Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes review: A new hero rises in agreeable, dutiful blockbuster
Wes Ball’s Apes movie is a measured follow-up that lives in the shadow of the trilogy that precedes it
Film Reviews Planet of the Apes
As the Planet Of The Apes franchise has shown us for almost 60 years, its primates won’t stop evolving, and neither will its movies. Case in point: the saga of Caesar, brought to motion-capture life by Andy Serkis in three films released throughout the 2010s, was a bleaker affair compared to the sci-fi shocks that sent Charlton Heston into a belligerent froth in 1968's Planet Of The Apes.
This change in tempo felt like a deliberate response to the morally complex blockbusters of the period; the funkier aspects of Apes—makeup, costuming, ham acting (no shade)—were tossed out for a more grounded Genesis fable, as befitted this gritter landscape. In frequently thought-provoking detail, the rebooted series of films explored how Earth became a planet of apes via dizzying computer effects and deeply human performances from the likes of Gary Oldman, John Lithgow, and (paradoxically, given all the fur) Serkis. The Apes revival succeeded because it met our complicated times on its terms.
The series’ headier themes returned with a vengeance in 2013's Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes, which cemented Caesar’s role as the apes’ reluctant leader and explored the bleak consequences of violence. By the time War rolled around, Caesar’s reluctance was replaced with vengeance, and naturally, the films descended further into moral murk. Given all this darkness and Serkis’ uneclipsable role, it’s not such a surprise that Wes Ball’s Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes would bring some sunshine back into the franchise by easing off all this gloom and doom—and it must be said, losing a lot of its charisma in the process—so that the Apes might live on for another decade or so.
That’s not to say Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes is a step down from what came before. It’s the most entertaining Apes movie since Dawn, and exceeds it in terms of scale. Set in a far-flung future where Caesar’s legacy still looms large, Ball’s film explores two of the various ape civilizations that have flourished over the generations since his death. At its core is Noa (Owen Teague), a burgeoning member of the Eagle Clan, who is introduced during an amazing egg-hunting sequence that showcases Maze Runner filmmaker Ball’s confidence with digital trickery and eye for labyrinthine visuals. Through Noa’s nimble ascent and the film’s often mesmerizing imagery (a blend of on-location shooting and effects from Wētā Workshop), Ball draws us deeper into his vision, going to impressive lengths to define it.
As the newest lead in a series rife with magnetic characters, Noa is a decidedly more measured protagonist; living a quiet life free of dangers, he’s guided by compassion for his friends and unwavering devotion to his family. This amicability extends to his inevitable retribution quest, spurred on by a thrilling attack sequence that decimates his peaceful tree tower community. Once the flames rise and the apes begin to drop, Noa shifts into revenge mode with surprising ease. This is where the script by Josh Friedman hits one of its few stumbling blocks: As a brighter, more optimistic hero, Noa’s introduction to violence doesn’t pack the same punch as Caesar’s. He adapts so quickly to it that we never grasp its effects on his spirit.
This surprise attack was done on the orders of Proximus Caesar (Kevin Durand), a self-styled monarch who has erected a fiefdom amid hollowed-out ships beached on the shores of the American West Coast. Proximus is a proper modern-day demagogue; he appropriates the words of Caesar—and, you’ve surely noticed, adopted his name as a title—and uses them to cow others to serve his goals. He preaches evolution for the good of the race and decrees himself as the leader who will guide them through this next developmental leap. You can’t help but daydream how the true Caesar would trounce this guy.
When Noa finally meets this ridiculous strongman, Proximus’s presence is earthquaking. He lays out what he wants boisterously, captivatingly: “Apes will learn… I will learn!”
This, perhaps relatably, leaves Noa blinking at him incredulously before he states the obvious: The king’s methods are wrong. Our hero’s simplicity makes the ensuing conflict surprisingly lopsided and flimsy, given how powerfully Kingdom pops off during its exhilarating and engaging first half.
