Planet Of The Apes Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1280x544 | 8138.47 MiB | 720p | |
|
720x296 | 1276.62 MiB | hidivx | |
|
624x254 | 987.62 MiB | divx | |
|
320x144 | 462.57 MiB | ipod | |
|
320x132 | 260.35 MiB | hpc | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
Rule the planet.
On July 27th, take back the planet.
You'll be sorry you were ever born human
It is the year 2029: Astronaut Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg) boards a pod cruiser on a Space Station for a "routine" reconnaissance mission. But an aburupt detour through a space time wormhole lands him on a strange planet where talking apes rule over the human race. With the help of a sympathetic chimpanzee activist named Ari (Helena Bonham-Carter) and a small band of human rebels, Leo leads the effort to evade the advancing Gorilla Army led by General Thade (Tim Roth) and his most trusted warrior Attar (Michael Clarke Duncan). Now the race is on to reach a sacred temple within the planet's Forbidden Zone to discover the shocking secrets of mankind's past - and the key to its future.
| Mark Wahlberg | Captain Leo Davidson |
| Tim Roth | General Thade |
| Helena Bonham Carter | Ari |
| Michael Clarke Duncan | Colonel Attar |
| Paul Giamatti | Limbo |
| Estella Warren | Daena |
| Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa | Krull |
| David Warner | Senator Sandar |
| Kris Kristofferson | Karubi |
| Erick Avari | Tival |
| Lucas Elliott | Birn |
| Evan Parke | Gunnar |
| Glenn Shadix | Senator Nado |
| Freda Foh Shen | Bon |
| Chris Ellis | Lt. General Karl Vasich |
| Tim Burton |
5.50 out of 10 (52681 votes)
Visitor Reviews
animal planet
posted on 26 Aug 2009Having never seen the 1968 version, I went into this not knowing quite what to expect. It occurs to me that this film wouldn't exist without the Charlton Heston version and its sequels. Imagine if Franklin Schaffner had never adapted Pierre Boule's novel. Do you suppose that now someone would still come along and say, hey, that would make a good movie? Actually let me re-phrase that: would that make a movie ANYONE would be interested in seeing? Not likely. So having seen Tim Burton's newly 're-imagined' "Planet of the Apes," am I glad there was an original whos coat-tails it could ride? Well, it's not terrible. At times it's downright interesting. Ultimately, though, it's just unnecessary. But that doesn't mean you can't enjoy it as long as it's around. Like any Burton film, this one is about escape. It transports you to another place and time. The sets, the makeup, the effects all work hard to create this temporary reality. It's convincing but, visually, I was hoping for something more like "Sleepy Hollow." I was never amazed by anything in "Apes" but was stunned by some of the things Burton and his crew accomplished on such previous films as "Sleepy Hollow" and "Batman." "Apes" seemed like fertile ground for the same visual opportunities, but Burton doesn't make good. At best, he's made the kind of cheesy sci-fi he poked fun at in "Mars Attacks." The irony! This didn't look or feel like a Tim Burton film at all. Where is the weird coolness that creeps into every single shot? Think of "Batman," how it more than overcame that horrid script with Palance and Nicholson, along with Burton's twisted vision of Gotham City. And where did the humor go? Burton picks NOW to get serious? THIS film? I mean, if this was the best he was going to do with "Planet of the Apes," he should have just stuck his name on it as producer and let some up-and-comer direct (actually, that will happen with the inevitable sequel, er, sequels). Not even Tim Burton can save us from Summer 2001, a film lover's nightmare.Grade: C-
Good, but did anyone understand the ending?
posted on 26 Aug 2009To sum it all up the movie was alright, I wasn't expecting to be as good as the originals, but I just wanted to go see a film to see some good action...and excellent makeup. I gave it a 6/10, it would've been rated possibly a 7 or a 8, but the ending was confusing...and I still don't get it....
