Skip to main content

This is our last stand. And if we lose... it will be a planet of apes.

War for the Planet of the Apes
(2017)

(SPOILERS) It isn’t difficult to see why War of the Planet of the Apes didn’t open as well as its predecessor and is unlikely to come close to its gross; it plays it safe. Which sounds odd to say, for such a dark, downbeat, (almost) relentlessly grim blockbuster, but the lack of differentiation between this and its dark, downbeat, (almost) relentlessly grim predecessor suggests Matt Reeve and Fox thought more of the same would tickle its audience’s anthropoid itch, when in fact it only leads to a lack of differentiation. Which is a shame, as War of the Planet of the Apes is (mostly) an accomplished movie, expertly directed by Reeves and performed with due conviction by its mo-capped (and otherwise) cast.


It does seem a tad churlish to complain about what a movie might have been when it maintains the series’ consistent high quality, but I’m now firmly in the camp of wishing some of the more tonally-varied content of the original pictures was finding its way into this re-envisaging.  I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the first two thirds of War of the Planet of the Apes are the most engrossing, in which Caesar’s quest for revenge runs in tandem with various mysteries (what is happening to the humans, why is the Colonel killing his own) as well as dropping nuggets of series lore (Cornelius, Nova, Alpha-Omega).


Caesar’s downfall, putting his personal vendetta above the welfare of his brood, is potently depicted through, leading to a fitting ending that emphasises no good can come from such thinking, but I nevertheless had the lurking feeling that these weren’t the actions of the Caesar we knew, whereby at some point he ought to have regrouped, rationalised and taken the higher path (Reeves, bending Caesar into the shape of the story he wishes to tell, on some level appears to recognise this, feeding the Colonel observations like “Always so emotional”).


The picture is more inspired prior to the arrival at the ape gulag, taking in encounters (Nova, Bad Ape) and moral quandaries. Once imprisoned by the Colonel, Reeves ups the tension, and Woody Harrelson more than fills the boots of main antagonist, with his own considered motivation, but there’s little sense we’re breaking any new ground. We’re swapping out an ape baddie (Koba, who resurfaces in Caesar’s troubled visions of the ape he fears he is becoming) for a human one, and we’re back in a grey, drab, washed-out milieu.


The narrative and thematic oppositions, while powerfully conveyed, lack the compellingly grand plotting of the first four originals (whatever their individual defects). Sure, a prison break movie with apes is a reasonable idea, but didn’t we already get a prison break in Rise of the Planet of the Apes? And with considerably less reliance on conveniently-placed tunnels, just waiting to be fallen into, conveniently-placed flammable fuel tanks, just waiting to explode and wipe out all the humans on the battlements (it’s a wonder they required Caesar to blow them up, as one good flyby of those army helicopters ought to have done the job), and a conveniently-placed pile of snow, just waiting to avalanche the area (one can only assume the Colonel wasn’t up to snuff long before the virus mutated him into a mute).


With regard to the mechanics of the virus mutation, if the Colonel is right in his analysis, then Nova, who we have invested in as the most genuine character in the picture, is doomed to devolve into a primitive/mentally feeble state; a reflection of how upbeat this series is. And the Colonel does seem fairly certain, hence shooting himself in the head. As to the significance of the infecting toy, if humans carry the (presumably mutating) virus anyway? It needs an external trigger? Or does it simply come with the territory of a magic virus that dumbs down humans while simultaneously evolving apes, such that Nova imbues Maurice with the ability to speak? Reeves leaves it a little grey, but if it’s maybe a little too neat for material that otherwise thrives on “realism”, it works thematically.


I have other niggles; honestly, the quasi-biblical elements of sacrificed children, floods and promised lands didn’t do an awful lot for me (having in mind Caesar as a Moses-type is one thing, but over garnishing it visually is another). And do we really need foregrounding of “Ape-ocalypse Now” on graffiti in a movie already nursing Woody’s possessed Colonel shaving his bald pate while delivering a cogent thesis on his fine madness?


But the characters are where this series has been most celebrated, and it’s Reeves skill in this quarter that consistently prevents the picture from becoming an over-familiar trudge. It isn’t for nothing that these Apes movies have been trumpeted as an unlikely example of intelligent, nuanced blockbusters (although, this is equally true of the originals). Serkis is yet again a powerhouse as Caesar. Less showy but still hugely compelling is Karin Konoval as the mostly mute Maurice – the effects work is all-round great, but on Maurice particularly so – who gets possibly the most affecting subplot in respect of his parental feelings towards young Nova (Amiah Miller).


Reeves elicits a fine moppet performance from Miller, particularly in expressing Nova’s grief over the death of Luca (Michael Adamthwaite), so it’s a shame she’s doomed to mindless oblivion. And it would be more powerful still if not for the shamelessly over-emphatic Michael Giacchino score. He’s a composer whose work I usually admire, but here seems to be under the illusion this a movie from the Hollywood Golden Age, where the soundtrack’s responsibility is to treat the audience like emotional idiots in need of a guiding ear. Steven Zahn also provides a welcome light touch as the disturbed but comical chimp Bad Ape, able to speak and fond of wearing body warmers. Even an ape like Red (Ty Olsson), loathsome in his cruelty, is offered an arc of sorts and a final glimpse of salvation.


Fox has now completed a Caesar trilogy, and one assumes, even if receipts are down, they’ll be planning a further trilogy to cover the events of the ’67 Planet of the Apes. Whatever tentative ideas there are for Reeves continuing with the baton, I suspect he’ll move on; he pulls his punches creatively somewhat here, such that new blood and ideas would be sensible at this point, albeit with the proviso of Andy Serkis returning, now as the adult Cornelius (much as Roddy McDowall doubled up roles in the originals).


