Why the APES still reign supreme

 "Planet of the Apes" succeeds where other franchises have failed thanks to equal parts reverence and reinvention.

By: Josh McCormack

In this era of franchise regurgitation, it is odd to think that one of the most consistently reliable series of films is the "Planet of the Apes" saga. Pre-dating other popular franchises like "Star Wars" by nearly a decade, the series has found a way to serve up consistently solid (if not always masterful) entries since 1968. Just this past weekend the latest entry, "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes" (the tenth film of the entire franchise, but fourth film of the rebooted saga that began in 2011) proved that the nearly six decade long series of films is still able to surprise and engage modern audiences.

Although the most recent trilogy was fantastic, I admittedly had some trepidation about this latest entry. The somewhat recent Disney acquisition of Fox, the odd choice of director (Wes Ball, who’s only notable work was the lackluster "Maze Runner" films), and the lack of Andy Serkis’ incredible performance as Caesar all made it seem as though "Kingdom" might end the Apes’ recent hot streak. However, my fears were put to rest once I realized that I was watching a film that not only honored the recent Caesar trilogy, but also honored the original 1968 film, all while uncovering new avenues to take this long-running series that genuinely managed to surprise me.

As I began to think about the film once the credits rolled, I was struck by how these movies have managed to be incredibly satisfying longtime "Apes" devotees, but film goers who have become so disillusioned by the nostalgia bait of recent blockbuster reboots. Where so many franchises try and fail to find success in retreading what came decades before, I believe "Planet of the Apes" succeeds in the unique realm between reverence and reinvention.

Looking at the most recent series of films in particular, there’s no shortage of homages or nods to the original 1968 movie and even some of its less revered sequels of the early ‘70s. Be it Tom Felton quoting Charlton Heston in "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" or Woody Harrelson’s alt-right apocalyptic militia in "War for the Planet of the Apes" adopting the moniker “Alpha Omega”, which is a direct reference to the name of a nuclear weapon in 1970’s "Beneath the Planet of the Apes". What’s wonderfully refreshing, though, is that the films are not only set so long before the events of the classic movie, there seems to be any rush to getting to that original timeline. In fact, with how the story is set up, there’s a strong possibility that we won’t ever get to the point where Heston’s lead character Taylor meets the Apes as he once did in the late 1960’s (mostly due to some of the canonical details not lining up with what we were told in the original films). While that might frustrate some nostalgic fans, it’s one of the things that I think has been the secret to this series’ success, while many overly reverential legacy sequels have completely failed. There’s no doubt that directors like Rupert Wyatt ("Rise of the Planet of the Apes") and Matt Reeves ("Dawn" and "War for the Planet of the Apes") have a love for the what’s come before, but this love is presented not by slavishly presenting events that would lead to exactly what’s come before, but instead picking and choosing elements from this franchise’s decades long legacy and remixing them for a new generation.

A perfect example is the recent movies’ most significant character, the ape revolutionary/messiah Caesar (played brilliantly by Andy Serkis) is a new take on a pre-existing character of the same name from one of my personal favorite–but much lesser known–"Apes" movies; "Conquest of the Planet of the Apes". By using this character as a template and not as a direct road map, the new filmmakers have been able to build a whole new mythology and a much deeper character than the Caesar that was presented in the past. It’s a perfect example of how these newer films look to what’s come before for creative inspiration to build upon.

With "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes", the next generation of filmmakers has continued this tradition. With apes being the dominant species hundreds of years after the events of Caesar’s reign, the production design and even some music cues find ways to slyly bridge the gaps between the beloved recent trilogy and the iconic films of a past generation (hmmm. Those scarecrows sure look familiar). In fact, the first act of "Kingdom" sort of feels like the original "Planet of the Apes" but from the point of view of the apes. That proves to not only be a really exciting subversion, but also goes to show just how much modern storytelling techniques have had a part in shifting audience's allegiances to the non-human creatures. And yet none of these elements are distracting or feel like they are excluding the audience whose relationship with the series only began with the Caesar trilogy as opposed to the older films. It merely enhances the experience by slyly calling back to the legacy and using it to make a much more dense universe than this series has ever been able to accomplish before.

As our three new characters–Noa, Raka and the mysterious human, Mae–journey through a world caught between the former reign of humans and the relatively new planet of apes, the film is able to tap into territory that was merely mentioned in prior entries but never developed to this extent. "Kingdom" is a film about religious dogma and how the words of a prophet can be twisted to fit one’s will. As the word of the long-deceased Caesar makes its way through this ravaged American landscape, many factions seem to be finding ways to twist his teachings into something that gives them permission to commit heinous acts. I really wasn’t sure what hook could possibly get me into committing to a whole new series of "Apes" films, but our lead character Noa discovering the word of Caesar and trying to go out and find what he truly stood for in this ideologically divided landscape is something that I am very intrigued to see moving forward.

Ideas of sociopolitical unrest, no matter how basic they might be, were something that was at the heart of the original films. While I certainly was a fan of the Caesar trilogy, I do feel that those movies traded in the hard sci-fi of Pierre Boulle’s original text and Rod Serling’s ‘60s film adaption for something more emotional and tactile. In other words, they were heavy on drama, but not so heavy on themes. It’s probably why "Kingdom" is already proving to be one of my favorites of these new films. There’s a real sense of world building through political and religious motivations that seems like the perfect evolution of what this series was founded on. Now combine that with the performances and state-of-the-art effects of the more recent prior entries and you have found an exciting new avenue to take this nearly 60-year-old series of movies.

If you want to honor a classic film with a reboot, you don’t do it by merely bringing back characters from the past. You don’t do it by taking audiences to the same locales or having characters quote the same iconic lines over and over. To honor something is to build upon it and that is exactly what has made "Planet of the Apes" endure.

I can’t wait for the next one.