What was the point?
posted on 26 Aug 2009Until the end of the film this was an entertaining 6 out of 10. It lost a mark at the end for leaving a bad taste in the mouth thanks to an appalling and ridiculous ending. It made no sense. Until then it was an entertaining film. Visually amazing, the make up superb and Carter and Roth gave excellent performances. The story just never sparkled, however. This may be connected to the fact that Walberg doesn't have much screen presence. Comparing to Heston for a second (not just to compare to the original, but also to compare to a great leading actor), he commanded the screen, made you care what was happening and drew you into the film. Marky Mark may know how to model underwear, but a great actor he aint. There is something about him that made me just not care.At the end of the day, unless you've something new to say on the subject, someway to improve it beyond dated makeup, remakes are just pointless.
Nothing compared to the original!
posted on 18 Aug 2009They clearly had a good idea to work with. It was also called Planet of the Apes. Why they chose to take a perfectly good idea and change into a bad idea is beyond me. This movie was designed to please thirteen year olds.
Lots of monkeys jumping around and some cool special effects. Those of us who have seen the original and know that it was an intellectually effective movie, should generally be disappointed with this sad re-make. Don't get me wrong, the apes were cool looking and the special effects were decent. In fact, take the monkeys of today and put them in the Charleton Heston film 34 years ago and you'd really have something. I don't want to spoil the film for anyone so I won't, but what is the deal with the end? Those of you who have seen it know what I'm talking about. This is a perfect example of poor story telling, from completely undeveloped characters who suddenly play a somewhat surprisingly important role in the protagonists actions, to scenes which have even the most intelligent of critics at a loss (in reference to the end).I gave this movie 6 out of 10 because as I said, the monkeys are cool. I love Tim Roth and they obviously spent a great deal of time teaching the actors to act as apes. However, this is never enough to make up for a bad story (those apes evolved awfully fast). See it if you wish, but if you wish to see an updated Charleton Heston picture, don't bother. Just watch the original.
my intelligence was insulted by a brainless movie
posted on 18 Aug 2009I was totally disappointed. In fact, I've come to hate that movie for the exact opposite reasons that I disliked "A.I.", particularly after reading this report from the executive producer this morning."You're not supposed to be able to (explain it). If the truth be known, it wasn't really supposed to make sense. It was just supposed to go 'whoa,' make you think. Now is he in another world, did he go back in time, did he get forward in time? The reality is there's no firm answer to that. It's whatever you want it to be".What's up with that? First, the movie spoon-feeds you everything to the point that the arrive of Percales is not a surprise but rather expected. Then they tag on an ending which is complete nonsense.Compare this to AI which blind-sided the viewer with an oddball ending that no one understood; but at least Spielberg meant to have a logic to it. In AI there was something to actually think about and figure out after you left the theater--mind you, Spielberg did such a bad job at telling the story that it was almost impossible to figure out that the creatures at the end were mechas.Burton, on the other hand, tries to get us to think by showing us something that admittedly isn't supposed to be logical. How can a completely non-sequitor ending provoke thought? You can't have an intelligent conversation about it because apparently nothing in the previous 120 minutes had any clues, hints, or impact on the ending. It'd be like have Mark Wahlberg land on a planet where people smoke grits in the ears and chew gum with their feet and say, "hey, I bet you didn't see that coming!" That's just stupid, stupid, stupid!On top of all that, Wahlberg's character has to be the most underdeveloped character in the history of movie making. All we know about Leo is that he wants to get off the planet. Is he concerned at all about the humans with him? We're never too sure. What about the system of slavery? He never gives it a second's thought? Gosh, we're not even sure if the guy prefers money maidens over pouty-lipped ladies!Burton gave us absolutely nothing to endear ourselves to the main character. He was neither noble or un-noble, he neither inspired us or pi***ed us off. Leo was simply there; trying to get off the planet. I've seen more interesting characters while watching "USA Up All Night!" Heck, you never even get the impression that he was really pi***ed off at the general; I mean, come on, get pissed, offended, or sad. I guess I was under the false assumption that everyone was passionate about something.The only reason this movie doesn't receive the lowest rating possible is because it wasn't actually painful to watch.
