×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

CmdrTaco posted more than 2 years ago | from the can-i-play-the-piano-any-more dept.

Sci-Fi 239

The original Planet of the Apes had a lot going for it: a compelling lead, an interesting story, a convincing world, a couple of good quotable catch phrases, and of course the not-really-all-that-surprising twist ending. Of course, it was a bit cheesy too. Different trailers for 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' had me concerned and excited: was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film? I am pleased to announce that it is mostly the former and it's totally worth checking out. Read on for my brief review.

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.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

239 comments

Greetings (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024148)

Did you know that millions of people on our planet are starving, while you sitting here talking about some stupid monkey flick? People, stop joking around! It's time for communism! --underground commando of the CFAFI

Re:Greetings (0)

YodasEvilTwin (2014446) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024190)

Did you know that you're commenting on the internet? You're wasting time more effectively than anyone your ineffective rant reaches.

Re:Greetings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024262)

owned

Re:Greetings (0)

AdmV0rl0n (98366) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024492)

Here have a clue. The last time some dickheads decided its time for communism - they spent all their efforts shipping AK47s and RPG7's to as many people as possible. What were they used for - Lets see, War, Famine, desolation, civil war, bloodshed. Robert Mugabe and others decided to implement Communist doctrine, wreck farms, and drive through the idealogy. Was done in a myriad of other locations.

I don't think people like you have a right to tell everyone else people are starving. Now fuck off and die.

Re:Greetings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024564)

It's apes not monkeys you insensitive clod!

Re:Greetings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024594)

When I was 5, I tried to call up Africa and tell them they could have my brussel sprouts. They didn't want them either. So it's not my fault!

Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (2)

n1ywb (555767) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024162)

I love you Dr. Zaius!

Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024334)

I really appreciate the affirmative action and equal opportunity that went into the production of this movie.

Never have I seen so many black people in one movie before. Sure, most of them should have shaved the fur to retain their customary appearance. And constantly calling them "apes" was rather offensive. Still, this is progress. Those African Americans were gainfully employed and proved they can act as well as any white man. This is a moment to be proud of, folks.

Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024404)

I really appreciate the affirmative action and equal opportunity that went into the production of this movie.

Never have I seen so many black people in one movie before. Sure, most of them should have shaved the fur to retain their customary appearance. And constantly calling them "apes" was rather offensive. Still, this is progress. Those African Americans were gainfully employed and proved they can act as well as any white man. This is a moment to be proud of, folks.

Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024482)

I really appreciate the affirmative action and equal opportunity that went into the production of this movie.

Never have I seen so many black people in one movie before. Sure, most of them should have shaved the fur to retain their customary appearance. And constantly calling them "apes" was rather offensive. Still, this is progress. Those African Americans were gainfully employed and proved they can act as well as any white man. This is a moment to be proud of, folks.

Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

No.

Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024586)

Wow. What a racist you are!

Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024596)

Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

Too Soon?

Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee (4, Funny)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024386)

I hate every ape I see...from chimp-an-A...to chimp-an-Z

OMG! (1)

Asmor (775910) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024502)

Oh my gosh! I was wrong! It was Earth, all along!

Re:OMG! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024650)

Now you've finally made a monkey (yes you've finally made a monkey) out... of... me.

Re:OMG! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024766)

"Can I play the piano anymore?" "Of course you can!" "Well I couldn't before!"

Previews and review... (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024236)

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 apes and monkeys (in comparison with humans) revolt. They grab spears. The military comes out and butches the shit out of them in five minutes. Ape deaths - all of them. Human deaths - a handful of civilians. End of story. If that's not how the story goes, the writers are idiots (monkeys), writing for other idiots (monkeys). And if that is how the story goes, well, its a dumb fucking movie.

There, I just saved you all a bunch of money on tickets.

Re:Previews and review... (1)

JoeMerchant (803320) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024318)

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:Previews and review... (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024702)

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:Previews and review... (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024806)

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:Previews and review... (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024812)

Plus at the end...

***SPOILER***

It's implied that there is soon to be the outbreak of disease. The pilot/neighbor showing the same signs as the animal handler from the lab, while hes in a busy airport. You know it was only going to spread from there.
They were about to have an epidemic, last thing anyone would care about then is some apes that caused a lot of localized damage and ran into the woods.

Re:Previews and review... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024320)

The military comes out and butches the shit out of them in five minutes.

