Planet of the Apes (Tim Burton, 2001)

"I think it's fair to call this hostile territory"

Introduction

It is strange how, in a week whereby I watch Batman (I was not happy about that film) and Batman Returns for the first time, I then write about another previously-owned property, Tim-Burton-ised for a new audience. He claimed it was a 're-imagining' of the original Planet of the Apes film. Since the end of the original saga, the film was in development in different stages from 1988. Over many years with a wide range of directors (Peter Jackson, Chris Columbus, James Cameron, Sam Raimi, Oliver Stone) and a diverse possibility of actors (Tom Cruise, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlie Sheen), it seems the reboot of Planet of the Apes could've been anything. Arnie, the 'scientist' travelling back in time? A half-humn, half-ape creature within the Ape version of the Renaissance? A "sword and sandal spectacular" set within an Ape version of the Roman civilisation? These were all considered ... but it eventually fell to Gothic Tim Burton signing on to direct and Richard D. Zanuck producing.

The Scale Roddy McDowell Dreamed Of...

The problem with the earlier saga was how small in scale it was. The idea of Apes taking over the world simply didn't have the same effect when you only see the apes fighting within car parks and in spaces which are clearly stage-sets. From the opening scene we see what we had never seen before - lots of space. Bar Taylor's (Charlton Heston) brief introduction at the start of Planet of the Apes, we never truly see the wide, expansive galaxy that earth hovers within. Even in Escape from the Planet of the Apes, whereby Zira and Cornelius crash-land on earth and tell us how earth was destroyed, we don't see their journey.

Tim Burton, and his $100m budget ensures that we see all of space. Our hero is Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg), an astronaut on board a mothership which trains apes to explore areas which are unsafe. Davidson's favourite chimpanzee is sent into an electro-magnetic storm and, without question, Davidson decides to save him when it is clear that he has been 'lost. A time-warp takes Davidson onto a different planet whereby Apes are the dominant species and, in the same manner as Schaffner's original, Davidsons - amongst primative humans - is chased by apes, and caught.

Already a change in the characterisation of our lead role - he is now not neccessarily a morally-ambiguous lead, he is very-much a hero. In the opening sequence, Davidson is a hero - he saves apes. To make matters worse, not only does a stunning female-slave Daena (Estella Warren) fall for him, but it seems that Ari (Helena Bonham-Carter), a liberal ape who doesn't agree with slave humans, also falls for him. The apes and humans all speak, and the subtext about communication is lost. The film knows what it is - a heroic journey whereby our hero has to 'win' by defeating the enemy.

Enemies

General Thade (Tim Roth) and General Attar (Michael Clarke Duncan) provide our hero with his enemies. Chalton Heston even cameo's as the aging Father of Thade, upping the ante, by showing Thade that 'guns' exist. This is all alongside the religious subtext regarding a holy site named CA-LI-MA and a Messianic figure in Semos - who the apes are descendants of.

Interestingly, pre-9/11, the story is very much about extremists as General Thade is overtly 'religious', even uttering the lines:

"Extremism in defense of apes is no vice"

The film is highliy critical of faith, but equally undermines it by implying that Wahlberg himself is a Messianic figure. Ari tells him how he is "sent from the stars" and his actions inspire the humans, leading the way to their salvation - and to war.

An Epic War

As previously noted, this is epic in scale. At the time, films including The Mummy, Gladiator and Armageddon were the buzz around Hollywood. The ancient civilisations in the former-two seen as a major draw at the box-office. Egyptian and Roman Empire's celebrated on the silver-screen - could the Ape Empire be celebrated on such a scale too? Throw into the mix a space-station, science-fiction element that - in the third act - is found again, having crashed to planet earth and it seems that you have a combination of all three. The latter is a bit of a stretch, but it is fair to say that both Armageddon and Deep Impact were huge-draws in 1998, and both of which spent a considerable amount of time on-board a spaceship.

