp and even those have been disappointments. He is a very talented director and a visionary in terms of how he presents a story with colors and graphics and technology. But I think what's truly been missing from his films has been the story and "Edward Scissorhands" had both, as well as "Big Fish," but all his other films have really seen the story take a backseat to his visual presentation. Graphics are wonderful, but it brings to mind an analogy about superficiality. If you are dating a beautiful women who has no personality, when she grows old her beauty will fade and what you're left with is a girl you can barely stand to talk to. Films with beautiful graphics, but no story are much like the beautiful woman with no personality. It's not like wine, which gets finer with age.
What "Planet of the Apes" does accomplish with Tim Burton at the helm is a magnificent re-imaging of the world, complete with ape-makeup that puts the actors no longer in suits, but rather they "become" the apes that they portray. Each ape does sparkle with personality and presence, thanks to the actors playing them, especially Paul Giamatti (the comic relief) whose ape is a sort of human slave-holder/seller. Michael Clark Duncan plays an ape developing a conscience in regards to how the apes have been treating the humans. Tim Roth plays Gen. Thade, an ape with a terrible temper and wants to see that all the human slaves are treating as such and given no mercy. He seems to want to stop at nothing to make sure the humans suffer badly and madly since evolution has clearly not been kind to them and the apes have surpassed with on the evolutionary chain. Gen. Thade seems to make a point of reminding everyone of that fact. It's really interesting towards the end of the film when he discovers the power of technology as he figures out how to shoot a gun. Technology seemed to be the only thing separating us from the monkeys, and now, with this development they will ultimately be unstoppable (much like we have been). And then there's Ari (played by Helena Bonham Carter, another one of Tim Burton's muses, so much so that he ended up marrying her at one point in his movie-making career). Ari is the ape with a heart AND a conscience.
The apes really steal the show here because the humans are flat and rather unsympathetic characters. You don't really care if they survive and/or escape. The human hero is Leo, played flatly by Mark Wahlberg (whom I usually am impressed with). Perhaps he was went to play him as an unemotional, typical man, who doesn't over-think or even so much as look for reasons why things happen. Even though he's an astronaut/jock who's clearly been trained in macho self-determination and narrowmindedness. He only cares for one thing: getting off the planet he crash-landed on. That is his single motivation, leading him to be a rather one-dimensional character.
His expected human love interest is played by blonde model-actress Estella Warren, also very flat and her character is insignificant since she seems written to only follow Captain Leo around and give him looks of longing and desire, which will remain unfulfilled.
Ape-girl Ari vies for his attention/affection as well (which leads to a more significant question of inter-species love). I give credit to Bonham Carter for really bringing Ari to life. Her ape has warmth and personality as well as distinct mannerisms and body language. She is a sensitive monkey (with a soul, if that's possible).
Being a fan of philosophy, I wanted the film to not only showcase the thirty years of advancement in regards to technology, but I wanted the story to be deeper than it was, because it could have been so much better with a story that tackled philosophical subjects much like the fantastic novel "Animal Farm" (one of my favorite books from high school). "Planet of the Apes" could have been a social commentary. It could have been a parable of men and animals. There could have been reflections on things like: animal intelligence and rights, the interactions humans and animals have with one another, the morality of genetic engineering and advancement of technology for the benefit of human beings. But, alas, it was not. It forces you to do your own thinking on the matter, even though it's there, in the undertones of the film, Tim Burton never sees the point of asking and answering these questions thoughtfully.
I saw this in the theater with my great friend, Sean, during the summer of 2001 (when it came out) which coincided with his return from his Freshman year of college where he'd taken a Philosophy course and was always ready to have deep, meaningful, and thoughtful conversations. After this film we dissected it until it seemed we were beating a dead horse, and even then we could not determine whether we understood it or not. I think I do now, though. We were always very confused by the ending, where Leo escapes and crash-lands, again, this time in an apocalyptic Washington D.C. at the foot of the Jefferson Memorial, which has been replaced with an ape-like Jefferson and a new quote/creed in its background. Sean and I were confused about whether the ending was presenting us with a piece about time-machine and just what could have happened or gone wrong with his return. But now, I see that he didn't actually go anywhere, that he never really left the "Planet of the Apes" which is a commentary on evolution in a post-apocalyptic world where apes have taken over. I get it now! But, I still wasn't impressed with the film as a whole.
Directed by: Tim Burton
Starring: Mark Walhberg, Helena Bonham Carter, and more
It's not as if anyone was really begging for a remake of the 1968 "classic" original film, but if it was going to be done, I cannot think of anyone better to re-imagine it than the one and only Tim Burton. Except, his recent films have really kind of been a disappointment.
