No less than 9 Planet of the Apes movies have been released so far. Maybe it didn’t surprise you, but honestly this short test caught me off guard. The original series that began in the late 1960s consisted of 5 films, was in the middle of a single Tim Burton remake, and then came the iconic Matt Reeves reboot trilogy. Planet of the Apes: A New Kingdom, this time directed by Wes Ball (The Maze Runner series) is the tenth Planet of the Apes movie, and is a semi-direct sequel to Reeves’ Planet of the Apes: War.
It’s a little hard to say whether we needed this movie. On the one hand, spoiler alert for the movie released 7 years ago, at the end of Reeves’ trilogy Caesar died. The beloved chimpanzee played by Andy Serkis was the beating heart of the reboot trilogy, and with his death it can be said that the narrative has reached its proper end – human civilization in a crash due to a cruel virus, and the monkeys who received a dose of intelligence are now building their own advanced civilization in a world where they are at the top of the food chain. From here in many ways you can just watch the original film series and believe that’s where it’s supposed to go. On the other hand, it’s possible that in the universe Reeves built the apes aren’t rolling towards classical civilization, or at least not one that looks like Star Trek technology to very hairy people.
After much less than two and a half hours it is easy to understand that Planet of the Apes: A New Kingdom feels like an attempt to open a completely lame trilogy that was meant to be the missing link – a link between a post-apocalyptic world and an advanced civilization of intelligent monkeys. Even so, it’s a little difficult for him to detach himself from the conflicts of the Matt Reeves era, which imprisons him in a limbo of good intentions and likable ideas on a bed of disinterest.
There is nothing new under the sun
A New Kingdom follows Noah (Evan Teague), an intelligent young chimpanzee who is forced to embark on a dangerous adventure in order to save the members of his tribe. On his way, he meets a mysterious human girl named May (Freya Allen), who turns out to be of great importance to Proximus Caesar (Kevin Durand), a dangerous ape and a threatening tyrant who concocts an alarming plot that could radically change the balance of power between the apes and the humans, as well as between the apes and themselves.
The plot takes place a few hundred years after a ‘war’, which put humans at a disadvantage. Those of them who didn’t escape the virus were intellectually neglected for generations, a process that led them to behavior and survivability befitting of destitute cavemen. Those who were lucky enough to be isolated have completely disappeared, and it is doubtful that the shelters they fled to contain anything but skeletons and rotting food. On a conceptual level, this is a fascinating dynamic that has not yet been explored in the intellectual universe that Reeves created. Although some of the visuals of The Hunt for Humans are very reminiscent of the original film series, it is easy to assume that in the context of the reboot we will have a more in-depth exploration of the new power relations.
So that’s it – yes and no. The film insists that the relationship that is forged between Noah and May is very deep and complex. Layers of mistrust and conflicting interests combine with empathy and a desire to live in partnership. The ideas are very clear, and on paper also very interesting, but the stumbling block comes in the execution phase. The chemistry between Noah and May is almost non-existent, and although I don’t usually point the finger of blame at the actors, it’s hard to ignore how Freya Allen doesn’t deliver the goods. Accompanied by the same aura of lack of charisma and lack of sympathy that suffocates the entire journey. Noah doesn’t star in this aspect either, with a milky personality and such a personal process By the book that it sometimes feels like this whole adventure is just a chore on his schedule.
A very wise man once told me: “A cliché is not a derogatory word, it is simply a narrative tool based on prior knowledge.” This sentence has not left me for many years. He shaped my perception. A New Kingdom is a very, very clichéd film, but I still didn’t say that in any derogatory way. Only now do the problems begin; So many scenes, fools lingering over such and such objects, certain pieces of dialogue, were performed in such a clear and familiar way that I, Zion Hershkowitz, my good friend from the visiting team, and my older brother, simply sat and read the dialogues in real time while they were heard on the wonderful IMAX speakers around us. Very specific parts of the film’s ending were so obvious from the first half hour of viewing that the remaining two hours were often boring and banal.
Clichés are not always bad, but they should be used responsibly. Sometimes it’s fun to have references to familiar tropes when the script earns them honestly, with a dash of creativity and a unique style. In the case of New Kingdom it’s evident that going into his first big gig post the Maze Runner era, Wes Ball opened up the Hollywood director’s ABC book and just went for the simplest formula he could find. Screenwriter Josh Friedman is also responsible for the matter. It is a story of heroism, responsibility, leadership, and personal sacrifice for those closest to our hearts. In the same way, this story could deal, and honestly has dealt in the past, with fish, owls, aliens, and perhaps worst of all – with humans. New Kingdom’s only unique discussion, the biting dynamic between humans and apes, gets almost no space, is led by a dry and weightless relationship, and mostly feels underutilized.
on top of the world
Still, I will insist that A New Kingdom is not a waste of time. There is something fun about this world, and after Reeves’ dark-gray trilogy I enjoyed watching the intelligent monkeys ride horses through lush green lawns and forests. Amusingly, the level of CGI doesn’t feel any better than the last 7-year-old film, but that didn’t really bother me. That’s not what we gathered for, in my opinion.
