The original Planet of the Apes (1968) had a sci-fi mystical aura with imaginative themes, reminiscent of Star Wars (1977) or 2001: A Space Odyssey. It was a clever exploration into the unknown that made you think and left you in complete awe. Each time I see it, it captivates me as it did the first time. Even though I know the plot and ending, it never loses its magic.

So now, thirty-three years later, Tim Burton (Batman I, II & The Legend of Sleepy Hollow) directs a hyped-up movie with the same title, but none of the same enchantment. Planet of The Apes (2001) is an "odyssey" with no original plot and no magic like its predecessor. It is an entertaining film, but clichéd and unfulfilling. Unlike the 1968 version, the ending of this movie isn't powerful or intelligent. It's stupid and puzzling. I didn't leave the theater in awe; I left utterly confused.

The plot does have some interesting twists along the way. Mark Wahlberg (Capt. Leo Davidson) in the year 2029 is on a space station training apes to go into space. One of the apes gets lost in a time/space warp and Mark follows him and ultimately gets lost as well. He lands on an unknown planet and discovers that apes rule and humans are inferior. Humans are beaten, tortured, held captive and some become slaves and pets. Mark ends up leading a group of humans, (including one hot blonde) away from the apes in hope of locating his space station and leaving the planet. Along their journey they learn the secrets of the world, befriend apes, love apes, run from apes, fight apes, kill apes etc.

But despite those twists the film as a whole is not original enough to be a brilliant movie like Planet 1968. It's not even a good movie. TV sci-fi shows such as Sliders and Quantum Leap seem more thought out and are far better than this. Rod Serling, (writer of The Twilight Zone and arguably the greatest television writer) helped write Planet of the Apes (1968). This new movie was written by the person who wrote episodes of "China Beach." Yes, Rod Serling's been deceased for a quarter-century, but at least get a Sci-Fi writer or someone different to write this film. The script is dull with no texture or uniqueness. There are a few one-liners, but no memorable lines or moments as there were in the original. There are also a few "stolen" lines from Planet 1968, proving how un-original this new version is.

One of the things missing in Planet 2001 is the "love" for the main character. Charlton Heston (star of Planet 1968) was a human, and we felt deeply for him. When he's locked up and whipped by the Apes, or when he sees his dead comrades, we are scared for him. He's completely alone and lost and we root for him. Heston commanded the role, playing a furious yet terrified and confused man. We could identify with him easily.

Mark Wahlberg downplays his role. He is calm, cool and collected and doesn't seem to be surprised enough by his surroundings. He must crash onto planets run by Apes regularly. Wahlberg is boring and his lack of emotion hurts the movie. There's no flair to his performance as there was with Heston. I didn't care if Walhberg found his space station, got home or if he was castrated and killed by the apes.

What is also annoying about this film is that, unlike the original, the humans are smart and can talk. With the humans intellectually equal to the apes, it doesn't make sense. In the original, it's obvious why the humans haven't rebelled; they weren't smart enough. In 2001, there's not enough of a disparity between the apes and the humans to believe that they needed Walhberg to "rescue" them. They were smart before he came. Also, how did the humans become inferior if they are intelligent? Even with an explanation at the end, it doesn't work. It also doesn't make much sense that the apes have such a hatred for the humans. The 1968 version had a good explanation for everything. This movie, including the ending has way too many plot holes.

Another tidbit, which lessens this film, is the lack of difficulty Wahlberg encounters. In Planet 1968, Heston has to search and beg for help. He can't ask the humans for assistance and his only hope is from the Apes. He's completely alone. In 2001, help surrounds Wahlberg. The humans can help him and the star Ape, (a compassionate female who could be compared to an animal rights activist today) practically lands on his doorstep. It's much easier for Wahlberg to escape, than it was for Heston. If you lighten the load of the main character, his heroism is depleted. And of course there was that one Hollywood moment where the timing was just right, to help Wahlberg out of a jam. Where was that moment for Heston?

Besides all the characters being one-dimensional, most of the acting isn't that good. Thade (the leader of the Apes played by Tim Roth) is decent in his role. He growls and snarls for no reason, but he is fun to watch. And Paul Giamatti is great as an ape scam artist. He gives the movie its funniest lines and best performance. But the star Ape (played by Helena Carter) is rather annoying. She's too passionate, and too righteous and not very likable. Carter could have toned down her role. The human characters have tiny one-dimensional parts. Except the hot blonde, whose good to stare at, there's no one even worth mentioning. In Planet 1968, there was the legendary star, Heston, and a great supporting cast including Roddy McDowall, Kim Hunter and Maurice Evans as Dr. Zaius. (He also played Samantha's father in Bewitched.) In the new film, except for Giamatti, there's not one good performance.

Overall, a lot of things don't work in this film. Tim Burton is an awesome director. Planet 2001 is physically beautiful with some cool scenes and it is at times entertaining. But there's not enough power, enough love of Wahlberg, or a blow-away ending to truly have a memorable classic. It's an average, confusing sci-fi movie. If it had no connection to the original, it wouldn't be hyped up or even noticed as a top summer movie.