Return to the Planet of the Apes

Well, here's a review I never expected to be writing. 

That's not because I've been severely absent from my blog since 2019, but because I figured the Planet of the Apes reboots had ended seven years ago with a conclusion that was pretty solid and pretty final. The main protagonist of those reboots had died after all, and the last film had set things up in a way that could easily bring us full circle back to the events of the original 1968 film. What else could there be to cover?

Well, in the spirit of its subject matter, this franchise just showed us again that evolution is a never-ending process. As long as humans and hyper-intelligent apes share a planet, they'll keep finding newer and bigger problems to have with each other — and for screenwriters to write about.

And that's what's so interesting about these reboots: each installment jumps years ahead of the previous one to show us a new stage in the apes' history, so we get to see exactly how they and their problems are evolving. It also gives us the chance to explore a lot of the same themes and ideas from new perspectives since the power dynamics between humans and apes keep shifting. This latest film, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, actually has a fairly similar plot to War for the Planet of the Apes, except that the delusional villains who enslave the hero's people this time are other apes and we get a character who's sort of a human version of Koba.

Speaking of characters from the first three films, Caesar, Maurice, Rocket, and a few others have cameos in Kingdom's prologue, but that's it. This film is both a sequel and a soft reboot that jumps ahead "many generations later" to give us a new cast of characters, including a new chimp protagonist named Noa. I'm assuming the writers gave him that name as an allegory since he literally has to save his people from a flood at one point in the film.

We get tons of new world-building this time around. We get a new orangutan character who also steals the show. We get our first mention of gibbons in the whole franchise. We even get a surprise appearance from William H. Macy for some reason, although no casting choice in this series will ever be as much of a head-scratcher as Kris Kristofferson in the Tim Burton film. And of course, we get lots of action, lots of nods to the original film, and even more of what's still some of the best character CGI put to film. All in all, Kingdom is a fun ride.

So how does it fair as a Planet of the Apes film?

As I mentioned before, this installment treads new ground by giving us a large-scale ape vs. ape conflict and also seeming to play with a few allegories. The main villain is an ape who goes by the name Proximus Caesar, a cult leader/dictator whose goal is to advance ape-kind into the planet's dominant race by forcing humans to share the secrets of their history and technology. He's presumably done his research on the name Caesar, since he often references the Roman Empire, but his preachings on the values of Caesar the ape are either sorely mistaken or deliberately twisted in order to brainwash his followers and serve his own corrupt agenda. There's some obvious social, political, and religious commentary there, with Caesar the ape even having become a savior-like figure in the eyes of the current ape clans. Just like its predecessors though, Kingdom handles this commentary with a subtle enough hand to avoid the traps that a lot of other movies fall into these days. 

The same goes for the human side of the conflict. Kingdom gives us a strong female character done right in the form of Mae, a teenage girl who manages to stay engaging and somewhat sympathetic throughout the plot even as her deception and prejudice against the apes slowly reveals itself. She's not doing what she does to be evil, she's doing it because her world has been shattered by the apes and she hasn't seen enough of their good side to accept that there are shades of gray in the struggle around her. Again, obvious commentary that's handled well. What's more, the movie ends her arc on a note that seems to suggest further development from her character if she returns in any sequels. 

I will say though that Kingdom is probably still the weakest of the Apes reboots. Noa isn't as compelling of a protagonist as Caesar, the supporting ape characters (aside from Raka the orangutan) aren't as memorable as the ones from the previous films, and the pacing could stand to speed up in many places. Still, calling a film the weakest entry in this series is like saying The Two Towers is the weakest Lord of the Rings film. It's still something to be proud of.

As a minor nitpick though, if it's even canon, the Planet of the Apes Wiki claims that Proximus is a bonobo just like Koba. Why keep making bonobos the bad guys? They're way less aggressive than common chimpanzees and way more endangered. And could this series please give us a gorilla character who doesn't get killed off? They've been through enough! 

