Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes 239
It's a hollywood blockbuster, so the plot is simple: James Franco is a scientist testing an Alzheimers cure that goes wrong. The test-chimps are all put down, but one was unexpectedly pregnant. Franco has to adopt the baby, whom he raises and teaches. He eventually uses his meds to cure his sick father, and Caesar is taken away to an animal sanctuary where exciting 2nd and 3rd act plot points lead to an action finale.
James Franco really seems to pick good movies to be in. From Freaks and Geeks on, he really seems to land good roles, and this movie was no exception. I've never had a problem buying him as a stoner or spoiled rich kid, but in this movie he gets to show emotion for his Alzheimer's stricken father, passion for his scientific work, and of course love for his ape "child" Caesar. The first half of the movie hangs on this relationship, and Franco holds up his end of the bargain.
Of course, the other side is the CGI rendered, Andy Serkis acted 'Caesar.' The ape was the unexpected child of a mother used to test Franco's Alzheimers cure, which goes horribly wrong and is cancelled. Caesar is a genius monkey who learns to communicate and solve puzzles far beyond a human child of the same age. It must kind of suck being Serkis: his work as Gollum and Kong has typecast him as the 'Performance Capture' poster child, but he does a great job. I buy the emotion in most of the scenes: it's only a few of the action shots where the weight felt wrong to me. For the film to work, Franco, Serkis, and the SFX had to all be pretty much perfect. And for my money, they were.
The rest of the film has some problems: The "Bad Guys" are so unbelievably "Bad" that it makes you want to wince. The zookeeper. The jerk neighbor. The bad boss. They are drawn with such thick black lines, I felt like we lose a lot of the potential for the story. The fact is that Franco is violating medical ethics, there is cruelty being done to animals, innocent people are hurt but because the "Bad Guys" are ludicrously bad, many of the hard issues are glossed over. Franco: Good. People who disagree with Franco: Bad.
As I said above, my fear for the movie was that it would simply be a Transformers style action film. Now, I like Transformers 3 just fine for what it is, but the majority of those movies are simply non-stop, boring action sequences. And I don't much care for that. I love action, but if that's your entire movie, it's pretty tough to carry 2 hours. Fortunately this movie is mostly about the development of Caesar: him struggling to figure out what he is, and finally learning to survive and escape imprisonment. These scenes are interesting and fun. So when we finally get to the dramatic finale atop the Golden Gate Bridge, it's nice to just have the big action release.
Plus Apes wreck stuff. It's pretty awesome.
Also, I don't recommend singing the Simpsons Planet of the Apes Musical during the closing credits. Your wife will get mad at you, even if it was the part you were born to play.
Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (Score:3)
Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (Score:5, Funny)
OMG! (Score:2)
Oh my gosh! I was wrong! It was Earth, all along!
Re: (Score:2)
Previews and review... (Score:2)
The two reviews I've read of it basically said the movie was written by monkeys - for monkeys. If you're a human of even remotely human intelligence, you'll pass.
And the previews - what I can say, looking incredibly dumb - though the graphics look great. So for me, the reviews completely confirmed the obvious conclusion one can draw from the previews.
I means seriously. This is the fucking PLANET of the apes. The movie should be called one square block of the apes. Let's see, the handful of super intelligent
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure how the writers handled this (poorly, I'd suspect), but there have been wild monkeys loose in the Ocala national forest for 70ish years since they were accidentally introduced there. If they could relocate or eradicate them without extensive collateral damage, they would have done it long ago. If the monkeys were a little more intelligent / ambitious, I'm sure they could spread from there.
Re: (Score:2)
There are different levels of threats. Some monkeys in forests scores pretty low.
Now imagine that these monkeys were, say, confirmed agents of biological apocalypse. Then they'd be dead within _hours_. Personally, I'd just surround the woods, evacuate people and then just use chemical weapons to kill everything that breathes.
Re: (Score:2)
We have a winner. Those people who keep offering its a plausible story are completely out of touch with reality. I don't think, "plausible", means what they think it does. They seem to be confused because plausible and completely impossible.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't factor in a little bit of "suspension of disbelief," I'm guessing there are fewer than 10 sci-fi movies you could watch without being annoyed. I've seen a lot, but I can't think of 10 that qualify. I feel sorry for you - there's some good sci-fi out there, but very little that passes the "Could this really happen exactly as depicted?" test. Personally I wasn't expecting to like it being a big fan of the originals, but was pleasantly surprised.
