Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) ***/5. The vulgar elements are present but the film manages to remain interesting throughout as an origin story for a long running franchise

The Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a good film despite the inherent vulgar elements in the story. Despite these vulgar elements it retains a steady head by adhering to the film’s internal logic which is the process of transformation of a mild mannered ape,(which inherited special genes from its mother who dies in a laboratory where scientists led by Will Rodman(James Franco) are experimenting on a drug that will increase brain function) into a revolutionary who leads his fellow apes to freedom from the oppressive bourgeois system. The film may be attached to a long running franchise however it achieves things which its predecessors did not mainly because it seeks to explain how apes could possibly gain control of an entire planet. As we know it chimpanzees are merely test subjects in a laboratory and for them to rule the earth would require a higher brain function which they do not possess at the moment however man gives them a nudge in the right direction. The previous installments in the franchise began with the absolute which is that the apes are already in control and have high intelligence which can only be accorded (in sci -fi films ) to extra terrestrials. This is why the previous films had the apes on another planet thousands of light years away from earth for it would require too much explanation of how these apes actually became smart. I have never appreciated those films however it is clear that there is a symbolic element inherent in the franchise that would make it successful. This in fact is what makes most science fiction and fantasy films successful: the  symbol. This film seeks to explore what symbol the leader of the clan, Caesar, (whose movements and facial expressions are modeled off simulations by Andy Serkis) represents as he leads the members of his species to freedom.  The vulgar element rests in the inability of the story to seem credible however that is superseded by the symbol which is resistance and triumph over the existing establishment which in this case is represented by the bourgeois class who made the drastic break with feudalism/or the  medieval period many centuries ago to become the dominant world economic force. The success of the bourgeois class is marked by exploitation of the working classes who generate the surplus value and therefore profit (associated with price) which makes this class and their lackeys rich. It is clear that Caesar’s rebellion (it is not necessarily a complete revolution since no new society is formed) represents a break with the system and the proposed dawn of a new civilization. There were those like Karl Marx who believed that the class struggle inherent in the capitalist system will be resolved with a higher form of civilization. In this case it is represented by the civilization that is to be created by the apes. We shall see what the apes have in store

What’s good about this film?

The development of the character Caesar and the many transitions brought about many interactions that eventually  make him into the leader of the ape rebellion is the major highlight. His development takes years unlike other films with the same premise where the main character becomes a hero over night. When Will (James Franco ) discovers him in the lab after his mother has been murdered following a burst of rage in the lab, he has inherited her characteristics of high intelligence which is artificially boosted in the lab with the experimental drug 112 which is later upgraded to 113. The drug is experimented on the apes that are closest to us biologically in order to determine the limitations of the project before it can be put into mass production by the capitalist class so as to make a profit. In capitalist production it is the scientists such as Will who make advancements in technology before  the existing technology can be improved upon. In this case it is the pharmaceutical companies who stand to benefit and I appreciated the rebellion of the apes because the tests in these films  is similar to tests run by these quack doctors on African people (it is then the hypocritical bourgeois class that turn around when Africa burns to say ‘help them! Help them!’) before they send the drugs to market. Caesar inherits the effects of the drug which see him born as a highly intelligent creature. It is because of his high intelligence that he is able to make insights into the servile conditions in which he is born. After several instances he turns his back on the humans who  sheltered him because, as the film brings across, this sheltering is questionable since he goes around on a leash like a dog and one with his intelligence should not be treated like a pet. Initially he unconsciously sees himself as a pet but eventually he assumes control of his clan through several instances simply because he is aware of how to wield the power exhibited by man. The transition from this intelligent pet to leader of the new civilization is a true highlight and it was interesting because it is a process of time and it is slow like time itself. It is the  small details revealed during  the course of 1hr. 50 minutes that will clearly make you appreciative of the screenplay and why the apes truly deserve their freedom. I cannot elaborate on these small details however it is these elements that make you understand the various transitions to the new civilization although you should know the outcome: there will eventually be a planet of the apes. The fact that you know the outcome should not deter you because of these transitions which are revealed in the small moments. Always bear in my mind that these transitions involve Caesar breaking with his human benefactors and his rise to power among his own kin who must first accept him as one of their own; although I told you about those situations does not reveal the small details that account for them coming into being. You know the outcome but the film maker's vision arises with the small details associated with Caesar’s emotional reactions to certain situations that alter his consciousness. It is much like Nolan in Batman Begins (2005) another origin story that took the time to elaborate on the hero’s quest to become an ideal. The quest undertaken by Caesar involves trial and failure and this film gets it right to some extent. 

Another good element of the film is the digital effects of Caesar himself which are crucial to understand his emotional reactions to certain situations in the film which are generated by his clashes with man. His movements are modeled off the simulations made by Andy Serkis however the originality is dimmed since the same technique was utilized by WETA (the visual effects co.) with another digital character by the name of Gollum for the  The Lord of the Rings trilogy. It would have been good if it was not all digitized however visual effects make things so easy so I suppose it does not matter. The visual effects, unfortunately, were jarring and all too obvious that the eye was being manipulated. All in all it was crucial to highlight the emotions expressed through the facial expressions.

