Jump to content

War for the Planet of the Apes


Peter T Chattaway
 Share

Recommended Posts

Links to our threads on Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014).

Link to our thread on 'Bergman Regretted Skipping Planet of the Apes' (Apr 2004).

Matt Reeves has revealed that the villain who seemed to die in Dawn might actually still be alive, and might reappear in the third film. And apparently the possible survival of this villain was already suggested in a post-credits audio sting.

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

‘War Of The Planet Of The Apes’ Recruits Gabriel Chavarria For Lead Role

EXCLUSIVE: Gabriel Chavarria, the young star of Universal’s upcoming Low Riders, is making his deal now to be one of two human leads in 20th Century Fox’s War Of The Planet Of The Apes, the latest installment of the franchise. Matt Reeves returns to direct, and the pic is shooting for an October start date in Vancouver.

Much like James Franco’s part in 2011’s Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes, the role is one of two main humans in the cast. . . .

Deadline.com, August 24

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 3 months later...

 

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said on Twitter:

 

Edited by Anders

"A director must live with the fact that his work will be called to judgment by someone who has never seen a film of Murnau's." - François Truffaut

Twitter.
Letterboxd.

Reviews and essays at Three Brothers Film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anders said:

As I said on Twitter:

 

Yep. And the endless "apes-are-just-like-people" thing is annoying, too ("for Family!"). The whole premise loses its punch if the apes are just humans with fur; it's imperative that they maintain some sense of uncanny Otherness. [And now I'm thinking of...Mark Fisher? Zizek?...and his point that King Kong as realized in claymation is more effective precisely because it doesn't try for photorealism. The ape costumes in the original movies are similarly effective, in part, precisely because we can tell they're "fake".]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said this elsewhere, but apparently not here: One thing that bothers me about the teaser that was posted here in December is the way Woody Harrelson's character actually says that Earth runs the risk of becoming a "planet of apes". Like, the whole *point* behind the original film's title was that Charlton Heston was an *astronaut* who thought he had landed on the wrong planet; it wasn't until the end that we learned he had been on Earth the whole time. But there's no astronaut here (unless there's some pertinent story element that they haven't revealed yet). I don't mind that the *titles* keep using the words "planet of the apes" -- it's part of the whole franchise/branding thing. But would the *characters*, none of whom have ever been to space, be speaking in those terms? Maybe, maybe not, but it nags at me just a bit.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

 

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

This has been getting raves across the interwebs, but I just don't get it:
 

Quote

 

In a nutshell, the problems are three:

1) Prequel/reboot inevitability. We know what is going to happen, so the "how" is more important than the "what" but the "how" isn't particularly interesting. It's a pastiche of The Last Temptation of Christ and Apocalypse Now (which is overtly referenced just in case you are, you know, an imbecile).

2) The film, like the franchise, has a decided pro-ape/anti-human misogyny misanthropy which doesn't seem to bother anyone but me, but...well, I saw the original, and I know the apes end up replicating all the same problems of human society. So it's not exactly like we are rooting for some more enlightened species over a more besotted one.

3) I'll add that in this film the cinematography is particularly disappointing. I dunno, maybe it's because I just saw A GHOST STORY a few days ago, but...well, the screen is dark in spots, making the action hard to follow. Like many films rendered in 3D for no reason, the background is often out of focus, one feels less for artistic reasons than as a concession to 3D (I saw the film on big screen 2D).

As an aside, there is lots of Christian allegorizing...talk of killing sons to save the world, cross hanging, etc. I suppose I'm down for a *serious* examination of the implications of the passion suffering, but the crucifixion really ought to be something more than a lazy stock symbol to underscore the cruelty of the Kurtz figure who hangs a cross in his office. (Or maybe the whole thing is just a Spartacus riff and Matt Reeves doesn't actually realize there is another story with a cross in it?)

 

 

Edited by kenmorefield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well count me as one of the rave reviews. 