There should be a prequel, not a sequel
posted on 18 Aug 2009"Planet" was, until the last 5 minutes of it, a great movie. The apes look very realistic thanks to Rick Baker's make-up design, which definitely is Oscar worthy. The actors playing the apes were superb, I almost forgot that there were humans under all that make-up, while the human actors almost took away from the movie. *SPOILER* The time travel story line is what really hooked me onto this movie. The twist of Leo being indirectly responsible for the apes creation and domination over humans yet also being directly responsible for getting apes and humans to live in peace is genius. I'm very curious as to how exactly the apes got smarter and stronger. Instead of a sequel from the absolutely awful ending, I think there should instead be a prequel, something like "Before the Planet of the Apes". I heard the rumor that 5 endings were shot for this film but both why Tim Burton chose this ending makes no sense.
Not nearly as good as the original
posted on 18 Aug 2009This is not a bad "remake" but I still get a feeling that the original is, even though it is set back more than 20 years still highly superior in every way, only special effects are better but that can hardly be called an accomplishment considering the technical possibilities compared to the 60's. The first Apes movie spawned 4 sequels that got worse with every film, If this one is followed by one or more sequels I really hope these sequels can beat the sequels to the original ones. Go out to the video store and rent them both, you will know what I mean, the original is super(ior), the "remake" is not bad.
leave it to tim burton to ruin movies
posted on 16 Aug 2009********warning: spoilers*********i've always hated tim butron, but this totally uncalled for. it first starts out good, emphesising on the space part of the story and explaining the origin of the ape domination. it also got rid of that whole "the planet being earth" bullcrap (i mean, of course it's earth dingleberry you can breath on the planet!!!!!).then we hear the humans talking. it then becomes automatically awful. the only reason for the ape domination is that the humans can't talk. then there's that stupid ending that makes no sense at all (and isn't suposed too, remember, this is a tim burton movie).terrible acting by mark wahlberg too.
A strange and Wonderful Love Letter to Insane Sci-Fi
posted on 16 Aug 2009Sci Fi- It's often scolded by most in this world, and sadly now such Sci-Fi films are most viciously attacked by their own fans! The fact it that this is a flawed movie, saved by Tim Burton's fantastic Visual Style and Danny Elfmans terrific score. The Cultural references are terrific: but once they are scrutinized further- sure it's unlikely that Apes would develop beautiful armour reminiscent of Ancient Armour worn by Turkish Knight in their religious wars, but man they look terrific and fill this strange world with a rich history and culture! While most merely see "REMAKE" up in lights and scoff at Hollywood- the film is more of a tribute to The concept of what Planet of the Apes has become, evolved with the help of fans through a horde of crappy sequels and weak spin off television series to the point where Pierre Boulle and what we know as Planet of the Apes are actually worlds apart. Bravely however, the films controversial finale is not to be taken seriously in any way! The ending which I will not give away, is an homage to many things.It's a tribute to Insane Sci- Fi, The deliberately profound endings to both the original film and Boulle's novel, and having a bit of a chuckle.It's like the Twilight Zone without taking itself seriously in any way.
F#ck this crappy movie!
posted on 14 Aug 20092 hours of mark mark huffing and puffing. Are you kidding? Mark Mark spends the whole movie looking like a little girl. It's like every time he talks, he is exhausted. In shape my ass. The only plus side is the great strides in human/monkey relations. OH, and how does one fuel cell only give them one blast when his stupid, ugly mini space ship at the end could travel through time with no room for a fuel cell at all. And the ending makes no bracken sense. Monkeys on motorcycles...only at a circus...stupid. Is there any explanation as to the ending of the movie. I'm pretty sure movies can't make complex machines like engines and factories to make cars. WTF. Oh yea, and why does shifty eyes try to sell crack to the kids at the end of the movie. Matter of fact, I need to start taking some crack after seeing the crap.DON'T WATCH THIS monkey malarkey
Apart from Helen Bonham Carter, there is nothing worthy about this movie.