Lastly, the symbolic elements of the film should resonate with some moviegoers. Caesar’s rebellion will be familiar with all members of the proletariat who are exploited by the profit mongers of the bourgeois class. It will resonate with those who feel themselves to be exploited on some level simply because you can identify with Caesar’s struggle. Is it any wonder why he is called Caesar? The only way to avoid exploitation is to seize power from those who exploit you. Apart from Caesar this film is a series of sudden jolts however they came close to tackling the concept of evolution where the once dominant species disperses and new varieties take its place i.e. varieties emerge from the once dominant species and  spread thereby  assuming new forms etc and the once dominant species becomes too big and eventually declines in the face of competition from its descendants. This element is vaguely present here however it would have been good to tackle the issue related to the decline of man which would explain the rise of the planet of the apes.

What’s Bad about this film?

The story has some vulgar elements that deny it a place among the pantheon of great science fiction. The apes are aided in their quest by man’s folly which happens to be a drug that dramatically enhances brain function. One critic, Armond White, pointed out the opening scene of 2001: A Space Odyssey where the apes, which eventually become human, learn, after being  inspired by the mysterious black monolith, the process of creating tools with their hands. The inspiration is external and not internal and the presence of the object alters the consciousness of the apes who eventually become man. In this current film the influence is both internal and external and it is the internal that shed light on the external. This film would have seemed more organic without the internal element of the compound however it seems as if it is unavoidable so as to hasten the process. It does not take away from the small moments but the internal element is a great benefit since some of the apes seem to be  pumped with steroids. There is one scene for instance where apes are considered stupid and Caesar resorts to the camp element by artificially making them smart and so now they will be able to understand him. It denies us  the opportunity of absorbing what made Caesar so smart since now all the apes become smart so radically and in the flash of the moment. Caesar took years to become who he is whereas his followers take 10 seconds. This is not in reference to the social characteristics of the apes themselves which is dealt with well. The final battle therefore seems very trite for they seem like super powered apes on Caesar’s mission.  Therefore while there was the slow build up in the beginning there was also interspersed the Holly wood convenience involving rudimentary action scenes instead of a more complete idea of the subject. The potential of the premise seems to be sacrificed near the end  as the action is a  vehicle that is not developed any further. There is a sequel in the makes no doubt however the audience could have been served with a sense of the impending battle that is likely to come. The external element is necessary because all the apes should be sharing in Caesar’s glory.  As the intimate is sacrificed for the large scale battle it remains to be seen how the other apes will develop on a similar scale as Caesar as it is supposed to be a collective effort which determines the birth of a new civilization. We shall see however how they resolve this issue in the sequel.

The final scene however does not suggest that there will be a planet of the apes it seems that the apes, like the chickens in Chicken Run (2000), have discovered their  sanctuary. There does not seem to be an element in the film that suggests the rise of the planet of the apes there only seems to be a rebellion and nothing more which is why an elaboration of Caesar’s manifesto would have been helpful in  understanding the direction he intends to take with his followers. The end only suggests that they are free not that they intend to take over; in this case it is another element independent of the apes that will help them to conquer although that negative element of the compound which affects man cannot solely wipe out the human race. The element which you will discover near the end comes across as superficial and vulgar to excuse the fact that Caesar does not have a manifesto. If they worded the title differently then I would not have expected much from the film however by the end you have no idea of any planet of the apes. I am not even sure that Caesar himself is aware of what he wants to do for the end suggests that once he has arrived at this particular place it is the end of his quest. Is that the planet?

 This is why the earlier versions of the planet of the apes found the apes in control of their own planet independent of man for to explain the context of the foundation of a new planet of the apes a clear manifesto is required. We will get that in the inevitable sequel however it is not clear since Caesar is more concerned about his emotional reaction to events. Even the final shot does not suggest that there is an impending conflict. The film was simply abbreviated with no sense of direction apart from the Caesar element which suggests that they focused solely on the subjective while not embracing the objective. It is clear that the apes will not conquer in Caesar’s time so why focus the story exclusively on him? Are we to believe that by the end of the next sequel mankind would have crumbled and the apes will take over our ruined world which they will have to rebuild? 2001: A Space Odyssey made a postulation and stuck to its manifesto and although some people were confused one cannot deny the concept of evolution over millions of years. In this film revolution is a simple rebellion based on the presentation however it was to result in the birth of something new or something that will challenge our perception of the world in the form of a new society however this is not forthcoming here.  In Kubrick’s masterpiece it was a postulation about man’s future in the world and that was its manifesto having carried through to the end. They conveniently avoided these high ideals in this film because it will be difficult to resolve without simplifying and vulgarizing the issue in the sequel for it would not have been possible to show the actual birth of a new society in this film based on the subjective presentation of Caesar. I will be surprised to see them pull it off without people questioning the credibility of the premise. If they do pull it off it will be good to see how the upcoming director will tackle, realistically, the element that is involved in world takeover. Caesar is smart but smart is not enough. When the credits roll there is a simple element near the end which will see the end of mankind.  It seems we forgot about quarantine.  As no one knows what brought about the extinction of the dinosaurs how are we to know why man will become extinct. I will love to see the director tackle this issue. This is why I wished the film would have tackled the issue related to the decline of man; it instead focuses on the members in the laboratory instead of making it an objective discourse on the future of mankind. In the film he should have included this element which would have helped the audience to see why man is doomed to give way to a new variety of species which will eventually supersede it. If they do not do this for the sequel it will be a failure with the vulgar elements already inherent in the presentation of this film coming to the fore. They should strive for the objective.