Planet of the Apes 2001 - Most dissapointing sequel ever?

[presto]

Planet of the Apes 2001 had awesome make up and scene design but everything else was awful. However the real reason I posted was to see if anyone could explain some goofs and plot dumbness:

1) In the original POTA series the humans were mute presumably less intelligent so the astronauts stood out. In this movie there is no difference between the humans in this time and the astronaut. OK he happens to run into some timid ones but are they all really sitting around waiting for someone who can open a cage with a knife and then say "Let's get out of here?"

2) When they are in the jungle and the slave trader ape jumps out at them doesn't he have two Gorillas with him who hold the boy? After one shot is fired by the astronaut they both vanish. It doesn't look like they get killed and the ultraliberal femal ape doesn't go see how they are. Did I miss something or did they really just vanish as in some kind of editing mistake?

3) In the old series the actors had foam pieces stuck to their faces with false teeth in front of their real lips to give that ape muzzle look. Does any one know if they did that or not in this movie? Somewhere along the line I decided that they didn't and you are really seeing the actors real lips and teeth but they still achieved that ape muzzle look somehow.

4) Does the ending make any sense? I hated the movie so much I can't say I put a lot of thought into the time travel lines but it sure didn't seem to make any sense.

[Epicurus8a]

Apes (2001) was a re-make (not a sequel). Anyway, the costumes, make-up, effects, etc. were quite good. Unfortunately, the writing was quite bad. Consequently the movie sucked. Yes, you are correct the ending made no sense. I suppose the writers wanted to add a new/different twist to the movie. Unfortunately, they failed miserably.

[Forum Troll]

Worst sequels of all time:

[spiderman2k1]

Planet of the Apes 2001 was not a remake, but a revision.

If it's not broke don’t fix it.

[SquirrelDip]

Another problem is that the original POTA has turned into quite a cult classic - IMO the 2001 version would have been viewed as bad no matter how good it was.

[adam]

The movie had a few distracting plotholes, but otherwise I thought it was decent.

If you have any questions about the ending just watch the movie with the commentary track on. Burton says that its not supposed to make sense because its completely open ended. The studio told him they were eventually going to make a sequel where Earth gets taken over by apes. They only wanted the character to end up on such a planet. It doesn't seem to make sense because the explanation will come in the sequal.

The general theory is that the one bad ape somehow fixed the pod that sank and used it to travel to the Earth of the past, where he proceeded to take it over.

[Epicurus8a]

one bad ape somehow fixed the pod that sank and used it to travel to the Earth of the past, where he proceeded to take it over.

This makes sense. It was a terrible mistake on their part not to show some of this. Or are they just saying this as a cover-up? Either way, the ending made no sense to the theater goer and this is the primary reason the movie is bad. This likely caused the Box Office receipts to be lower than they expected, and hence no sequel.

There have been more disappointing movies, though. Just look at the EXORCIST sequels or the Roger Moore/James Bond films (those were pretty bad).

[adam]

When he looks at what should be the Lincoln Memorial he sees that its actually a statute of Thade. If you catch this then I think it makes it pretty obvious that wherever he is, its a planet corrupted by Thade.

The ending to the original POTA was so powerful and really disturbing. I think they felt that they had to do something similar by giving it a total twist at the end. And they had such incredible liberties with the ending since it was meant to be a cliffhanger and dealt with both time and space travel, so he could have ended up anywhere and they'd just explain it all away in the sequel.

I'd be very suprised if the sequel wasn't being worked on right now in some form.

[adam]

1) In the original POTA series the humans were mute presumably less intelligent so the astronauts stood out. In this movie there is no difference between the humans in this time and the astronaut. OK he happens to run into some timid ones but are they all really sitting around waiting for someone who can open a cage with a knife and then say "Let's get out of here?"

Its matter of timing. In the first POTA the ape world is an evolution of our modern society. I think it must have taken place over 1000's of years, where ordinary apes evolved and humans just lost their collective culture including language over this time. They were enslaved for so long, they forgot their history.

In the remake the evolution takes place over a much short time period (hundreds of years?) because the apes are evolving from the genetically altered genius apes. Presumably if the apes were normal, the humans in the remake wouldn't be able to speak either by the time the Walberg got there.

3) In the old series the actors had foam pieces stuck to their faces with false teeth in front of their real lips to give that ape muzzle look. Does any one know if they did that or not in this movie? Somewhere along the line I decided that they didn't and you are really seeing the actors real lips and teeth but they still achieved that ape muzzle look somehow.

From looking at the special features on the DVD they used different techniques for different types of monkeys (orangutan, gorilla, etc..) but most did involve a full facial prostethus. The actors all comment in the extras about how they had to exaggerate their speech to make their fake mouths actually move. Movie magic has just come a long way since then. I thought the make-up and movements were really convincing.

[offline]

The movie had a few distracting plotholes, but otherwise I thought it was decent.