But the war-finale pre-dates The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and combined with the religious overtones and historic civilisation, it caught the imagination of an audience keen to watch action sequences on such a large scale. We see explosions and a battlefield pitting humans against apes - a far cry from Battle for the Planet of the Apes. Mid-fight, a spaceship lands, and the ape Davidson originally seeked, arrives on the planet.

Lets Do The Time Warp Again

The time-warp element is important to the apes film and Burton doesn't leave it out. IT is integral to the plot. Davidson managed to survive blasting through a time-storm, the chimpanzee seems to do the same - whilst the spaceship Davidson was on fails to jump the time-warp and instead crashes down on the planet, beginning new life and new conflicts. But that is not all. God-like Mark Wahlberg sets off, leaving the planet (this time, in-keeping with Pierre Boulles novel) and returning to Earth before finding that time has been altered and General Thade has replaced Abraham Lincoln. It makes no sense. Don't even start to think it through - it is ridiculous.

This finale sharply pulls everything sharply into focus- the film is merely a light-hearted joke. This is an Apes film without depth, without personality and without meaning. Prior to Burton's Planet of the Apes, every film raised a social-issue that you could discuss afterwards. The film brings nothing new to the argument. It hints at ideas about equality, faith and 'truth', but it doesn't resolve the issues. In 1968, Planet of the Apes conclusively stated how earth will destroy itself if it continues in the same manner. Beneath The Planet of the Apes tackled nuclear power - and our obsession with weapons and power. Escape from the Planet of the Apes tackles the fear of exploration, and fear of acceptance. This film doesn't directly conclude any of the issues raised and, within all the fighting and fire, you know that it simplifies everything. Taylor wasn't neccessarily 'good', Ceasar was complex - frustrated by the injustice and angry about human greed. Leo Davidson is 'Good'. Ari and all the humans are 'Good'. Thade, Attar and Limbo are 'bad'. They need to all get along ... and by the end of the film, they do get along. Praise be to Semos. 

Battle for the Planet of the Apes (J. Lee Thompson, 1973)

"All knowledge is for good. Only the use to which you put it can be good or evil"

Introduction

When you watch the Blu-Ray versions of the series, they are introduced by the 'lawgiver'. Considering he does not appear in any of the films until Battle for the Planet of the Apes, it seems a bit unneccessary. Even in this film, it is more a cameo of John Huston, rather than a neccessary facet to the film. It bookends the film before flashing back to a period shortly after the end of Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. In the time period between the films, a nuclear bomb has killed many humans and all apes can now speak. Considering this has all happened within a human lifetime is shocking - even MacDonald from the previous film has a 'brother' (Austin Stoker) who is Ceasar's (Roddy McDowell) close, human-friend. Differences to the timeline have included a rule whereby the word 'No' is forbidden and 'Apes do not kill other Apes'. But there is a conflict between the species - Gorilla's are angry about their previous enslavement, humans are already a 'lower' class but they can talk. This is the final confrontation between humans and apes.

Back to the Original ...

It seems to me that producers and writers wanted to hark back to the first film and get out of the city-scape and human-dominance of the previous two installments. The apes are the dominant species now - something that has not been the case since Beneath the Planet of the Apes. The existence of Ceasar though is different to the original 'sacred scrolls' text. We don't know where this future will lead. Ceasar is much more understanding and wants humans and apes to co-exist together - but this is an opinion not shared by all. The theme of 'exploration' is tackled further. Ceasar wants to know about his parents - Cornelius and Zira - which MacDonald explains is possible if they visit the Forbidden City. Unknown to the apes, malformed humans are still alive beneath the city - and the visit is shortlived as Governor Kolp (Severn Darden reprising his role from Conquest of the Planet of the Apes) uses this as a reason to strike against the apes, starting a war, attempting to take them out before they continue their dominance of the planet.

One of the few strengths of the film is how it references so many of the previous installments - footage from Escape from the Planet of the Apes, mention of the ALPHA-OMEGA bomb worshipped in Beneath the Planet of the Apes - show how the producers wanted to honour what had preceded in this story. Unfortunately, some awful acting and small-scale sequences made what should've been an epic, huge-scale finale into a whimper of a finish.