And they didn't go into how the escaped apes were
Re: (Score:2)
The water buffalo in the Everglades were a pretty high priority, and they couldn't manage to capture them. I suppose they could have killed them eventually if they wanted, but they managed to roam free in the swamps for a long time.
In another vein, Osama Bin Laden was a pretty high priority... and the apes won't be trackable by the means that finally brought him down.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, "Everglade preservation" is not kinda the same as "the preservation of human species". And unlike Osama you won't need to search for him - we can just go genocidal on the whole species (well, we are sort of doing this already).
Re: (Score:2)
If we found an intelligent subspecies of dolphin that could communicate with us, would you immediately be like "oh kill them all because they might take over the world?"
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly not.
I'm talking about a case where some species represent an existential threat to humans.
Re: (Score:2)
*** SPOILER *** cont'd
You're right. What people would be concerned about was the bio tech who was exposed to a special, extra-virulent virus-based gene therapy. You know, right after he was hospitalized immediately following exposure. Or possibly when he called in sick to work soon after. Or when he reported signs of illness to the authorities. After any of those almost unavoidably probable events the CDC would have been notified, (probably before the Great Ape Escape) and in the ensuing investigation
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still wondering if they will keep the original storyline with nuclear war between humans.
They've already strayed from the original storyline. In the originals, a virus wiped all of the traditional house pets and apes replaced them. Then became servants and were bred to be intelligent. Finally, about the time everyone had at least one ape-servant, they got pissed and went all ape-shit on the humans.
Re: (Score:2)
The bird flu virus idea was pretty clever. It hearkens back to the 1918 Influenza. Man would be so weakened by the virus he couldn't mount an effective defense. To win, all the apes need to do is survive and reproduce.
Or there can be sequels with lots of man vs ape battles!!!!
Where is the: (Score:2)
You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!
The apes don't win against humans; the humans do in themselves first.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are wrong.
The movie is about the start. These monkeys are supposed to grown on the forest, and grown to milllions, while the humans will suffer the epidemic.
The movie make a good work to show how monkeys are way more versatile and powerfull than humans, making humans feel idiotic and unadecuate.
The movie is very good at setting a start for a possible suppremacy of monks. But is sets maybe 4000 years before monkeys end the work :D
Re: (Score:2)
What a buzzkill.
I guess you hated Jaws too? "Get out of the water. Problem solved."
(Knock knock. Who's there? Land shark..)
Re: (Score:2)
You haven't even seen it.
I have and I thought that it was excellent. It was exciting, well acted, well handled, and just generally very good.
I give it 8/10.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, that certainly sounds like a better movie.
Re: (Score:2)
They take over because **DELETED SPOLER**.
Ya, from the first preview I ever saw, I just assumed it was one of two things. One, some cross species super virus as a result of the drug. Or, it ultimately turns everyone into monkeys - basically DNA regression.
Honestly, unless there are super hot naked chicks in every scene I can't imagine how this movie is anything better than a rental.
Re: (Score:2)
unless there are super hot naked chicks in every scene
You'll probably prefer The Change Up a lot more then.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't actively seek out such movies; not that I mind. My point being, unless there are super hot chicks in each scene, the movie doesn't seem to have anything else to offer.
Re: (Score:2)
The chances of a super intelligent, super aggressive, alpha-human level predator not being genocided is exactly zero. Humans have done far worse to other humans for far less. The fact its a sub-human species means its an absolute given.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't seen the movie, but the only way the monkeys could realistically supplant human domination would be to lay low, breed, and wait for humans to weaken themselves sufficiently though the usual means (warfare, economic unsustainability, etc.).
No, all they would have to do is put on a jacket and a tie, get in to law school, graduate and run for elected office.
On second thought, that might actually improve things.
Obligatory Simposons (Score:2, Funny)
http://www.strimoo.com/video/16728738/Planet-of-the-Apes-The-Musical-Veoh.html [strimoo.com]
It's hard to find a good video due to Fox being so strict. But this is still one of the funniest scenes Simpsons scenes of all time.
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent.
