Double Feature Duel:
The Brothers Bloom vs. Planet of the Apes (2001)
The Brothers Bloom vs. Planet of the Apes (2001)
The Brothers Bloom: Quirky, different, funny – everything I want from a Dirty Scoundrels remake. No, the entirety of the story didn’t add up completely, but I really like the characters, especially everybody except Adrian Brody, strangely. 7 bugs.
Planet of the Apes (2001): Boy did Tim Burton drive
this into the ground. My guess is he just wanted to have a reason to make a
bunch of slightly more ape-looking apes than the 1968 version jumping around.
And he wanted it to be darker. But he didn’t necessarily want the dialogue or plot
to make any sense. But it was still less painful than most of the original
sequels. 3 bugs
Title: Yeah, I know. It’s a freakin
sequel. But y could have done something. (Point, Brothers Bloom 1-0)
Funnier: I believe the first line in
POTA 2001 was a mockery of the “Take your stinky paws off me, you damn dirty ape.”
And it went over like grape juice in David’s Bridal. (Point, Brothers Bloom
2-0)
Better Turn: Well, the Brothers Bloom
was full of turns, much in the style of Maverick. POTA started turning with the
opening credits. Mark Wahlberg established a relationship with a chimp, went on
an unsanctioned mission, got shot through a wormhole in space, crash-landed on
“some strange planet” and got captured by the apes all before I even put the
DVD in. But in the con game style of movie, we enjoy the constant turns, much
like the teacup. Because we know they’re coming, but we don’t know when or
which way. (Point, Brothers Bloom 3-0)
Better Ending: The ape version of
Lincoln is Burton’s way of coming up with an ending as shocking as the
original. He could have also had a huge race of apple-headed people for the
same effect. (Point, Brothers Bloom 4-0)
Better Message: I really don’t feel
like thinking too hard about this category and I know the stupid POTA movie is
going to lose so I invoke the I’m Tired
and Moving Things Along clause. (Point, POTA 4-1)
Better Acting: I take back what I said
earlier. Paul Giamatti made for a rather comical ape and a bright spot in this
film, possibly the only reason to ever watch it again. However, I fell in love
with Rachel Weisz in this movie. And I fell in like very much with Mark
Ruffalo. Rachel really played her quirky millionaire who “collects hobbies” to
perfection. I have already started putting more of her movies on my Netflix
queue and that’s usually a good sign. And poor Paul Giamatti has lost this
category all three times he’s appeared since this started (The Illusionist,
Storytelling). In fact, he’s lost all three duels. Hmm. I’m gonna have to watch
Sideways again. (Point, Brothers Bloom 5-1)
More Creative: I guess there’s
something to be said for random being creative. Kinda in the same way Jackson
Pollack was creative. But Pollack happens to be the butt of my jokes for good
reason, so any comparison to his creativity is not a compliment. (Point, Brothers Bloom 6-1)
Poster: Well, I like how they stayed
true to the font of the old movie. And I kinda like the ominousity of the POTA
poster. And I know it already lost so I’m not spending much time thinking about
exactly which one I absolutely completely and without a doubt like better. (Point, POTA 6-2)
Watch again: No question. I’m invoking
the I’m Tired and Moving Things Along
clause again. (Point, Brothers Bloom 7-2)
Overall: I don’t think I gave the POTA
a chance at all based on the stupid, stupid ending that is stuck in my head. I
almost forgot completely about Paul Giamatti. But that should show you how bad
it was. The right movie won. Winner: Brothers Bloom (7-2)
No comments:
Post a Comment