"Are their any jobs available on that 'Death Star' thing?"

The Malformed Humans

We know that the 'circle' of events from Planet of the Apes should loop around - and the radiation poisioning of the humans in this film clearly precedes the hugely deformed humans in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. Interestingly, when I analysed Planet of the Apes, I noted how - as a planet - the 'apes' dusty location, the endless desert, reminded me of Star Wars and the planet of Tatooine. Due to the negative-associations of the uniforms worn by Nazi's in World War II, it seems that both Lucas and Thompson both used this World War II reference point to design costumes for the villains in Darth Vader and Governor Kolp. Because of this, Kolp seems to be almost Darth Vader in every form - except without the mask and voice. Long, black jacket and over-sized collars. Both have huge physiques that, as they lead their armies, connects their intelligence in leading an army with the brute-force of a wrestler or fighter. Considering that both Star Wars and Planet of the Apes were very-much a part of the Sci-Fi scene in the 70's, I'm sure Lucas considered what made Planet of the Apes successful was the 'alien' look of the planet.

Ape-City if Built

We recall vividly Charlton Heston's mistreatment in the first film, and yet here we see an Ape-City which is built whereby humans play with apes. The Gorilla's are what threatens this - and the death of Ceasar's child is what truly changes his attitude. Gorilla's break rules to get their own way - opposed to fairness and equality. Even Ceasar does not initially believe in the equality which humans expect - the change in this stance is what changes the foundations of Ape-City and the future of the planet.

As we flash-forward again, the lawgiver is revealed to be telling a story to children: apes and humans together, living in harmony. A child asks "Who knows about the future" and the lawgiver replies:

"Perhaps only the dead..."

And a single-tear falls from a Ceasar-statue behind the group. It doesn't really make sense - tears of joy for the continued co-existence of humans and apes? an awareness of the future? (Taylor's - at this stage - future arrival to shake-up the balance?) or did Ceasar want apes to dominate? It really seems like one of those endings that thinks it is more profound than it actually is. Battle for the Planet of the Apes is, very-much, an anti-climax to the saga. Trying to take the film back to its roots, it seems to fail at showing any 'truth' to the apes history. Merely tackling themes which have already been explored and extending a story that we could have mentally filled-in after Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. It is not a suprise that this was the last theatrical-film until 2001, whereby Tim Burton, in the time of Lord of the Rings, Gladiator and Braveheart, would release his own 're-imagining'...

Planet Of The Apes (Franklin J. Schaffner, 1968)

"Beware the beast Man, for he is the Devil's pawn. Alone among God's primates, he kills for sport or lust or greed"

Introduction

Prior to watching the original Planet of the Apes, I had seen Tim Burton's 'reimagining' from 2001 and the latest Rupert-Wyatt-directed Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Like the majority of audiences, the word-of-mouth behind ROTPOTA is what pulled me to the cinema and now, very late in the day, I have 'caught up' on the original films, released between 1968 and 1973. Based upon the 1963 novel La Planète des singes by Pierre Boulle, Planet of the Apes explores a world whereby earth is inhabited by Apes. The novel, a French-property (whereby astronaut Ulysses sends a bottle into space, specifying his exploits on an Ape-plant, after he returns to Paris to find that Apes have taken over society) was converted into an American Story, whereby New York is the centre-piece. But, as we all know, our protagonist Taylor (Charlton Heston), and the audience, only find this out at the very end.

Role-Reversal

Communication, especially in the Internet-age, is taken for granted. Consider the relentless, irrelevant information we communicate to each other via social networking sites. The spaceship Taylor travels on crash-lands on an 'alien' planet, only to realise that the human 'creatures' are mute. They are primitive in their manner and are used for hunting by the dominant species: Apes. To twist the story further, Taylor loses his ability to speak as his throat is injured, and we see the world from his 'primitive-animal' perspective. You can feel his frustration as the apes mock him when they say "Look! He's trying to speak!"