Andy Serkis on npr about virtual acting (Score:2)
And off topic some more, we already know about trying to raise a monkey as a human baby [npr.org]
It's good. (Score:3)
It is not a great movie, but it was good. My wife was sad for the apes, and that kind of detracted from her experience (she really likes science fiction). I was rooting for the Apes the whole way and I liked it.
The CGI is the best. At one point animated clothing is ripped off an animated ape. Only now, as I'm writing this, does it sink in show technically awesome that was.
The review is correct about the moral stupidity of the movie. Franco's unethical behavior and his exploitation of the primates is glossed over, while the Anti-Franco people are all evil.
It was fun, though. I didn't want it to end.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, but when the apes take over the world, it will be all your fault!
Re: (Score:2)
You're assuming all risks end with yourself. They don't.
Semi Spoiler - If a drug using a virus based delivery system has side affects on it's subject it's not just the subject who has to deal with it. But then I guess you're fine with untested viral mutations being spread willy nilly amongst populated areas.
If you're willing to receive the cure but stay confined to a medical lab for long term monitoring then feel free, although having a disease that primarily targets the brain and reduces cognitive skills
Re: (Score:2)
Penicillin resistance comes to mind. . . .
Could be worse . . . (Score:3)
> was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?
As long as it's not a Syfy film!
Re: (Score:2)
> was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?
As long as it's not a Syfy film!
I'm suprised the Sy Fi channel hasn't come out with "Rise: The planet of the Apes" (with the addition of a colon) in the same way that there was "Battle:Los Angeles" and "Battle Of Los Angeles". Or will we get Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?
Re: (Score:2)
> was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?
As long as it's not a Syfy film!
I'm suprised the Sy Fi channel hasn't come out with "Rise: The planet of the Apes" (with the addition of a colon) in the same way that there was "Battle:Los Angeles" and "Battle Of Los Angeles". Or will we get Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?
Wouldn't they have to cancel / rearrange the wrasslin' and ghost huntin' shows? That sounds like a lotta work.
Re: (Score:2)
Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?
When does this one release. Sounds totally bad ass.
On a scale of one to five Cowboys and Aliens (Score:3)
Where one is it sorta sucks, and five is it really sucks.
[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] (Score:2)
Great. Another "science will destroy us all" theme. Maybe Will Smith could show up as Robert Neville and attack the apes with the cancer-cure-gone-all-wrong from I Am Legion.
The "Bad Guys" are so unbelievably "Bad" that it makes you want to wince.
Nothing new there. Hollywood sucks at creating compelling villains. It's why the Green Lantern movie gave us Yet Another Evil Space Cloud.
Re: (Score:2)
I Am Legion.
Is that the one with a herd of zombie pigs running off the cliff?
Re: (Score:2)
Great. Another "science will destroy us all" theme.
Good news everybody! We're all going to die...but with SCIENCE!
Saw it last night (Score:2)
and rather enjoyed it. The ending was different from what I expected or thought it might be, but given the nature of apes, a much more fitting ending than the one I imagined.
the only people the apes kill are the ones that deserved it. on the other side, lots of apes were killed by people.
CGI vs actors (Score:2)
The thing that impressed me the most, as well as dissapointed me the most, was that the CGI Caeser's acting was better than all the human actors. Part of it was bad writing keeping the actors from being anything more cardboard cutouts, but the Caeser's facial expressions really conveyed what he was going through. I was impressed by that. The rest of the movie, though, felt a little flat in comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing that impressed me the most, as well as dissapointed me the most, was that the CGI Caeser's acting was better than all the human actors.
Does anyone on /. know of any purely CGI acted movies? I'm not talking about anime, or even rotoscoped like "scanner darkly" but a movie where all the actors are "realistic looking computer generated human beings"? Like all tech, I'm sure the pr0n industry will implement it first...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone on /. know of any purely CGI acted movies? I'm not talking about anime, or even rotoscoped like "scanner darkly" but a movie where all the actors are "realistic looking computer generated human beings"? Like all tech, I'm sure the pr0n industry will implement it first...
I think one of the first was Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within [wikipedia.org]. Not a great film, but the tech is impressive for its era (2001).
The best example is probably James Cameron's Avatar. All the aliens were computer-generated, and the acting for them is pretty good. Of course it's not as good as Andy Serkis in 'Rise'....