One of the strongest elements in the film is Raka, an orangutan who accompanies Noah on his journey and is played by Peter Macon. All the charisma that Noah and May lack seems to have been absorbed into Raka. He is intelligent, heartwarming, entertaining and a frame stealer. The facial animation of all the monkeys is very impressive, and I must say that the combination of grunts and standard speech works better than expected, especially considering the fact that the amount of words is significantly greater than in the previous cartoons. But Raka, oh, Raka is just a joy to watch. Probably the most visually impressive character in the series besides Caesar. In such a simple dialogue, he manages to convey a lot of nuance through the giant monkey mask, with carefully timed body language that optimally utilizes the motion capture technology. Just for his scenes, which aren’t as many as I might like, it’s worth giving New Kingdom a chance.
Proximus Caesar is also relatively charismatic on the acting level, but doesn’t really do enough interesting things on the plot level to be considered a significant villain. The villains of the reboot were in my opinion the weakest link in the trilogy, and Proximus joins the club. He is not a physical threat like his predecessors, and does not really demonstrate his evilness in this aspect with his own hands. He tries really hard to create mental pressure on Noah and May, but his supposed iconic scenes end up in the cliché camp I mentioned earlier. Proximus thinks he is strong and evil, but in reality he is compassionate and spends more time than he executes. He goes as he came.
In the technical aspects, the film does the job within the standard of the modern Hollywood blockbuster. In the context of the limited budget we gave to the stamp, it can be said that this is a very nice achievement in itself. It’s obvious that Ball drew some inspiration from Reeves’ cinematography and atmosphere, which helps to link the new film to the reboot trilogy, but the rest of the inspiration comes from the same directorial book I mentioned earlier. There is nothing particularly wrong with the photography, as it is just banal for the most part. Some of the weak compositional choices are reminiscent of quick events from video games, which focus on information that is not necessary for us as passive viewers and mainly reduce the panic, but other than that the fools are simple and clear. The action and battles don’t feel as rough as in Reeves, and the ferocity of the monkey punches isn’t expressed with the same intensity. The soundtrack is basic, with motifs reminiscent of the previous films, but nothing special here.
The design of the world stands out for the better. Noah’s tribe is very pleasant and planned in a very logical way. The architecture of the central structure, which feels like the bread of an observation tower, a huge tree and a zoo facility, tells the story of the tribe, and conveys its culture and customs well. I really enjoyed watching Noah mess around and explore the interactive and detailed environment that felt like a nice and friendly Hub. It is obvious that a lot of thought was put into it. In contrast, the kingdom of Proximus Caesar is much less visually interesting and looks like a barbarian village in Civilization 6. If you are building an original and interesting world, I would like it to be spread throughout the film and not be drained to the beginning.
Did you know I’m a gamer?
To conclude, I will dedicate a small section to the swans of my mind. In case you didn’t know, Wes Ball is currently working on the live-action Zelda movie. This is a very significant event for me, to say the least. I entered a new realm, among other things, to understand if the Zelda movie is in good hands. Ball now uses every interview to explain how much he is a part of the gamer community, how important Zelda is to him, and how hard he tries to make the best movie he can imagine. Despite my complaints, I will say that upon leaving the hall I actually felt relieved.
I threw in references here and there, but in many moments it seems that New Kingdom really draws a lot of inspiration from video games. As Zion also gleefully pointed out during the film, many environments and shots look like they were taken directly from The Last of Us and Horizon. Many scenes where Noah rides his horse helped me understand exactly how Link would look on a pea. It is believed that at the time of filming Ball did not know that he was going to fulfill his dream as the director of the Zelda movie, but it seems as if he was preparing for this day anyway.
There is nothing cynical about Planet of the Apes: A New Kingdom. It is evident that Ball really created a film here that he would have liked to see himself, and along the way did not harm the legacy of Reeves or the franchise as a whole. It’s a film that doesn’t take any bold steps in any direction, so its mistakes don’t make it unwatchable. In many ways this is what a Zelda movie needs – someone who thinks basic and respects the foundations of the franchise. After all, all we need is to see Link and Ganondorf fighting, some chickens, Rufiz and jars breaking, and one princess who is a little in love with our hero but not really. All in all, I think Zelda is in good hands.
Planet of the Apes: A New Kingdom is that friend who is nice to be with, but not fun enough to schedule a meeting with more than once every two or three months. It’s not that the meetings with him are suffering, they’re just not exciting or innovative enough to warrant more than that. A New Kingdom has flashes of brilliance in some places, but most of the time it goes for the most predictable, in a way that doesn’t leave a mark for a very long time. If you’re a fan of the franchise I think you’ll find value in it, but you don’t have to find that value immediately in theaters.