Does this mean there is some hot butch combat boot wearing lesbian monkey on lesbian monkey action?

Re:Previews and review... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024364)

You should see the movie. The apes don't take over because of a revolution like they did in the original. They take over because **DELETED SPOLER**.

Re:Previews and review... (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024410)

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:Previews and review... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024794)

unless there are super hot naked chicks in every scene

You'll probably prefer The Change Up a lot more then.

Re:Previews and review... (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024850)

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.

I've not seen this particular movie (1)

brokeninside (34168) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024372)

But the theme in the Planet of the Apes movies (and books) was that humanity eventually started using apes as slaves who eventually ended up doing all of the work and then were able to rebel because they were the only ones with any technical skills.

So a human military violently putting down an ape rebellion doesn't really end the saga unless not only are all the mutant apes exterminated but the very technology used to create them is also destroyed.

Re:I've not seen this particular movie (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024452)

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.

Where is the: (1)

bussdriver (620565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024662)

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:Where is the: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024756)

Where is the:

You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!

You haven't taken a look at the stock market today, have you?

The apes don't win against humans; the humans do in themselves first.

In the end, it doesn't matter whether it was the jackasses, the elephants, or the apes at the rating agencies.

You maniacs! You blew it up [standardandpoors.com] ! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!

How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024238)

It'll be a spoiler, but how can there be enough non-Human great apes to take over the planet?

Yes they are strong and everything, but they can't fit in MRAPs, M1 tanks or fly Apaches or snipe so I really don't get how they can take over the planet.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (3, Insightful)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024336)

This is covered in the plot and does it nicely. I won't spoil it though.

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:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

Imabug (2259) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024358)

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:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

Warwick Allison (209388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024484)

I fear this movie will have the "poor humans" as just unlucky. The original movie suggests that we failed by our actions, not some single fluke, THEN the apes rose up. Not that they explained why completely different ape species co-developed.....

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024866)

Yea, that's how I saw the original film, that we destroyed ourselves and only had remnants remaining from our civilization.

The apes over the years then eventually developed and took over what we left behind.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024488)

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:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 2 years ago | (#37025004)

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 such a short time, that we wouldn't recognize that and can take counter measures.

The interesting thing with the book and the original film was not the ape takeover as such. It was the new idea and the message. We already got that message. And the new movie does not focus on the message anyway.

Its like having Faust saving Gretchen from the prison and living happy ever after.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024366)

Spoiler... but the same thing that enables the apes to gain intelligence begins (just begins) to wipe out the humans. By the end of the film, the apes have a foothold, and the humans have begun their decline. Within a few years/decades, the apes will be in charge.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024526)

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:How come there are enough apes to take over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024998)

There are more than five. And there's a little thing called mating.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

oracleguy01 (1381327) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024414)

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:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024698)

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:How come there are enough apes to take over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024888)

Do you have some anger issues to work out, GooberToo? From the numerous posts you're making, desperately repeating your opinions to anyone who cares to listen, it sounds like you're hurting inside and this is your only outlet. Do you want to talk about it?

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024996)

You posted anonymously. Have some shame to hide that I'm right? Holy shit, you've never been bored. So obviously you know I'm right and this fact injures you because it means you're not nearly as smart as you believe yourself to be. So to feel better, you retaliate and attack. Perhaps it is you who should find someone to talk to.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024418)

It'll be a spoiler, but how can there be enough non-Human great apes to take over the planet?

Welfare encourages them to breed. So does their total lack of concern for fatherhood or whether they can actually afford to raise that many children.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024496)

I expect the traditional closing to these sorts of movie where the [forces of the first part] are shown [conquering | liberating] [large but finite area (Manhattan being traditional)] from the [forces of the second part] thus showing the audience that the world [is lost | is saved].

Feel free to replace [the forces of the first part] and [the forces of the second part] with any of
"zombies", "scientists", "animals", "people", "aliens", "military forces", "Cloverfield Monster", "Intelligent Apes" as needed for your movie.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

JoeMerchant (803320) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024524)

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:

  1. Year 1 : 2
  2. Year 2 : 3
  3. Year 3 : 4
  4. Year 4 : 5
  5. Year 5 : 7
  6. Year 6 : 9
  7. Year 7 : 12
  8. Year 8 : 15
  9. Year 9 : 19
  10. Year 10 : 25
  11. Year 11 : 32
  12. Year 12 : 41
  13. Year 13 : 53
  14. Year 14 : 69
  15. Year 15 : 89
  16. Year 16 : 115
  17. Year 17 : 149
  18. Year 18 : 193
  19. Year 19 : 250
  20. Year 20 : 324
  21. Year 21 : 420
  22. Year 22 : 545
  23. Year 23 : 707
  24. Year 24 : 917
  25. Year 25 : 1189

etc. of course, if they can interbreed with an existing population of apes and get the enhanced intelligence in even half the offspring, that jump-starts any curve like this.