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what you mean, although Polar Express might fit the bill. The human actors in that were mocapped but it was a 100% CGI film.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within, and Beowolf.
Beware, however, that both fall rather hard smack-dab in the bottom of the uncanny-valley.
-dZ/
Re: (Score:2)
Here's [latimes.com] an LA Times article on Serkis and his role as Caesar.
It was completely plausible. (Score:4, Interesting)
Most of the naysayers who haven't seen this film are complaining that they don't believe a handful of apes could take over the entire planet.
Well, they don't. Get over that. This is a prison breakout movie. They do eventually own the planet, through a twist that's telegraphed in advance and completely plausible. But the main action is a couple hundred apes against the San Francisco PD.
Just go see the movie. It's very, very good, completely plausible, with no plot holes. (Although as mentioned, some of the humans in it do act stupidly evil.) And Serkis deserves an Oscar nod for the role.
Re: (Score:2)
Apes have already taken over the planet, you insensitive fool!
Re: (Score:2)
They do eventually own the planet, through a twist that's telegraphed in advance and completely plausible.
I guess I figure not so much, if your bio-research lab has any protocol at all for accidental exposure.
Re: (Score:2)
By far the biggest plot hole in the movie.
I liked the movie in general but that entire scene of them administering the newly redesigned drug was sooooo painful to watch. From the delivery method to their security procedures it made me wish I had gone for a snack break and missed those 5 minutes. I would have rather just heard someone describe it, after the fact, and assumed it couldn't be as bad as they made it sound then to see such a blatantly bad scene be projected on screen just to push the story alo
News for nerds with room temperature IQs... (Score:2)
Plus Apes wreck stuff. It's pretty awesome.
First there's all the stories about comic book movies aimed at 12-year olds, now we're getting spammed about another crappy film you couldn't pay me to see, written by what seems to be a third-grader. Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"
Re: (Score:3)
Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"
I dunno, when did you join?
I kid, I kid.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First there's all the stories about comic book movies aimed at 12-year olds, now we're getting spammed about another crappy film you couldn't pay me to see, written by what seems to be a third-grader. Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"
Did you ever care to think that people may not need "ambient temperature" IQ's to enjoy a movie or story? What kind of entertainment gets you? The Hitchhiker Guide to the Galaxy? Herp derp 42. Dune? Herp derp spice spice spice space worm spice.
You can degrade anything into mindless drivel if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it can entertain us for a few hours from aspects of life that are not entertaining (e.g. filing expense reports after a business trip).
Take your arrogance and shove it where
Re: (Score:2)
Shove it in Seattle?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I find it kind of warm in here....
They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even in the original Planet of the Apes series of movies, the original timeline that led to the ape future was unaltered. Xera going back in time and Caesar initiating the revolt actually resulted in a different future where apes and humans lived together peacefully rather than the ape future that Taylor visited. This is established in Battle For the Planet of the Apes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
In this movie "Bright Eyes" is Cesar's mother - the same nickname given to Taylor. The subtext is that Charlie Heston was reincarnated as a female chimp!
Re: (Score:2)
OK, now I've truly seen it all.
That's it for me!
It must kind of suck being Serkis (Score:2)
no it doesn't. not everyone wants to be julia roberts or another top tier star. they don't even make that much money after all the taxes and agent fees are accounted for.
i bet Serkis loves his job because he never leaves the studio, doesn't have to travel around the world all the time and is always there for his kids while making a very nice living and not seeing most of his money go to agents, publicists, accountants and lawyers
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong.
According to NPR [npr.org], motion capture actors now perform on the real set wearing a Lycra bodysuit covered with dots. Both live action and motion capture cameras "capture" the scene.
According to the interview, Serkis doesn't see any differe
for good sci-fi, see Attack the Block (Score:2)
Attack the Block is currently the best sci-fi movie I know of in theatres (though very FEW theatres). Much less humorous than the premise or trailers make it out to be, but there is a fair amount of humour in it.
Serkis (Score:2)
The plot and the Idea (Score:5, Interesting)
In the original "Planet of the Apes" movie, this kind of plot was chosen to show us humans, how we behave and how stupid and violent it is.