Luckily, there’s a slightly more complicated X factor to this minor war in the form of Mae (Freya Allan), a human whose heightened intellect and discerning fashion sense set her apart from the feral remnants of her kind. (Among the few people we see in this movie, the ferals wear tatters, drink from streams, and collectively perk up their heads like meerkats before a hyena attack—which would almost seem shocking if they weren’t seen from such a distance.) As Mae silently shadows Noa on his odyssey, a fragile trust gradually forms between them, threatening Proximus’ reign while laying the groundwork for a potential new trilogy, should audiences embrace this less knotty yet undeniably crowd-pleasing installment.
That’s perhaps Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes’ biggest shortcoming: It’s too agreeable, too dutiful to building a new series, and too reluctant to disrupt this new status quo even as it detonates its many explosive setpieces. It makes its ending, which aims to evoke the shock twist of the 1968 film, land with a thud. Instead of flooring us with a daring finale, it offers mild surprises in the interest of brand proliferation. That’s the essence of Wes Ball’s blockbuster-to-be; it wants to amp up a new generation of Apes die-hards but is only allowed to politely jostle them.
41 Comments
Proximus […] adopted his name as a title
While carrying a Latin name…Where does he get his historical information and how often does he think about the Roman Empire?
You’d be surprised!
I can’t answer the second question, but I can answer the first one: William H. Macy.
I’m ok with a slightly more cautious story if it manages to be a hit despite it being set centuries after the Caesar trilogy. There’s room to get deeper in the sequels. I’m simply delighted we get more Apes movies, they’re always at least pretty fun simply because of the premise and modern FX really sells the world and characters.
I love this series of films and I’m happy it keeps getting made. I’ll see this on a reasonable edible and enjoy the fuck out of it, I’m sure.
Given where these revivals started, it’s bonkers that the series has turned into a critical and commercial success with depth of characters and plot. I guess that’s what happens when someone with creativity like Reeves decides to take the whole enterprise seriously.
Cautiously optimistic about this one, as I loved the three previous Apes movies and I’m a bit wary of this new director Wes Ball based on his track record (known for the “meh” Maze Runner series). Matt Reeves had done such a great job with Dawn and War.I just started watching the entire Apes series, re-watching the 1968 original film (still fantastic), and now watching those early ‘70s sequels for the first time. Only seen Beneath the Planet of the Apes so far, which spends the first half re-treading the same story beats as the original but then takes some WILD turns in the second half. Looking forward to Escape/Conquest/Battle.
I’m a bit wary of this new director Wes Ball based on his track record (known for the “meh” Maze Runner series).Yeah, I am not thrilled that this is the guy who’s being tasked to finally direct a movie based off of Legend of Zelda.
I’ve done a complete PotA rewatch this year – original and new films included. Beneath is the worst of the original sequels (and maybe the worst overall, depending on how much you like the make-up and production design of Burton’s film). It spends too much time trying to be the first film (which is still the best one) but only slightly different for way too long before it finally gets interesting at the end.I think Escape and Conquest are both legitimately great sci-fi parables of the 70s and were very different than my expectations. Battle is also very good, and there is a ton of DNA for what would eventually become Dawn in there.All told, I think it might be the single greatest and most consistent film franchise in history, especially with the greatness of the reboot trilogy to back it up.
Can’t wait for Constitutional Monarchy of the Planet of the Apes!
The Autonomous Collective Of The Planet Of The Apes!
The Anarcho-Syndicalist Commune of the Apes.
Y’all are joking, but I would watch each and every one of these joke movie titles with complete seriousness and sincerity
Splitters!
Help, Help, I’m Being Repressed By The Planet of the Apes
You Could Have Called Me Dennis of the Planet of the Apes
Followed by the Democratic Republic of the Planet of the Apes.
The Homeowner’s Association Of The Planet Of The Ape- wait, no, that’s too evil.
The Soldiers of the Army of the Church of the Planet of the Apes
do you need to have seen the preceding trilogy in order to follow this film? asking for a friend.
No, I think you’re good
I think they mention Caesar quite a bit in this but plotwise it doesn’t sound like you would miss much without seeing the previous trilogy. I just rewatched the last two though, and if you have an interest in watching this, it’s well worth watching the previous three beforehand. And the whole “humans lost the ability to speak” is a big part of the plot in War.
It’s the only trilogy that comes to mind where the movies got progressively better as they went. War was friggin’ great, and so unexpected.