I'm still sitting in the afterglow of this one that left me speechless much like walking out of Arrival last year.

Really i feel the best review of this film would be one done in sign language because it's truly at its best in its subtitled moments when face capture or the incredibly talented Amiah Miller (as the human war orphan Nova, a name which is homage to the similarly mute human woman Heston's Taylor meets in the original first film) say SO MUCH with just facial expression. To the actors who played Maurice (yet another homage, first name of actor who played the orangutan scientist Dr. Zaius in the original films) and Rocket and Luca and even freakin Steve Zahn as Bad Ape who manages to turn some hard moments into a respite of laughter. But really as everyone says the star of the show is Andy Serkis, who creates a character that is so real and vital and yes even human that we can't help but feel his every emotion as he feels them.

And with just that, as it kinda felt the second film Dawn was, it's still an incredible film. But on top of that we are offered some of the most humanistic morals of the whole film with mercy and forgiveness winning out over revenge and hate. I could should will say more but behind a spoiler gate. Suffice to say I share Jeffrey Overstreets thoughts on zombie films that I feel this one treats similar situations with a lot more grace. 

And it truly is Caesar's trilogy, we see him grow from a young ape in the care of humans to a ape leader who tries to be better than humans to an aged wise war weary king who realizes that there is really very little difference between apes and humans and both come with flaw and beauty.

And those last moments really evoke something like Ben Hur or The Ten Commandments. Even just the lighting and setting feels like you're watching an old biblical epic. 

But my second favorite part of this film is Nova. If they make more movies the next one, or trilogy, should be her story. It's a shame Amiah Miller probably won't come back to play her again but man can that girl act. 

I didn't hate -anything- about this film, at one point I found myself interested at the juxtaposition of the somewhat patriarchal culture of the apes and the novelty of seeing female soldiers in The Colonel's army. But then I realized first they're apes with different instincts towards family structure than humans, and two they're a species in the midst of social evolvement, give em a couple hundred years to grow up.

That's really another thing, these movies truly seem about social evolvement. We see them as cynical since it's apes vs humans, but if we also see our own origins in the apes (I mean we evolved from apes so...) We are in a way seeing our own history playing out perhaps up against the extinction of say, the dinosaurs. If science tells us anything this cycle is natural, species evolve and sometimes die out and other species rise to dominate. To consider ourselves the center of the universe and think it won't ever happen to us is hubris at best.

But that Reeves manages to make the Apes act so human is humanistic. That Caesar makes human mistakes and uses human terminology like "wife" is in a way watching a mirror of ourselves but on the face of an animal. I mean it's hard to anthropomorphize in order to garner empathy without making the animal basically a caricature of humanity but Reeves raises it to an art form and Serkis and the other actors are brilliant.

So truly an epic film and a need to see. My favorite of 2017 so far. And one of my most favorite movies ever seen.

 

"The truth is you're the weak, and I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin Ringo, I'm tryin real hard to be the shepherd." Pulp Fiction

Justin's Blog twitter Facebook Life Is Story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justin Hanvey wrote:
: But on top of that we are offered some of the most humanistic morals of the whole film with mercy and forgiveness winning out over revenge and hate.

This was the film I was thinking of when I tweeted this:

More recently, I tweeted this:

 

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Justin Hanvey said:

That's really another thing, these movies truly seem about social evolvement. We see them as cynical since it's apes vs humans, but if we also see our own origins in the apes (I mean we evolved from apes so...) We are in a way seeing our own history playing out perhaps up against the extinction of say, the dinosaurs. If science tells us anything this cycle is natural, species evolve and sometimes die out and other species rise to dominate. To consider ourselves the center of the universe and think it won't ever happen to us is hubris at best.

Have to say, respectfully, that I disagree with all of this. (I'd expand and expound on this but I've just broken my arm, so typing's a laborious process...)

Still, glad you rate the film so highly. I admired the previous two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...