We see the day-to-day running of the Ape Village. Clearly defined roles are highlighted in the Orangutan's political prowess, whilst the Gorilla's represent the militaristic side to society. Our lead Chimpanzee characters - Cornelius and Zira - are liberal, free-thinkers. They hold jobs that reveal a desire to seek knowledge - Zira conducts experiments on humans, whilst Cornelius is a historian. Of the three 'ape'-species, the Chimpanzee's hold the least power. Subtext regarding social-class is clear from the outset - and, through the high-standard of make-up, we believe in the world created as we can see parallels in our own world.

Schaffner's way of shooting though is a long-way off from our world. The camera flips upside-down, it will spin 360 degrees. It is rough-and-ready and combined with Goldsmith's score - equally sporadic and alien - it is uncomfortable. To imagine watching the film, for the first time, you don't know what is around the corner and, in the first instance, the threat is the primitive humans ... it is when we see the Gorilla's hunt that we see the true fear. But again, looks can be deceiving, as the Gorilla's are only one part of the apes culture.

Blind Faith

Though social-class is highlighted, the film does not seem to be overtly critical of the world the apes have established. What it is critical of, is faith - and the blind faith the apes hold.  Strange laws that are dictated by the 'sacred scrolls' dictate that they do not visit the 'Forbidden Land' and that humans are 'the devil's pawn'. The challenge Taylor has is not as much against apes, as it is against their belief system. His existence, akin to the comfortableness of atheism, challenges their faith.

Dr Zaius, a self-interested philosopher, could be seen as a character 'protecting' the apes from the dangers humanity holds. Or, if we side with Taylor, we see him as the enemy - the man, amongst others, who stops the apes from furthering their understanding of the history that preceded their existence. "Greed, lust, death" are all attributed to man, and we know that this is true of mankind, but this is true of many societies. This is such a strong stance, that I'm sure anyone who has strong convictions will find the film more than your-average low-budget Sci-Fi - the film is tackling the foundations of what defines faith and belief. And how it could be completely wrong. Blindly following scripture is the polar opposite to earnestly exploring and seeking the answers, to the biggest unanswered questions.

The Future of Sci-Fi

Planet of the Apes, originally considered as a stand-alone film, spawned multiple sequels, tv-series and comic-book series. This was a time before 2001: A Space Odyssey and Star Wars were released. 2001: A Space Odyssey uses apes to show us how we seeked answers, and how we seeked understanding to our existence. These huge-questions, were tackled within months of each other in the late sixties due to both Planet of the Apes and 2001: A Space Odyssey.

And, as far as dusty-planets go, you only need to consider the farm Luke Skywalker lived upon in Star Wars, to see how desert landscapes, so alien to most people, is ideal for another 'world' to be based upon. As the astronauts wandered the desert terrain in the first act of the film, I could imagine R2D2 and C3PO wandering past in the background as they search for Obi-Wan. Even the apes houses are circular in their form, a structure Lucas would replicate on Tatooine. I have a feeling Planet of the Apes is more influential than many people realise.

Man Dominates

When the ship crashes down, amongst the crew is one female astronaunt and she is revealed to have died in hypersleep. This beginning sets a very masculine tone to the film - Taylor and his fellow astronaunts discuss humanity, death and the pursuit of knowledge as they walk across the desert. It exclusively portrays different male-perspectives on these issues and this is purposeful - Taylor, representing humanity is a man so before he even meets apes, he only represents a very limited outlook.

With this in mind, it is questionable how 'good' Taylor even is. As the film progresses, Taylor becomes more dominant and powerful, eventually overpowering the apes. He orders the apes for his own protection and, with a hint of lust, kisses Zira before setting off. He believes he is a hero.

Until the final moments, whereby the power and dominance of man is what ensured its own destruction. The final acts sets-up Taylor 'winning' the battle for his freedom, but consequently undercuts this by showing how his attitude is what destroyed mankind. Atom-bombs and nuclear war was still a conversational topic at the time, and to tap into those fears was a brave move - and ensured Planet of the Apes stayed in the public-consciousness for years to come.