Yeah, I had zero interest in the previous Planet of the Apes movies (I think the ape costumes just freaked me out as a kid). I watched the first movie of this trilogy a while back, found it surprisingly decent, and then watched the second two on consecutive nights last week. Really started caring about those damn apes! Which makes me kind of bummed that this movie takes place way after. Not only is this the rare trilogy that gets better, it’s also a rare instance where i wouldn’t mind seeing prequel movies, or at least movies in between the existing three, even though we already know Caesar’s fate.
You should definitely watch the first three if you’re interested in it AT ALL. They are much more wonderful than it would seem from the titles and the plot synopses.
This one was originally written as a new reboot of the franchise, and there reportedly wasn’t much rewriting to fit it into the prior continuity.
This one was originally written as a new reboot of the franchise
Citation Needed.The story doesn’t work without the groundwork of the previous trilogy.
I just got home from viewing it. It was good, and I didn’t see the first two. What did irritate me somewhat was the depicted ‘technology’, like, the totally decayed radio antennae array that’s rusted, missing 70% of it’s structure (over a hundred years old?), but yet, they’re able to rotate and send radio signals, and that vault structure, how is it that it has power? I’ll have to ask Josh Friedman about it.
I’ve never seen any of these newer movies but know the gist of the story from trailers and the original so I know the humans are suppose to be “wild” or more akin to something like humans were in prehistoric times, right? So my question is, do they ever explain while the female lead in the movie has what appears to be well made clothing? Now practically I get they could release these movies with all the humans running around naked, but in the movie world, it seems like feral humans have good tailors.
Just got back from seeing the movie. It would be misleading to say that they explain Mae’s clothing (and other things), exactly. I’m trying to avoid spoilers here, which is difficult. I can say that it isn’t just a dumb “she has better clothes and hygiene because she’s one of the stars of the movie” kind of thing; there’s a reason for it. They don’t really spend much time explaining why it’s the case, but the movie does show some context for it.
“So my question is, do they ever explain while the female lead in the movie has what appears to be well made clothing?”Yes.
Let me know when they get to the Planet of the Cows:
“It’s the most entertaining Apes movie since Dawn”You literally just made clear there’s only been one other movie since then just before saying this.Watching the trailer, what really hit me was how effective these latter Apes movies have made the symbol of that attic window. You’d swear it had been around since the original movies with the weight it has, but no, Rise created it out of whole cloth.
The Planet of the Apes: The Musical when?
After, Once Upon A Time on the Planet of the Apes.
“blockbuster-to-be” is some turn of phrase.
I know we can no longer expect any movie to have audiences queuing round the block to get in, but can we at least reserve the term “blockbuster” for something that’s actually proved successful, instead of a generic word meaning “mainstream movie”?
“Tentpole” is I think the better term for that, indicating movies with big production and marketing budgets that are a major part of the studio’s release strategy for the year. A tentpole can be a bomb, of course, and a little indie can turn out to be a blockbuster.
Wait, so this is technically a spin-off then?I had planned on actually making the trek to the theaters for this one, as it seems like the big screen aspect would benefit viewers. However, from the trailers it looks like the effects aren’t quite up to par with the previous three. Weta did Rise, Dawn, and War, Rise, but doesn’t seem to have done this one.
I can’t get over the title of the film. Kingdom and planet are both locations with kingdoms typically being the smaller of the too. It would be like calling something, idk, the house of the hospital of the laymen. That’s not a good example because it’s genuinely hard to string words in that dumb manner.
It makes its ending, which aims to evoke the shock twist of the 1968 film, land with a thud
I can’t disagree with this more. Both the idea that it’s aiming to evoke the twist of the original (it’s made clear much earlier in the film that there are many more surviving humans like Mae), or that it lands with a thud. For all the triumphant score, the implications of the ending make it the biggest downer ending of the modern Apes franchise.
I’d give the film an A minus. It shows the secrets that humans and apes alike can harbor. a well respected actor has a too-short supporting role, here, too.I liked the motion capture effects, they looked believable. the landscapes of former human cities with skyscrapers, also very cool in their design.I’m wondering how much time has passed by since the first reboot movie’s plot?