All in all, it's nice to make my own return of sorts alongside Planet of the Apes. I don't know how long we'll have to wait for the next installment, or if any more will come after this, but like the titular apes, I've seen enough strength and evolution along the way to be hopeful for the future.

And remember: if you ever tell Maurice the orangutan that gingers have no souls, he'll simply steal yours.

"The Battle of the Five Armies" Extended Edition - Early Review

I've finally seen it.

After ten months of blogging theories and a few days of trying to find a construction-free route to the one theater in town that was showing it, I've finally seen the Extended Edition of The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies.

I should backtrack a little though to talk about this event as a whole. Just as they did with the Lord of the Rings trilogy in June of 2011, the company Fathom Events recently hosted a one-time-only, three-night screening of the Extended Editions of the Hobbit film trilogy in select theaters across the country. Fans like myself naturally flocked to cinemas to see the Extended Editions of the first two films last week, and both were highly entertaining experiences. However, this week's screening of the never-before-seen third Extended Edition was the star attraction of this event.

This was apparent not only from the much larger turnout in the audience, but also from the much more visual presentation of Peter Jackson's pre-movie introduction. Instead of showing one simple shot of the director talking to the camera like the first two Extended Editions did, the third one's intro featured music and clips from all three movies along with a full-screen graphic at the end. This extra bravado for the third Extended Edition makes sense, seeing how underwhelmed so many people were by the theatrical cut, and I for one was very excited for the movie to start after Mr. Jackson was done giving his thank-you's.

With that said, and with the promise not to give away much, what did I think of the Extended Edition of The Battle of the Five Armies?

To begin, there's only about 20 minutes of bonus footage added, not 30 minutes as was originally planned, and the bulk of it is more battle scenes. There are some scenes added before the battle, including a simple but poignant one that fans have been hoping to see since almost last December, but expect a first half that's very similar to the theatrical cut. There's also a bit more wrap-up after the fighting is over, though most of the minor storylines still don't get the closure that a lot of people probably wanted for them.

On a more praising note, there's actually quite a lot of humor throughout the bonus footage. Some of it is just goofy slapstick and sight gags, but the jokes involving the main characters give this version of the film something that was sorely missing from the other: a sense of fun.

Bilbo may be the heart of this story, but in the movies, the dwarves are the soul of it. They're the key to what made Bilbo and the audience come to enjoy this whole adventure in the first place, and having their presence diminished so much in the theatrical cut of The Battle of the Five Armies sapped nearly all of the enthusiasm out of it and left us with a terribly bleak final act of the Hobbit trilogy. Thankfully, the dwarves get way more screentime during the battle and we get more of their action antics like those in the first two films. Fans of Bifur, Bofur, and Bombur are especially going to walk away happy from this movie.

For anyone concerned about the Extended Edition's R rating, don't worry. I can point the finger for that at exactly two shots, and what happens in them is mostly aimed to draw cheers and laughter from the audience. What that says about our modern-day senses of humor is probably more disturbing than the actual onscreen content.

There's really only one deleted scene that I lamented not making it into the Extended Edition, since it likely would have been a major character development moment and was sort of a centerpiece of the film's original trailer, but ultimately, I do understand why it was cut. There's also a scene added in that I've thoroughly spoken against in a previous blog entry, although the way that it unfolds is just so ludicrous and yet poetically fitting that another part of me couldn't help liking it.

And since it's been almost a year since I wrote my "There's Something About Ori" essay, I might as well mention that the little dwarf scribe photobombs Bilbo twice in one bonus scene. It's not the journal scene that I was hoping to get, but I'll still call it a victory.

In short, the Extended Edition of The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies is worth the wait. I wish we had gotten this version in theaters instead last year, and given its 164-minute run time, it feels more like a theatrical cut anyway. Like I said back in December, hardcore fans are probably going to look back on this movie and all five of its predecessors as films that were preceded by condensed editions rather than followed by Extended Editions.