posted on 08 Aug 2009Apart from Helen Bonham Carter, there is nothing worthy about this movie....And the surprise ending?! The thought of a sequel is even more annoying. Save your money, wait for the video and ignore that too.
this is weak
posted on 06 Aug 2009What the hell ? This is one of the poorest films I have ever seen. At first it seemed quite average, but then, I decided to think about the ending in the context of the rest of the film. It made so little sense that I threw the DVD into space, hoping that it would travel through time a few times, and give me an idea of what happened in the film.Unfortunately I doubt there is any logical reason as to why the earth became controlled by Apes.I was never quite sure what year he was in, or what planet he was on, so I assumed -at first- that the ending made sense. Of course this later obviously became disproven. All in all there was no need for:Most of the ApesMost of the HumansThe ending
Who directed this film and what have you done with Tim Burton?
posted on 04 Aug 2009I am a huge fan of all of Tim Burton's previous films. They contain fantastical fairytale worlds inhabited by beautiful and strange beings. They have a degree of warmth regarding the beauty of the outsider. His almost baroque and gothic imagery are sublime within their own right, and the ultimate message of understanding and appreciating those who are different completes this magical composition. His wonderfully facetious dark and light humor dominate and charm audiences. None of these qualities were present in Planet of the Apes. Mark Wahlburg was an unsypathetic hero with very little character development or history. The same can be said for the rest of the cast sans the comic relief character of the slave trader. No magic here, except for the disappearance of Burton's usual artistic and unique vision. I honestly could not believe that he directed it. Tim, please, come back to us!
you have to do one thing to enjoy this movie
posted on 04 Aug 2009Do not think.I managed to forget all about how much I enjoyed the original movie - but that one never inspired me to think anyway.This movie hits you over the head with such rampant stupidity right from the start that you are forced to think about it. And once you start thinking, you will know after the first fifteen minutes exactly how the story will climax, so you may as well leave for an hour or so since it just gets worse (although you might want to stay just to see Charlton Heston actually giving up a gun), and come back for the last fifteen minutes just to see the non-surprise ending, since it is no surprise at all if you think about it - did you really expect them all to just get along? Then again I told you not to think if you really want to watch this movie, so you have been forewarned.
Entertaining but with some weak points
posted on 04 Aug 2009I believe that if it was even less related to the original it would be better. In addition there would be less comparisons with a movie considered a classic.The effects and make up were simply outstanding, the apes the most interesting and complex than the humans. It is worth to watch it just for that.On the other hand the script was weak and the surprise ending does nothing to the story other than an obvious nod to a sequel.Regardless I had a pleasant evening. Gave it a 6
Waste of Four dollars and Eleven Cents!
posted on 29 Jul 2009I was unfortunate enough to pick this movie up today at the local video store after seeing a slightly above average rating on this site. Sadly, this is the first time the ratings have been, in my opinion, totally inaccurate. From the savages to the apes, I can't help but laugh at the pathetic dialogue, poor, uhm, acting?, and the, well, general atrocity of the overall movie. The blond savage was the highlight of this movie with her sequined(I didn't actually notice the sequins, but it was commented by the rest of the excited crowd gagging on the movie), tight-fitting, low-cut cave woman swimsuit, and I can't forget to mention the sexy red lipstick she manages to keep smudge-free throughout the movie. *note: i just heard "what a crap movie!" as i'm typing this review. For some odd reason, the rest of them are still watching the blockbuster.Don't waste your time!!!
What were they thinking?
posted on 27 Jul 2009My overview is that the special effects and sets are good, the make up and costuming are excellent, the dialog is silly and the plot is ridiculous. The lesson learned is, don't monkey around with a good thing! What more can I say?Recommendation: Go to Block Buster and rent the original movie.