Let's take a quick peek at his career:
Pee Wee's Big Adventure ('85) CLASSIC
Beetlejuice ('88) CLASSIC
Batman ('89) OKAY
Edward Scissorhands ('90) CLASSIC
Batman Returns ('92) CLASSIC
Ed Wood ('94) OKAY
Mars Attacks ('96) DISAPPOINTMENT
Sleeply Hollow ('99) OKAY
Planet of the Apes ('01) OKAY
Big Fish ('03) CLASSIC
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory ('05) DISAPPOINTMENT
Corpse Bride ('05) GOOD
Sweeney Todd ('07) DISAPPOINTMENT
Alice in Wonderland ('10) DISAPPOINTMENT
Dark Shadows ('12) DISAPPOINTMENT
Frankenweenie ('12) GOOD
It's rather clear that he's found a muse in Johnny Depp ever since "Edward Scissorhands" but his last 4 movies have starred Johnny Depp and even those have been disappointments. He is a very talented director and a visionary in terms of how he presents a story with colors and graphics and technology. But I think what's truly been missing from his films has been the story and "Edward Scissorhands" had both, as well as "Big Fish," but all his other films have really seen the story take a backseat to his visual presentation. Graphics are wonderful, but it brings to mind an analogy about superficiality. If you are dating a beautiful women who has no personality, when she grows old her beauty will fade and what you're left with is a girl you can barely stand to talk to. Films with beautiful graphics, but no story are much like the beautiful woman with no personality. It's not like wine, which gets finer with age.
What "Planet of the Apes" does accomplish with Tim Burton at the helm is a magnificent re-imaging of the world, complete with ape-makeup that puts the actors no longer in suits, but rather they "become" the apes that they portray. Each ape does sparkle with personality and presence, thanks to the actors playing them, especially Paul Giamatti (the comic relief) whose ape is a sort of human slave-holder/seller. Michael Clark Duncan plays an ape developing a conscience in regards to how the apes have been treating the humans. Tim Roth plays Gen. Thade, an ape with a terrible temper and wants to see that all the human slaves are treating as such and given no mercy. He seems to want to stop at nothing to make sure the humans suffer badly and madly since evolution has clearly not been kind to them and the apes have surpassed with on the evolutionary chain. Gen. Thade seems to make a point of reminding everyone of that fact. It's really interesting towards the end of the film when he discovers the power of technology as he figures out how to shoot a gun. Technology seemed to be the only thing separating us from the monkeys, and now, with this development they will ultimately be unstoppable (much like we have been). And then there's Ari (played by Helena Bonham Carter, another one of Tim Burton's muses, so much so that he ended up marrying her at one point in his movie-making career). Ari is the ape with a heart AND a conscience.
The apes really steal the show here because the humans are flat and rather unsympathetic characters. You don't really care if they survive and/or escape. The human hero is Leo, played flatly by Mark Wahlberg (whom I usually am impressed with). Perhaps he was went to play him as an unemotional, typical man, who doesn't over-think or even so much as look for reasons why things happen. Even though he's an astronaut/jock who's clearly been trained in macho self-determination and narrowmindedness. He only cares for one thing: getting off the planet he crash-landed on. That is his single motivation, leading him to be a rather one-dimensional character.
His expected human love interest is played by blonde model-actress Estella Warren, also very flat and her character is insignificant since she seems written to only follow Captain Leo around and give him looks of longing and desire, which will remain unfulfilled.
Ape-girl Ari vies for his attention/affection as well (which leads to a more significant question of inter-species love). I give credit to Bonham Carter for really bringing Ari to life. Her ape has warmth and personality as well as distinct mannerisms and body language. She is a sensitive monkey (with a soul, if that's possible).
Being a fan of philosophy, I wanted the film to not only showcase the thirty years of advancement in regards to technology, but I wanted the story to be deeper than it was, because it could have been so much better with a story that tackled philosophical subjects much like the fantastic novel "Animal Farm" (one of my favorite books from high school). "Planet of the Apes" could have been a social commentary. It could have been a parable of men and animals. There could have been reflections on things like: animal intelligence and rights, the interactions humans and animals have with one another, the morality of genetic engineering and advancement of technology for the benefit of human beings. But, alas, it was not. It forces you to do your own thinking on the matter, even though it's there, in the undertones of the film, Tim Burton never sees the point of asking and answering these questions thoughtfully.
I saw this in the theater with my great friend, Sean, during the summer of 2001 (when it came out) which coincided with his return from his Freshman year of college where he'd taken a Philosophy course and was always ready to have deep, meaningful, and thoughtful conversations. After this film we dissected it until it seemed we were beating a dead horse, and even then we could not determine whether we understood it or not. I think I do now, though. We were always very confused by the ending, where Leo escapes and crash-lands, again, this time in an apocalyptic Washington D.C. at the foot of the Jefferson Memorial, which has been replaced with an ape-like Jefferson and a new quote/creed in its background. Sean and I were confused about whether the ending was presenting us with a piece about time-machine and just what could have happened or gone wrong with his return. But now, I see that he didn't actually go anywhere, that he never really left the "Planet of the Apes" which is a commentary on evolution in a post-apocalyptic world where apes have taken over. I get it now! But, I still wasn't impressed with the film as a whole.
Comments
Post a Comment