First, it pointed out that humans destroyed earth after all, because of the usual things: greed, stupidity and being power hungry morons. Second, it changed the perspective for humans. Now humans are the animals and the apes are those who control the world. Humans are mistreated and used for experiments without any doubt in the action. Just as we humans did and do. Third, it shows that the apes, who call themselves superior (being a little bit chauvinistic at this point), that they would not resolve their problems in violence. However, in the end they do. In that part it discusses the problem with unequal power inside a society can result in problems when not controlled properly.
The way to broach those issues were good and typical for the time the movie was made. All this World War III stuff can be seen in different movies, books and other creative work. However, nowadays such plot is more than lame. The idea of being taken over by apes is not very convincing. Even if apes are twice as smart as a human (which is not possible, due to energy constraints). We humans are 6 billion entities 1/12 has guns. On the other side, there are at top most a million apes (I doubt that there are still that many of them) without guns. And the very idea of fire weapons is, that physical power does now longer count. So the apes are largely outnumbered and outgunned.
But the top most thing is, our cultural context changed since 1963 (book)/1968 (movie) and it does not make sense to discuss these issues in a move in the same way. A much more convincing plot would be a world, were we eradicated almost all animals and un-diversified plant life in such a way that some simple deceases destroy all our crops and humans die out (almost) due to food shortage.
Such movies are however, difficult because the transition takes so long. You either use the Roland Emmerich approach and let happen a deep freeze in days instead of decades or you try to do a 12 Monkeys approach. YOu not necessarily need time travel, but it is a method to connect the move past and the move present.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I really liked the original movies because of the way the arc went.
You had the planet of the apes which was your typical cautionary tale. You can read into it so may subjects from violence to racism.
Then you had beneath the planet of the apes which I feel was the worst of the four. More of a cautionary tale and both sides are just evil and everybody dies.
Then you had escape from the planet of the apes where you saw a chance and humans where good or acting out of fear and terror but there was both a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is true, I didn't watch the movie. I just read the plot information on Wikipedia. The movie might be a good action movie. And it might be fascinating to watch it. However, a strain which make apes intelligent over night is not very convincing. Even more that the same strain kill almost all humans. And humans are not able to take any counter measures. Looks like 12 Monkeys to me, which is an interesting film of its own, but which is not becoming more convincing when used in a second movie.
I guess, if you
Read the book, Watch the originals (Score:2)
The most loved sci-fi shows Star Trek, Dr. Who were famous for not so great special effects. Special effects do not good sci-fi make unless great stories, good acting and good scripts are there too.
Read the book. It is fantastic. Though the story in the original movie is very different, it holds true to the spirit of the book. Both excellent.
Watch the original moves, they hold up very well even after 30 years.
Soylent Green is Monkeys! (Score:2)
Would have been a much better ending.
"Now, I like Transformers 3 just fine" (Score:2)
This is the kind of disclaimer that should be right at the top.
Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree with the reviewer - they used really thick lines with the bad people in the movie. Storytelling for the people who can't get subtlety. But all in all a pretty good movie.
The CGI is excellent and the facial expressions and body language of the apes is amazing. I was in awe with regards to that. They did a great job.
And in comparison, way better than the Mark Wahlberg remake of Planet.
Re: (Score:2)
the apes don't really need to get rid of people to take over the planet. humans take care of the problem all on their own
Re: (Score:2)
Which brings us back to the super stupid plot - dumb plot for dumb people.
Seriously, if the solution is anything other than shooting them dead - as reality demands - the writers assumed we're all morons. I dunno - sounds like they may have hit their mark.
Re: (Score:2)
We are so many humans. We would even win without weapons. And we have approx 6-7 billion people and approx 600 million guns out there. Not mentioning planes, helicopters etc. so most likely we can murder all of them. We could even use strange gases. Or do what we always did, destroy their habitat.
Even if they are twice as smart as humans (which they cannot be, due to energy constraints), they are technologically so backward that it won't work. They cannot build tools which would fit their proportions in suc
Re: (Score:2)
The ending showed that the drug/virus spread among humans all over the world, supposedly wiping most of them out. I thought it was kind of silly that they started to play the credits and then showed a scene that hinted at that. It should have been more apart of the last act of the movie, not just an after thought.
Re: (Score:2)
Ugh. That means within roughly five to tens seconds of seeing the first preview I had the entire fucking movie figured out. Fucking pathetic.
