I realise that action movies aren't meant to be realistic but these characters needed to be far more interesting and believable if they were going to draw me in.
"Having established that Will is a strong-minded yet reckless individual, the writers have then tried to change him into someone more caring and level-headed. We pan 8 years into the future and see Will pleading with his boss (who has also had a personality transformation) to slow down the testing of the wonder drug. He is worried about things getting out of control â?? rather hypocritical given his own actions."
So 8 years passed and we have to explain to you that the 8 year relationship with the monkey Ceasar, could not or could change the way of thinking of Will in some way? 8 years can do a lot in a human being!
Moron!
"Throughout this, Willâ??s girlfriend (Pinto) is ignorant to the fact that his pet ape has super intelligence despite herself being a veterinarian. Will confides in her years later but Iâ??m not sure why it comes as such as shock. Further, she doesnâ??t seem to have too many concerns about the fact Caesar spends much of his life cooped up in suburbia."
She is just a veterinarian and the guys girlfriend, not the monkey's girlfriend.
They know each other for how long?
" Iâ??ve alluded to some of my concerns above but I also had trouble with the apes and the ease with which they communicated (even without the drugs). The use of subtitles in a couple of scenes left me laughing but Iâ??m not sure that was the intent of director Rupert Wyatt (The Escapist)."
Apes and other animals are smarter than you think and maybe the use of subtitles were you to help people understand several scenes better.
Aug 2 - 12:35 AM
I'm sorry, but the "Apes and other animals are smarter than you think" is pretty funny, man. It's only a movie, one that you presumably haven't seen yet. He's not insulting you or anything. He's just DOING HIS JOB.
Aug 2 - 02:28 AM
If you saw Project Nim you would think a little differently... this isn't so far from fiction (in response to "it's only a movie.")
Aug 2 - 07:28 AM
You don't know how the actual "project nim" science wound up, do you? It was a failure.
Aug 2 - 10:04 AM
@Sideways It reminds me of it, I should've said; this is completely different. They're using a chemical compound in a MOVIE (not like I'm taking it that seriously) as opposed to merely raising the chimp like a child (though, it appears he's also raised like a child.) And it is debatable. If the variables were changed and more subjects were tested... who knows. One study will be built upon, mark my words; they always are.
Aug 3 - 08:15 AM
I've seen apes, dogs and dolphins, hell, even pigs, do shit that would make you question what you've heard over the years. Animals are much smarter than people think.
Aug 2 - 09:05 AM
If the Ape is played by Andy Serkis there really is no need for sub titles. His performances through looks movement and expression have spoken louder then most actress can do with hours of dialog.
Aug 2 - 01:42 PM
I know Yanks like to drop the U from words like Honour and Harbour, but how else can you spell Tyre?
Aug 2 - 12:51 PM
Is that how you spell 'tire'? That's silly. So it's tyres and tyred then too? I would think tyred would sound like tie-red...
Aug 2 - 01:43 PM
I was saying like sleepy tired. Wheel tire and sleepy/bored tire are spelled the same in the US. Not so elsewhere?
Aug 3 - 06:34 AM
How much more interesting can a chimp glaring at you with those sharp, penetrating, thoughtful eyes be?
Aug 2 - 08:49 AM
Just from looking at the trailer you know this movie is retarded.
Defranco as a lead scientist? c'mon. lol.
Aug 2 - 09:15 AM
Franco has some serious acting power. 127 hours alone proved me wrong about this guy.
Aug 2 - 09:22 AM
he's a great actor...but doesn't fit the role as a lead scientist.
some people just don't fit into certain roles.
Aug 2 - 10:53 AM
ugh...you guys just don't get it apparently.
Regardless...this whole movie is pointless because you know how it ends.
Aug 3 - 08:37 AM
Is Apollo 13 pointless because you know how it ends, no, and the list goes on and on, don't say ignorant things win you've lost an arguement, it makes you seem extra helpless.
Aug 3 - 09:41 AM
@ toomasio
I think my theatre could disagree with you, infact I disagree with you.
He was an awesome LEAD scientist...and an awesome part of this film. In fact, I will be seein this film again just because how great the character developemtn and built up was...and the best thing about this film was the references, and how well they presented this REBOOT with an origin story. See the movie than judge it.
Aug 5 - 01:33 AM
Toomey has turned into a retarted critic, like many critics have recently. He shouldn't have had such high expectations for the film. It is obvious it will be worthless trash.
Aug 2 - 10:34 AM
wasn't the biggest fan of the Mark Wahlberg Planet of the Apes, but I'm a huge Franco fan and I'm really looking forward to this
Aug 2 - 03:49 PM
I like how in that movie one man with a gun defeats a planet full of apes wielding spears, and in this movie 1000 apes with spears defeat a planet full of men wielding guns. Oh, and in the latter the apes are supposed to be less developed than in the former too. Har!
Aug 2 - 04:09 PM
Actually, the apes with spears take down a single guy in a single scene on the streets of San Francisco. Admittedly, the police response in the movie seems less than organized.
Aug 2 - 09:55 PM
haha spot on. i don't require a ton of realism, but i mean...a pack of apes with spears took down SWAT, Rangers, Spetsnaz? there's a line somewhere.
I'd take me some good fiction any day over this crap. Give me Children of Men or another 28 days later and were good
Aug 2 - 10:11 PM
you're bringing me down Matthew Toomey. Your review track record seems like you can tolerate some shitty movies... so this makes me nervous. You bastard.
Aug 2 - 11:10 PM
After reading Matt's whole review.. I'm now officially worried. I was looking for the same edgier film Matthew was but it looks like they're playing it super safe here. damn it.
Aug 2 - 11:18 PM
Only six reviews by Wednesday? Looks like another bomb that's being hidden from the eyes of critics.
Aug 3 - 12:20 AM
This movie is going to be awesome....ITs an origin story (not saying origin stories always a success). This movie just looks very well developed and character based, almost like they took time to make rather than rushed. I have my fingers crossed because, I'm hoping it does do great in the Box Office and we do get more after this since the director has announced 2 more sequels if successful. :)
Aug 3 - 02:47 AM
Ted Chalfen
well that was nice while it lasted...i guess. let's see how many more of these we get.
Aug 1 - 11:45 PM
Devia Tan-Navarro
this'll get at least 150 reviews... but a rotten one this early on is a bad sign.
Aug 2 - 12:19 AM
Reservoir Man
Not necessarily. I've seen movies before start out in the tens to only shoot up heroically, but just the opposite as well. You can't really tell. At any rate, the commercials and all the material I've seen have given me the impression that this movie is more of a sci-fi drama, which culminates in the giant action scene on the bridge. So I guess if he's judging it by a genre it isn't exclusively supposed to be, that easily explains the negative review.
Aug 2 - 12:37 AM
Tyler Schwab
Inglorious Basterds started in the 50's after Cannes. Now it's at like 88 or 89. Julie and Julia was in the 20's... not it's in the 60's or 70's. The list goes on and on.
Aug 2 - 01:24 PM
Brian Fredericksen
The movies first 10 reviews have no influence whatsoever.
Aug 2 - 07:36 AM
John Rival
then after the fanboys insult the review we get the typical insults pointed towards fanboys. Right Mattieu? Same shit, different movie.
Aug 3 - 12:27 PM