Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - Grading & Discussion

I just saw this, and really enjoyed it, even though Gary Oldman isn't used to the full extent of his talents. I'm a huge fan of the original films and related media. I love how this was rebooted for a different angle on animal experimentation, etc.

The child in me, of course, wishes the new films could recycle some of the wacked-out story ideas from the old Planet of the Apes magazine.

That said, is there any dissension in the ranks of Apes fandom akin to the frothing in the Trek community about the recent films?

 

I wonder if they would ever remake the original Planet of the Apes in the new continuity?

 

This doesn't happen very often online, but I'm going to admit you won the argument.

I can't provide an iron-clad rationalization for why wind turbines couldn't have been erected within city-limits. Within some metropolitan areas maybe, but the wind-currents off the ocean are probably sufficient in many places (including the bridge).

Whether they had the tools necessary to erect them, I dunno, but then it really gets into the minutiae.

I'll concede it's a genuine plot-hole, and I was willing to concede it as a plot-hole before, only that there MIGHT have been some way for them to try to rationalize it in some missing dialogue during the exchange about there being no-alternative.

That being said, does acknowledging plot-hole hinder my enjoyment of the movie? No. Mainly because I like to process movies more based on the message they're trying to convey and the character arcs. The thematic purpose of the film would not be realized if they merely erected wind-turbines. Someone flagged me for saying this by saying "META ARGUMENT!" Whatever that means.

There are a lot of left-brained people who like to deconstruct films purely on the basis of their inner-consistency. If there's a plot-hole (think Checkov not being seen during Space Seed) then they harp on it and harp on it as if they've got his "gotcha" that is supposed to make everyone throw up their hands and say "Yep, that means the film sucks." Well, maybe that's how it works for some people, but I think most people leave some room for poetic license.

Remember, this is a film that has to sell you on talking apes riding horses and shooting guns. And if you saw (or will see) it, you'll realize it does a damn good job of it, mostly by virtue of the FX and the 100% serious performance-capture on the part of Serkis and company. While it has its popcorn moments, it's ultimately played very straight, zero camp. And I felt the sincerity of the production from the first frame to the last. That's what I keyed on, not the plot-hole over power-sources.

The problem is the original Apes played out like a Twilight Zone movie (or M Night movie) and so the twist at the end (as obvious as it was) was the whole purpose. Since the audience already knows what happened, the process of gradual discovery that Taylor goes through doesn't work the same way. The theme that could still carry over is one in which the Apes gradually appropriate human technology and rewrite biblical history to place themselves in the center of the universe, denying the fact they didn't come first and mostly stole all they knew from their current slaves. They began to setup Maurice as a "Lawgiver" character, but I would think it would take a long long time for the Ape society to begin to resemble the one we saw in the original 60s film. That society was kind of a cross between medieval and old-west, whereas nuApes is currently at a native-american level.

 

They've laid the groundwork if they so choose (the disappearing Mars ship in the first movie) but yes, it would not be the same movie - I would hope that they would keep all four astronauts alive for a bit longer and it would likely involve more action than the original.

The Tim Burton movie was indeed more like a Twilight zone movie. It was fun but gimmicky and had little so say about the human condition.

 

You have a poor understanding of The Twilight Zone.

 

See, for me though that does not consitute a plot-hole. Just because the characters don't explicitly state why there is no alternative, doesn't mean there isn't a reason. I just accept it as a given and enjoy.

(That's not to say I always subscribe to the "the movie said so" way of thinking. Far from it. Just that I don't believe absence of evidence is evidence of absence.)

 

I'm sure they will eventually if this franchise remains succesful. We're going to get a whole lot of Cesar in the immediate future though.

 

After finally seeing the movie, my biggest question is: What the hell happened to the roads? Why couldn't they travel to, hell, nearly anywhere that was more easily accessible location to look for power options? They even said they ran out of nuclear fuel, so clearly they had guys capable to using that kind of tech, so why not go hunt for more fuel at other known locations, too? And if it was a fact of convenience, why did they wait so long before checking to see if they could access the dam in the first place? Wouldn't that have been a priority some time ago?