Not as good as the original... just not at all good.
posted on 27 Jul 2009I saw this movie with some friends who loved the original (like me) and some who had never seen it. The result was unanimous, and echoes by other movie-goers at the theatre. We literally laughed at very climatic scenes. I mean, the entire theatre, on opening weekend, busted out laughing at the major points in the movie. These were near the end, not a result of the cool-looking outfits and sets, but a result of poor directing and a heavy dose of melodrama. This film makes no social commentary, as the original did. This film was boring to watch and unsatisfying at the end. It was a huge waste of time and money, only serving to mar the image of the lovable original.
Steaming pile.
posted on 27 Jul 2009I loved the original. It had a lot more to it than a simple sci-fi flick.
Everyone agrees with that. Did I expect this remake to be up to the same level? No. I went in with a fresh perspective, letting the movie stand on its own. What a mistake that was.One ‘plot' point that bothered me was all the people wanting to see the man who defies the apes, since they defy the apes every day by congregating in roving bands of scavengers evading capture. Also, there is a difference between giving the ending a hanging twist, the sort that requires you to think, and incomprehensible one. Oh, and the two swiped lines from the original ("Get your stinking hands off me..." and "Damn them...") had the feeling of being forced into the script. They just did not flow.Warren is a horrible actress. Wahlberg was fairly stiff. Bonham-Carter was a caricature. Roth was the stereotypical mister-mean-man. The script was just plain weak and the craft of storytelling was nonexistent.So, I thought I would read the book. Let's see, the beginning was nothing like the book, the ending had little in common with the book, the middle wasn't really that much like the book. However, there were talking apes...
So, yeah, it was similar in that respect.I am glad I only rented this. Well, not really.
Does plenty well everything a movie is supposed to do, and does it GRAND!!!
posted on 26 Aug 2009Wonderful movie! Although not without some flaws, but well worthseeing and enjoying. After seeing it this morning, I was surprisedto discover that this evening I felt like seeing it again. So, I'll catch itagain within a week or two.WARNING--SPOILERS The entire gorilla cast was magnificent! Truly and reallyastounding work by the makeup guys-- but more, by the actorsthemselves. Not once did I think-- Hey, there's Roddy McDowell ina gorilla suit! The animal characters were so believable. Thehumans were less than grand, though. Kris Kristoffersen wasamazing-- a welcome and remarkable acting re-appearance, andtotally apt for his role.The blond babe: Whats-her-name, was serviceable, but nothingspecial. Markie Mark -- I mean Mark Wahlberg-- is a fine actor,generally. But here his character is annoying and dumb. I kind ofwanted to see him killed pretty much right away.Helena Bonham-Carter-- all I can say is you've got to see her tobelieve her! Even though any role as a gorilla lady would be,professionally, a bit of a burlesque, she made it into somethingworthwhile. Appropriate to the spirit of the movie-- but I say that hercharacter in this flick outdoes and therefore embarrasses JuliaRoberts, in ANYTHING Roberts has EVER done. Bonham-Cartergets an exquisite performance out of the circumstances, whichspeaks highly of her genius and mastery of acting.The ending, though-- What the F*** was that??? Talk aboutsomething happening simply because the script, or pre-fab cliche,demands it! Knowing critic Roger Ebert's movie law that "No propis featured in a movie without a purpose/payoff later on"-- seeingso much attention paid to the real chimp in the beginning was aclear tip-off that somehow he'd show up later, etc. I also couldguess the secret source of the ape planet within 8 seconds of itsfirst mention. I'm sure most other audience members did as well.But when Wahlberg goes back in time to earth and finds that AbeLincoln is a gorilla dude? That is illogical, even in a 1960's vibesci-fi movie. What's the logic? It makes no sense, and thus hadabsolutely no effect on me.On the other hand-- so what? This great flick does plenty enoughof what a movie is supposed to do, and it does it really well. Maybeit ain't Shakespeare-- but from what I've read, in his time,Shakespeare himself wasn't Shakespeare either.Go see "Planet of the Apes." Be glad; be happy!