I tried watching this film probably about five years ago and gave up the effort about half way through. Figuring I might have been having a bad day I decided to give it a try again. I'm glad I did because there was actually some thought provoking stuff here just as you had in the original film, with ideas explored concerning racial/species intolerance, animal rights, and the concept of equality in general. Some of it was presented in clichéd dialog, which I agree can be a turn off, but if you listen attentively, a lot of it is applicable to the present day. One of the most insightful was the observation that "The human problem cannot be solved by simply throwing money at it".
There's an idea that occurred to me while watching the picture I haven't seen expressed anywhere else and it has to do with the names of the principal characters. The anagram of each name has a connotation that intrinsically describes the nature of that character. For example, take General Thade. An anagram of Thade would be Death, and he was certainly the personification of violent, deadly hatred toward humans. Others I came up with include:
Semos = Moses, the mythical ape who was considered the savior of his race, having insured the place of apes above humans in a 'Promised Land' of sorts.
Ari = Air, as in having an ethereal quality required to bridge an understanding between the apes and human inhabitants of the planet.
Even the name of Mark Wahlberg's character has a Biblical reference if you will. Davidson = David's Son, or Son of David, a name often associated with Jesus Christ who was descended from the Family of David. I haven't read the Pierre Boulle novel on which the film was based, so I don't know if these were names he gave his characters, but if this word play regarding the characters is merely coincidental, the odds I think would be astronomical.
Anyway, that's what I thought about while watching the picture. And what is good science fiction if not making you think about what you're watching and/or reading? Beyond that, there's no question the time/space implications of the story lend themselves to serious head scratching. Upon first seeing the ruins of the Oberon space station, the representation called to mind the spires on the crown of the Statue of Liberty which signaled an obvious swipe from the original movie. But then we got to the crux of the Calima business, and I thought that was done pretty cleverly.
So all in all, I thought the film makers did a decent job here in re-imagining the original screenplay, while offering food for thought in any number of areas touched upon in the script. Probably more so than even the awkward ending with the Thade Memorial, my biggest question was why Captain Davidson left Pericles behind.
There's an idea that occurred to me while watching the picture I haven't seen expressed anywhere else and it has to do with the names of the principal characters. The anagram of each name has a connotation that intrinsically describes the nature of that character. For example, take General Thade. An anagram of Thade would be Death, and he was certainly the personification of violent, deadly hatred toward humans. Others I came up with include:
Semos = Moses, the mythical ape who was considered the savior of his race, having insured the place of apes above humans in a 'Promised Land' of sorts.
Ari = Air, as in having an ethereal quality required to bridge an understanding between the apes and human inhabitants of the planet.
Even the name of Mark Wahlberg's character has a Biblical reference if you will. Davidson = David's Son, or Son of David, a name often associated with Jesus Christ who was descended from the Family of David. I haven't read the Pierre Boulle novel on which the film was based, so I don't know if these were names he gave his characters, but if this word play regarding the characters is merely coincidental, the odds I think would be astronomical.
Anyway, that's what I thought about while watching the picture. And what is good science fiction if not making you think about what you're watching and/or reading? Beyond that, there's no question the time/space implications of the story lend themselves to serious head scratching. Upon first seeing the ruins of the Oberon space station, the representation called to mind the spires on the crown of the Statue of Liberty which signaled an obvious swipe from the original movie. But then we got to the crux of the Calima business, and I thought that was done pretty cleverly.
So all in all, I thought the film makers did a decent job here in re-imagining the original screenplay, while offering food for thought in any number of areas touched upon in the script. Probably more so than even the awkward ending with the Thade Memorial, my biggest question was why Captain Davidson left Pericles behind.