We’re now at the point of mute humans, with apes all-but ready to take command, so labouring a holding pattern of further internecine simian struggles will only lead to further diminished returns. Deliver us the returning astronaut thrown into an upside-down milieu, the underground mutants (already referenced by the Colonel’s Alpha-Omega faction), but, without the dictating Chuck factor, moving on past the point Beneath left us for a distinct trilogy capper, without that decimated planet (that nihilism, potent as it was, closed off all other plot avenues, except for time-travelling ones). There’s a lot of juice left in this series, but being caught in yet another gritty ape power play is unlikely to result in fresh ideas or stimulating storytelling and all-important box office.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Well, we took a vote. Predator’s cooler, right?

The Predator (2018)
(SPOILERS) Is The Predator everything you’d want from a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator (or Yautja, or Hish-Qu-Ten, apparently)? Emphatically not. We've already had a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator – or the other way around, at least – and that was on another level. The problem – aside from the enforced reshoots, and the not-altogether-there casting, and the possibility that full-on action extravaganzas, while delivered competently, may not be his best foot forward – is that I don't think Black's really a science-fiction guy, game as he clearly was to take on the permanently beleaguered franchise. He makes The Predator very funny, quite goofy, very gory, often entertaining, but ultimately lacking a coherent sense of what it is, something you couldn't say of his three prior directorial efforts.

Right! Let’s restore some bloody logic!

It Couldn't Happen Here (1987)
(SPOILERS) "I think our film is arguably better than Spiceworld" said Neil Tennant of his and Chris Lowe's much-maligned It Couldn't Happen Here, a quasi-musical, quasi-surrealist journey through the English landscape via the Pet shop Boys' "own" history as envisaged by co-writer-director Jack Bond. Of course, Spiceworld could boast the presence of the illustrious Richard E Grant, while It Couldn't Happen Here had to settle for Gareth Hunt. Is its reputation deserved? It's arguably not very successful at being a coherent film (even thematically), but I have to admit that I rather like it, ramshackle and studiously aloof though it is.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

My pectorals may leave much to be desired, Mrs Peel, but I’m the most powerful man you’ve ever run into.

The Avengers 2.23: The Positive-Negative Man
If there was a lesson to be learned from Season Five, it was not to include "man" in your title, unless it involves his treasure. The See-Through Man may be the season's stinker, but The Positive-Negative Man isn't far behind, a bog-standard "guy with a magical science device uses it to kill" plot. A bit like The Cybernauts, but with Michael Latimer painted green and a conspicuous absence of a cool hat.

The possibilities are gigantic. In a very small way, of course.

The Avengers 5.24: Mission… Highly Improbable
With a title riffing on a then-riding-high US spy show, just as the previous season's The Girl from Auntie riffed on a then-riding-high US spy show, it's to their credit that neither have even the remotest connection to their "inspirations" besides the cheap gags (in this case, the episode was based on a teleplay submitted back in 1964). Mission… Highly Improbable follows in the increasing tradition (certainly with the advent of Season Five and colour) of SF plotlines, but is also, in its particular problem with shrinkage, informed by other recent adventurers into that area.

Dude, you're embarrassing me in front of the wizards.

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
(SPOILERS) The cliffhanger sequel, as a phenomenon, is a relatively recent thing. Sure, we kind of saw it with The Empire Strikes Back – one of those "old" movies Peter Parker is so fond of – a consequence of George Lucas deliberately borrowing from the Republic serials of old, but he had no guarantee of being able to complete his trilogy; it was really Back to the Future that began the trend, and promptly drew a line under it for another decade. In more recent years, really starting with The MatrixThe Lord of the Rings stands apart as, post-Weinstein's involvement, fashioned that way from the ground up – shooting the second and third instalments back-to-back has become a thing, both more cost effective and ensuring audiences don’t have to endure an interminable wait for their anticipation to be sated. The flipside of not taking this path is an Allegiant, where greed gets the better of a studio (split a novel into two movie parts assuming a…

Bring home the mother lode, Barry.

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010)

If Panos Cosmatos’ debut had continued with the slow-paced, tripped-out psychedelia of the first hour or so I would probably have been fully on board with it, but the decision to devolve into an ‘80s slasher flick in the final act lost me.

The director is the son of George Pan Cosmatos (he of The Cassandra Crossing and Cobra, and in name alone of Tombstone, apparently) and it appears that his inspiration was what happened to the baby boomers in the ‘80s, his parents’ generation. That element translates effectively, expressed through the extreme of having a science institute engaging in Crowley/Jack Parsons/Leary occult quests for enlightenment in the ‘60s and the survivors having become burnt out refugees or psychotics by the ‘80s. Depending upon your sensibilities, the torturously slow pace and the synth soundtrack are positives, while the cinematography managed to evoke both lurid early ‘80s cinema and ‘60s experimental fare. 

Ultimately the film takes a …

What a truly revolting sight.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge (aka Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales) (2017)
(SPOILERS) The biggest mistake the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels have made is embracing continuity. It ought to have been just Jack Sparrow with an entirely new cast of characters each time (well, maybe keep Kevin McNally). Even On Stranger Tides had Geoffrey Rush obligatorily returning as Barbossa. Although, that picture’s biggest problem was its director; Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge has a pair of solid helmers in Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, which is a relief at least. But alas, the continuity is back with a vengeance. And then some. Why, there’s even an origin-of-Jack Sparrow vignette, to supply us with prerequisite, unwanted and distracting uncanny valley (or uncanny Johnny) de-aging. The movie as a whole is an agreeable time passer, by no means the dodo its critical keelhauling would suggest, albeit it isn’t even pretending to try hard to come up with …

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…