I loved it from start to finish. It was not perfect by
any means but I found no errors serious enough
to make me dislike the film. I thought it was one
of the best remakes I have seen.

Yes I am a fan of the original and this 2001
version was different. Great!

[Epicurus8a]

When he looks at what should be the Lincoln Memorial he sees that its actually a statute of Thade.

This is from so far in left field that it doesn't make sense to most viewers. They should have shown him working with the pod earlier in the film. A few quick shots would have been sufficient. This would fill in the huge gap in the storyline, and yet leave it completely open for a sequel.

[adam]

Its supposed to leave you guessing, and even cussing a bit maybe. Look at it this way, you said you didn't like the film at all so presumably you'd have no interest in a sequel, but aren't you a tad bit curious to see it just to understand what happened at the end of the first one? If so then the ending accomplished its purpose for you.

I think its safe to say they took a risk with ending, so most people are either gonna love it or hate it.

[Epicurus8a]

There are many films that have been cut for time due to the studios demands. (Shorter films mean more showings per day, and therefore more $$$.) Often times the storyline suffers because of this. When these films are eventually released on VHS or DVD, the cut scenes are sometimes restored, and the storyline improves. Do recall any mention of cut scenes in Apes? If so, Burton was probably a victim of the studio's demands. But I suspect he had complete control of the film. Maybe I should check out the DVD...

Adam, I've enjoyed this chat. Thanks!

[offline]

I'd be very suprised if the sequel wasn't being worked on right now in some form.

I'd like to think so. The ending really fired the imagination.

20th Century Fox was reported as saying in
2003 that there would be another Apes movie.
Apparently they have too much invested in
POTA to just let it die.

However Tim Burton is not expected to
direct it, and the next film is likely not
to be a sequel. but a whole new movie.
Thats the grist on the rumour mill anyway.

What is interesting is that, according to some,
another ending had been shot, and that it was
replaced days before the film premiered, with
the Earth Ape scene as we saw it.

[Soopafresh]

"Worst" Sequel? -"Godfather 3". This isn't Caddyshack, it's Coppola. Oh, how the mighty fell on that one. What could have been, what could have been.

[adam]

Epicurus8a

I saw it in the theatres and watched all of the DVD including watching it with director's commentary, as I always do. I didn't notice any difference and I don't recall Burton ever complaining about the studio butchering his movie. I'm guessing it has the usual fare of deleted scenes (I forget) but in any case I'm pretty sure none of them do anything to explain the ending or foreshadow what will happen in the sequel.

[Conquest10]

What is interesting is that, according to some,
another ending had been shot, and that it was
replaced days before the film premiered, with
the Earth Ape scene as we saw it.

The rumor is that he shot a couple of "different" endings. All of them the same. Statue of Libery with ape head, Licoln with ape head, Sphinx with ape head, Mount Rushmore with ape heads, etc. Seems that they were just rumors and that he had a hard of enough time coming up with the ending you see.

BTW, I just put on the DVD to check out something, remind me to NEVER watch that again. It kept crashing PowerDVD (its the only DVD to ever do that). There are no deleted scenes on either of the discs. There are only extended versions of the scenes already in the movie. Totally worthless IMO.

[presto]

Did anyone watch the movie and check out the scene when they escape to the jungle? What happened to the vanishing gorillas I mentioned in my first post?

More goofs - Why does the chimp need a space suit? Why do they need the chimp at all? If the pod isn't pressurized why doesn't the lead need a space suit on the return trip?

[offline]

Seems that they were just rumors and that he had a hard of enough time coming up with the ending you see.

I stand corrected.

As for the space suit..

That is where the life sign telltales are
held for health monitoring. They also act as a
micro climate to make the life support more
efficient and, in an emergency, can help
sustain life.

In real life it also protects the public from full frontal
ape nuditiy and the prop from being
soiled. You wanna see some naked ape presto? Kinda kinky huh?

[offline]

Worst Remake ever made!?

My vote would go to Lost In Space.
What a dreadful movie! Hurt acted like
he was in a coma. One of the worst
abuses of CGI since its invention.

[yoda313]

Hi,

Oh yeah - LOST IN SPACE Stunk!

That was absolutely stupid!

Kevin

[presto]

Worst Remake ever made!?

My vote would go to Lost In Space.
What a dreadful movie! Hurt acted like
he was in a coma. One of the worst
abuses of CGI since its invention.

Sitting in the theater watching Lost In Space I got kind of mesmerized. I thought it was the best movie adaptation of a TV show I had ever seen. I loved the way they paid homage to the old show while still updating it. One example is that the ship blasted off looking like the old Jupiter II and then lost it's shell to reveal the new look for the ship. They did a similar thing with the robot.

Unfortunately shortly after the scene with the metal spiders the movie went really bad. It felt to me like the director was fired and the corporate boys took over. I can't exactly detail what I'm saying but that is the way it felt.