But in the end, I'm grateful that the filmmakers of the six Middle-earth movies cared enough about their fans to give us two versions of each to choose from. We're a very lucky bunch, if you do believe in luck.

Snow White and the Huntsman

I recently rented Snow White and the Huntsman from Netflix. I saw it once before in theaters, and I wasn't really sure what to think of it at the time. My feelings had nothing to do with the whole Kristen Stewart/Rupert Sanders scandal because I was lucky enough to see the movie before all that came out. Since that story overshadows the movie itself nowadays, I might as well get my thoughts on that out of the way first.

You see, I never quite bought that Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson were actually dating in real life. The whole thing felt like a huge publicity stunt for Twilight, in which (according to the reviews I've watched) the two show no chemistry whatsoever. I don't know, maybe I've just seen Singin' in the Rain too many times. Bottom line, I didn't care about the supposed affair and breakup, and I have no idea what the status of their relationship is now. I know even less about Rupert Sanders, so I care even less about his end of the aftermath.


As for Kristen Stewart as an actress, this is the only movie of hers that I've ever seen, and I didn't hate her in it. That's because she was such a non-entity that she didn't trigger any emotional response whatsoever. In fact, that's how I'd describe pretty much every performance in this movie, so Stewart didn't leave any especially negative impressions on me.

And that's ultimately what I've decided about Snow White and the Huntsman: it's a non-entity. I don't love it or hate it. It's just something to stare at for two hours. The story is a confusing mess, the editing sometimes makes things even more confusing, and the pace is so rushed that you never have time to connect with anyone in the story.

There was an option on the DVD to watch the extended cut of the movie instead, but get this - when you select it, a message comes up saying that you can't watch that version on a rental DVD. You have to buy the movie to have access to both cuts of the film. I didn't even know DVD distributors did that. Can anyone tell me if the extended version is any better?

Anyway, back to the review.

For as weak as the script is, I'll admit it's a good twist to have Snow White sort of fall for the huntsman instead of the prince in this version. He's always been the more conflicted and interesting character of the two, and let's face it, he risks and sacrifices a lot more for Snow White than the prince ever does. I always wanted to know what happened to him after he decided not to kill her, so kudos to this film for exploring that. I just wish it could have tied up the love triangle instead of leaving it wide open for a sequel.

The only other thing the film has going for it are the visuals, which are extremely stunning and imaginative. I love that the queen turns into a flock of crows to get from place to place. I love that the trees and rocks in the dark forest morph into monsters that attack the characters. I love that the magic mirror melts and stands up to looks like a person underneath a shiny cloak. The only problem is that there's such a lifeless, jumbled narrative stringing all these images together that you're too busy asking questions to fully admire them.

It's also worth mentioning that this movie goes to a lot of lengths to look like a Lord of the Rings film. Seriously, there's a scene where Snow White is being chased through a forest on horseback by several knights dressed in black, and it looks like they took the chase with Arwen and the Black Riders and Photoshopped Kristen Stewart's face over Liv Tyler's. And just look at Snow White's battle gear at the end and tell me she didn't steal it from Gondor. I find it kind of interesting that Lord of the Rings is still influencing the genre so heavily eleven years after it came out.

And okay, there's actually one more thing this movie has going for it. I find Chris Hemsworth attempting a Scottish accent to be extremely funny. The harder he tries to sound Scottish, the more noticeable his Australian accent becomes. It's like someone put Paul Hogan and Craig Ferguson in a blender and their voices started battling for dominance.

That's not a knock on Hemsworth's performance though. He's actually one of the better actors in the whole cast, or at least he's one of the few who really tries to do a good job. And you know what? I admire him a lot for that. I don't know what it is, but there's just something about him that I always find very likeable.

No! That's not what it is!

...Although that certainly doesn't hurt.

So those are my thoughts on Snow White and the Huntsman. Overall, I say either skip it or just watch it once for a laugh. It's a "C" at best for this one.

Hopefully I'll be seeing a much better fantasy film on Friday.