Also, why did they need a dam's power supply to power their radio? They acted like this was the first time in forever that they were able to turn the thing on.

 

It's San Francisco, a major metropolitan hub, so rather than them fanning out to scavenge, I would think the unwashed masses from nearby poorer or rural areas converged onto SF looking for asylum and had to be continually fought off. That's why they had walled/gated the city off. It wasn't built that way to defend it from apes, but from other humans. I would think as long as the plague was actively weeding out the population that it would have been safer to just hunker down, especially since they had a healthy cache of supplies to draw-from. Plus we don't know if the entire population is immune or not. Some of them could still be vulnerable and just beneficiaries of isolation. Think of the monasteries during the medieval plagues or the underground society in 12-Monkeys.

There are hints given as to the zombie-apocalypse-style violence that occurred in the early days. We don't know exactly how long it lasted, but we know it scarred the survivors to have lived through it. Even Gary Oldman's character was worried that the people in SF themselves would revolt as soon as supplies run short. You'd think they'd want to make damn sure it had run its course before making the decision to turn on the radios.

Overall, it paints a picture where human society is fearful and always on the verge of a riot and only a select few are doing anything reasonable, and even then, maybe not that well thought out. Considering what happened after Katrina, for instance, that may be a fairly realistic portrayal of human-nature.

Or Serkis will keep playing descendants the way Roddy McDowall did.

 

That was one of the few quibbles i had with it too. The reactions (and situation) made it seem like this was the first time they'd had power for ages.

 

I'd assumed that a short range radio could function on a manual dynamo but they'd need more power to run a radio tower for long distance comms.

 

They had gasoline generator power before , but they were talking to Canada after the Dam came online. I don't know the difference in radio range between the 2 sources if any.

 

They set it up from the get-go, because (IIRC) the Icarus is launched (in the background) in Rise.

 

Serkis did say during an interview I watched that he would be happy to play a descendant of Cesar if they took the franchise in that direction.

 

For the 3rd installment I predict the closing of cesars story, in a heroic sacrifice that solidifies him as a legend among the apes.

 

Actually, right at the end of the credits there are some sounds, and both me and my girlfriend thought the samething about them...

Spoiler: Spoilers

You don't see Koba dying, and the breathing at then end did sound like him. The fact that instead of just falling down, he crashed into a bridge which then fell down, and that he is one tough son of a bitch could point to his survival and return in the third movie.

 

Enjoyable. Sure it had a few plot holes but just abou every movie does.

A comparatively happy ending. Particularly for this franchis
Next movie title? War on pota? Clash on pota?

 

Probably quite a lot, going by the way modern pre-agrarian societies are organized. There's generally a specialization of labor between men and women, e.g. men doing the hunting and women the gathering, or men clearing away land for horticulture and women doing the planting and cultivating, but both sexes play important and integral roles in society, and women's roles are arguably more important (gathering provides 2/3 of the calories in a hunter-gatherer diet, and women's role as the maintainers and managers of social order is highly important). Male dominance was pretty much an invention of agrarian societies.

Yes, but that doesn't mean one sex does everything while the other just stands around looking pretty. It means there's a division of labor with both sexes playing crucial roles. Probably Maurice, who was evidently responsible for teaching and managing the community, should've been a female character instead.



Here's my blog review:

http://christopherlbennett.wordpress.com/2014/07/29/dawn-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-review-spoilers/

 

A+ Everything I'd want in a blockbuster film.

 

Agreed - everything I'd want, and more than I usually get even from the best of them these days.

Much as I liked the first one with Franco, this one was better. That the writers incorporated so many riffs on Battle For The Planet Of The Apes in a movie that's so different in tone, so much better and so much more sophisticated is remarkable.

The scale of this, compared to the first, is extraordinary and it's very well realized. Can't wait for the next one.