Tim Burton's ill-fated 2001 remake of Planet of the Apes had a notoriously confusing ending - here's what that final twist really means.

Ever since its release, there has been intense debate over what Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes' ending really means. A remake of the massively popular 1968 film of the same name, the 2001 film stars Mark Wahlberg as Leo Davidson, an astronaut who crash-lands on a planet inhabited by intelligent apes. It's in its premise alone that Planet of the Apes' similarities to the original film lie, as the remake made a number of substantial changes to the story that shifted its meaning considerably.

Despite updating the franchise with a more modern sci-fi aesthetic, Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes received mixed reviews, with most critics citing the film's confusing ending as its most negative aspect. While its earlier scenes more closely mirror those of the original film, Planet of the Apes' reboot quickly establishes itself in a different timeline. In the remake, Davidson is transported by an electromagnetic storm to the year 5021, where he crashes on a planet identified as Ashlar.

From there, Davidson's story only vaguely resembles the plot of the original Planet of the Apes movie. The film's divergence from the story of the original culminates in an ending as baffling as it is unexpected, making it one of the most notorious movie endings of all time. Here's exactly what Burton's Planet of the Apes' ending means.

What Happens In Tim Burton's Planet Of The Apes' Ending

Wahlberg's Davidson discovers that his former crewmates crash-landed thousands of years before his arrival while attempting to rescue him, which seeded both ape and human life on Ashlar and formed the basis for the apes' oppression of humans. In Planet of the Apes' confusing timeline, Leo is then met by Pericles, the chimpanzee he followed into the storm at the beginning of the film. This ceases hostilities between humans and apes and allows Leo to use Pericles' intact pod to fly back into the storm in the hopes of returning home.

Upon flying into the electromagnetic storm and being returned to his own time, Leo sets a course for Earth, eventually crash landing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Entering the memorial, he sees that Lincoln's statue has been replaced with one of General Thade, and as he looks on in horror, he's surrounded by a simian police force. The lack of context for Planet of the Apes' ending changes the original's by effectively flipping it around - instead of realizing he's in the future, Leo returns to his own time only to find it controlled by apes.

Did Leo Time Travel In Planet Of The Apes?

While the film's ending makes it far more confusing than was strictly necessary, the short answer is yes: Leo time traveled. His pod's console indicates that he crash-lands on Ashlar in the 51st-century, and towards the film's climax, he returns to his own time in the 2020s. However, the film's General Thade twist makes this slightly more ambiguous, making it unclear as to whether or not his pod's console was entirely accurate.

Was Planet Of The Apes Set On Earth?

In the original film, the twist ending revealed the titular planet was Earth all along. However, Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes subverts expectations by taking place on another planet called Ashlar. Despite Burton's Planet of the Apes having talking humans and Earth-like conditions, its planet is shown to be a separate place on which life was seeded by the crash of the Oberon. The film's final scene shows Leo returning to Earth as guided by his pod's console, indicating that the apes also somehow took over his home planet after the events of the film.

What The Statue Of General Thade Means

The film's climactic scene reveals a huge memorial to General Thade, Tim Roth's human-hating villain. With very little context, one must look to Planet of the Apes' finer details to extrapolate its exact meaning. The inscription on the wall behind the statue indicates a possible explanation for a movie twist more divisive than M. Night Shyamalan's notoriously hit-and-miss endings.

The inscription explains that Thade saved apes from humans, hinting that he somehow came to Earth and conquered it, and that Leo has entered an alternate timeline. This conclusion requires a few leaps of logic, but the film itself provides some evidence for it. For one, there is some semi-intact technology left on Ashlar, and the electromagnetic storm has proven itself to be a wormhole through time and space. If Thade was somehow able to access the technology and then the time-traveling capabilities of the storm, he possibly could have appeared on Earth long before Leo's return.

What Happened To Pericles

Perhaps the most charming of Planet of the Apes' original characters was Pericles, the chimp pilot from the beginning and end of the movie. However, despite his sudden appearance in the film's climax saving Leo's life, Planet of the Apes leaves his fate ambiguous. He's left on Ashlar when Leo flies his pod back into the storm to return home, but his fate after that is largely unknown.

From the societal change Leo has seemingly inspired on Ashlar, it's possible that Pericles is treated well after his former trainer leaves. However, given the apes' newly divided society, it's also possible that Pericles would become the subject of much debate, both scientific and societal. Either way, Pericles' future was most likely a pleasant one, as Helena Bonham Carter's Ari promised Leo she would look after him.

The Planet Of The Apes' Themes Explained

Like most Planet of the Apes movies, Tim Burton's film comes with an inherent message of animal rights. It explores most of the same ideas as the 1968 original, with one notable addition: the brief exploration of mankind's usual role as the aggressor. There's some societal commentary in the film as well, particularly regarding the apes' inhumane treatment of their human slaves.

The Real Meaning Of Tim Burton's Planet Of The Apes' Ending

With its confusing final twist, Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes ending gets a little messy. However, much of the film's Ashlar story is wrapped up nicely, and it's Leo's journey home that creates most of the film's narrative issues. Leo's abrupt realization that he has not returned home to the Earth he originally left is intended to be a horrifying and thought-provoking climax, but without the proper context, it's nothing more than a baffling final image.

In an attempt to emulate the iconic ending of other Planet of the Apes movies, Tim Burton's film reveals that apes have conquered Earth, after all. This could see the film interpreted as a cautionary tale about tampering with the unknown, particularly where space and time are concerned. It's Leo's disregard for his orders that precipitate the whole movie's plot, and by seeding Ashlar's society and then granting them access to sophisticated technology, he seemingly dooms his own home planet, too.

Why Tim Burton's Planet Of The Apes Changes Were So Divisive

The reason Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes' changes were so divisive is mostly a matter of execution. The ending twist of Thade's statue was clearly intended to be as shocking as the original's Statue of Liberty, but as it came suddenly and without any context, it felt like nothing more than a cheap and confusing piece of mimicry, or a lazy Planet of the Apes easter egg. However, the film's ending wasn't its only issue; it was just the final stinger in an otherwise disappointing remake.

The reason the remake proved divisive with fans was that while it updated the original film's visuals, it failed to add anything meaningful to its story or underlying themes. Instead, it came off as a pointless rehash with a number of needless changes, all of which were subsequently thrown into doubt by Planet of the Apes' confusing ending. Ultimately, Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes has gone down in movie history as having one of the worst ever final twists, and its ending lives on in infamy as a prime example of how not to execute a remake.

Next: Why Planet of the Apes’ Prequel Trilogy Is Better Than The Original