Holy shit that is a horrible, piece of shit movie. Hollywood is now officially flinging monkey poo on movie goers - and charging the masses for the honor.
Sounds like the fall of mankind has begun...
Re: (Score:3)
OK, OK, so you didn't like it already.
How was Cowboys vs. Aliens?
I see what they did there... (Score:2)
Apparently, someone heard about a movie where only a handful of humans remain on Earth trying to figure out what wiped out the rest of humanity.
Movie being called "Twelve Monkeys" they assumed it was one of the "Planet of the Apes" movies and a part of that canon.
Not that they've actually seen any of those movies. They just kinda make movies, they don't watch them.
Re: (Score:2)
Haven't seen the movie, so can't spoil the ending for you, but with an age of maturity of 3 years, it doesn't take too long to expand from a population of 2 to thousands:
etc. of course, if they can interbreed with
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is, before the end of year one, all the apes are dead.
So Year 25 looks like this: 0
Re: (Score:2)
The fact I completely deduced the entire movie within seconds of seeing the trailer for the first time
means that the writers have done their job well. Their job, being, to produce a movie that people will enjoy and pay to see, tell their friends to pay to see, rent from Netflix, buy on DVD, etc.
Sheeple like predictability. You are clearly not a sheeple - and therefore of no concern to the marketing department. Your opinions, regardless of how loudly you express them, will not change the profitability of the venture.
Re: (Score:2)
It must be me, but why is 420 always used everywhere?
Is there some back office writers betting going on to see who can cram the most 420 references into a single episode / movie / season?
Re: (Score:2)
In this case it was a random product of a hand calculation adding the previous number to 1/2 of the 3rd previous number, with probable errors thrown in. The real answer you are looking for is likely 42.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean all five of those apes.
The technology base and numbers of humans in comparison is completely insurmountable. Which is why the entire concept is beyond absurd.
Re: (Score:2)
And there's a little thing called mating.
You must be new here.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm an underground commando. I'm sitting in the basement and not wearing underwear.
Re: (Score:2)
I hate every ape I see,
From chimpan-A to chimpanzee,
No, you'll never make a monkey out of me!
Re: (Score:2)
Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes?
You know for once it would be nice if the mollusks were the bad guy, screwing things up for humans. Gastropods could evolve to have hi-tech bio-warfare labs in their shells, they retreat and then re-emerge with an exotic neurotoxin precisely tailored to the threat. Then! Fed up with being trodden on and being cooked in French cuisine they turn on mankind by turning chimps into hyper-intelligent evil psychopaths! Only to find that the now dominant chimps evolve a taste for escargots au beurre d'ail.
get him! (Score:2)
Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes?
You know for once it would be nice if the mollusks were the bad guy, screwing things up for humans. Gastropods could evolve to have hi-tech bio-warfare labs in their shells, they retreat and then re-emerge with an exotic neurotoxin precisely tailored to the threat. Then! Fed up with being trodden on and being cooked in French cuisine they turn on mankind by turning chimps into hyper-intelligent evil psychopaths! Only to find that the now dominant chimps evolve a taste for escargots au beurre d'ail.
What are you some sort of closet $cientologist?!!
Re:Homocentricity (Score:4, Insightful)
Not in the original. In that one, the story--by inference--is that humans blew up the world, and thus killed themselves; and that the apes eventually evolved to be the superior species and took over the planet.
It was a cautionary message of determinism, and how insignificant we actually are on the large scale of things: we ceased to exist, and nature found a way to replace us. Eventually, the apes would have done the same, as they were going in ostensibly the same path.
Everything else was revisionist crap to sell more tickets on an increasingly absurd franchise.
-dZ.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, Charlton Heston was like a lot of old-school leading man actors--in that he only sucked when he was in the lead (playing the cliched handsome leading man). He was pretty good in later supporting roles (where he got out of that leading man mentality).
Re: (Score:3)
I have to ask:
Was there a "Right turn, Clyde" reference in this movie?
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you missed the part where the drug doesn't make the humans dumb but DEAD. Not much of a rebellion needed when you're enemy manages to kill himself off.
At the end the apes seemed happy enough to just sit around in the trees.
Re: (Score:2)
This movie make me think Humans stole Parkour from the Primates.
Um, we are primates.