Add to that the fact that the actor who played will as a boy was bland and the one played him as an adult was repulsive somehow. The part where Dr Smith morphed gave me flashbacks to Men In Black where the bug inhabits the human and then molts out to be a ridiculously huge creature.

[Tool Man]

I think the ending of the 'remake' was closer to the original book than the Charlton Heston movie. It's been a while from I've read it.
I still prefer the old movies though.

[Conquest10]

I think the ending of the 'remake' was closer to the original book than the Charlton Heston movie.

I've head that a couple of times before. I got to get around to reading it one of these days. I still prefer the Heston ending, though.

[BJ_M]

Tim Burton's new "Planet of the Apes" is actually a remake--excuse me, a "re-imagining"--of the first TWO movies of the old series. Its occasional paraphrasing of lines from the original movie (devoid of any meaningful context), and its cameos by members of the original cast (Charlton Heston and Linda Harrison), only underscore that this new version isn't what the original was, i.e., an original. Mark Wahlberg, as Our Hero, has none of the cynical, edgy complexity of Heston's Taylor, and is in fact the sort of can-do flyboy Taylor found laughable. Much as I adore Helena Bonham Carter, her turn as Ari, a sultry, sexy, meddling, annoying human-rights activist, is ultimately tiresome, and absolutely incomparable to Kim Hunter's brave, brilliant, impish Zira of the old series. The role is also a criminal waste of Bonham Carter's beauty, hidden as it is behind a bizarre makeup that looks neither ape nor human. Rick Baker's highly-touted ape makeups (which I've enjoyed since the days of "Schlock" and "Kentucky Fried Movie") are highly uneven here. Tim Roth's villainous Thade has the best, with most of the rest being just adequate and no particular improvement over John Chambers' work in the original. And the socko ending (keep reading; I won't spoil it for you) is simply tacked on: unlike the jolting end of the original, it neither ties together nor arises from the movie's earlier action in a way that Explains Everything. Instead, it begs so many questions (mainly "How the heck did THAT happen?") that it seems engineered (or contrived) solely to set the stage for more sequels. All told, this is "Apes Lite," a comic-bookish caricature of the original, made for the short-attention-span crowd. It made me want to do something I hadn't done in ages: fire up the the original again. It's typical of the 1968 movie's gritty, clever irony that the first word of dialogue uttered by an ape--his entire line, in fact--is "Smile."




# Charlton Heston, spokesman for the NRA, is the only ape on the planet to own a gun.

# When released on DVD 20th Century Fox included a card to try to explain the reworked Tim Burton ending. It said "Maybe someone went back to earth before Captain Leo Davidson".
The "reworked" Tim Burton ending for this film is based on the original book ending as written by Pierre Boulle.





I would like to know how the chimps got a iced drink in that one scene - its very hot outside and in that area - year around , there are no mountains close by and no freezers of course ...


there are 100s of plot holes -- subject of much speculation ...


Unsurprisingly Tim also quotes on the commentary that " ...half way through it...I wanted to get out of making this film"

[BJ_M]

The two moons are the clue that Leo is not on Earth!

it is a different planet --completly ....


but of course - how did the horses get there ? no one can seem to figure it out ..

[offline]

You have to accept some plot inconsistencies. I mean
jeeze... how could you ever watch Star Trek or
Star Wars and enjoy the experience?

It is science fiction people, and not even hard SF but
leaning towards the fantasy side. If people are so
concerned about the horses how about asking how
in the hell the apes can talk in the first place?? not
to mention how a "space storm" can induce
time travel.

FWIW POTA was not as bad or as good as it could
have been. The original was a classic and imo you
can never beat a classic. Comparing the two films
is crazy. Picking apart the new film to this extent
is unfair and ultimately fruitless imo.

I think POTA “revised” was a good effort. Even when
I first heard it was being 'remade' I knew they could
never win over lovers of the original. That is why
I saw it with an open mindset and enjoyed it.

[presto]

You have to accept some plot inconsistencies. I mean
jeeze... how could you ever watch Star Trek or
Star Wars and enjoy the experience?

I agree that any film can be picked apart. The problem is that in a well made film you aren't distracted by whatever inconsitancies or even goofs end up in the film. My problem with the new Planet of the Apes is that for me (and this is personal) I was all set to love it and these inexplicable things jumped out at me and ruined the film.

Basically I just didn't enjoy the film and I then try to figure out why. I think BJm probably did a better job of explaining it than I did.

[vhelp]

What I didn't understand (the ending part) was when he returned to
earth, only to find it run by Apes. I didnt (I forgot) the correct
sequence of evenes (in 2001 version) how this happed. Didn't the
first apge (small chimp) get shot or something in the end ??
And, what made him go back ??

(I have the dvd, but i'm too lazy to look for it, rada rada)

Thanks,
-vhelp 3330

[BJ_M]

he didnt return to earth .... there were two moons