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024608)

The problem is, before the end of year one, all the apes are dead.

So Year 25 looks like this: 0

Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? (1)

zero0ne (1309517) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024682)

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?

It's good. (2)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024298)

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.

Could be worse . . . (2)

LMacG (118321) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024308)

> was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?

As long as it's not a Syfy film!

Re:Could be worse . . . (1)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024434)

> 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:Could be worse . . . (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024520)

> 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:Could be worse . . . (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024946)

Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?

When does this one release. Sounds totally bad ass.

[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024316)

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.

Homocentricity (1)

ablaze (222561) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024324)

What I liked about the original Planet of the Apes is that it was told that the monkeys started to say "No!" if I remember correctly. I always imagined it as some kind of evolutionary development. Nature fought back! This one gets it all wrong. Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes? This is ridiculously homocentric.

Re:Homocentricity (3, Informative)

Smidge207 (1278042) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024384)

. Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes?

Ummm.....humans are part of the Great Ape family; sorry to break it to you.

Re:Homocentricity (1)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024730)

Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes? This is ridiculously homocentric.

If you watched the originals and didn't get the message that it's all mankind's fault, you seriously missed the point...

Saw it last night (1)

Imabug (2259) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024400)

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 (1)

eclectus (209883) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024422)

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:CGI vs actors (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024562)

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:CGI vs actors (1)

Xylaan (795464) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024700)

Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within? Or are you talking about where all of the actors performances were done via motion capture? Avatar comes closer to the latter, but obviously isn't entirely done that way.

Re:CGI vs actors (1)

Remus Shepherd (32833) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024726)

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'....

Monkey Attack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024458)

Now, I like Transformers 3 just fine for what it is

A big, mechanized, heaping, pile of shit? Not my cup, so to speak. OTOH, if there is a scene in this ape movie where a battalion of monkeys are repelling the US military by letting loose a lethal barrage of flung poo, I might be persuaded to go see it. Can anyone confirm such a scene? Is there any lethal poo flinging in this movie, at all?

It was completely plausible. (3, Interesting)

Remus Shepherd (32833) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024464)

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.

News for nerds with room temperature IQs... (1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024486)

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:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... (2)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024800)

Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"

I dunno, when did you join?

I kid, I kid.

Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024828)

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 the sun never shines.

Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... (0)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024934)

Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"

You seem to have forgotten this is slashdot. Most of the high IQ posters left a while ago. Most of all that's left are room temperature IQs - and worse.

Here's MY review. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024514)

We went to see it because it received high ratings on IMDB but there was no point in doing so. The CGI isn't bad, but it's obvious enough to be slightly distracting. The plot is thin to non-existent as it is already summed up in the trailer.

In writing there is a saying that one should be careful of trying to fill three acts with one act of plot, and that is exactly what this movie did. The entire first half of the movie could have been an ape's voyage of self-discovery and the second half a replay of every revolution in the history of man. But it wasn't.

Worst of all, when writing what is a simple revenge plot, it is EXTREMELY distracting to have the director be averse to showing violence on the screen. Constant cut-aways to avoid a violent scene, the ape's repetitively holding back because they're non-violent (hint: apes are absolutely not non-violent) and so on.

It's one of the worse movies I've seen in a while unless you just want some simple, dull and ultimately unfulfilling action. It rises to that level.

They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) (1)

crow_t_robot (528562) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024568)

They ruined this moving by removing the paradox that Cesar was the "son" of Xera. He wasn't genetically modified. He was smart because he was the son of smart/evolved apes.

Re:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) (1)

ildon (413912) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024672)

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:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) (2)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024746)

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!

It must kind of suck being Serkis (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024576)

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: It must kind of suck being Serkis (2)

MojoRilla (591502) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024802)

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

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 difference between motion capture acting and live action acting. They are both acting to him.

And Serkis most definitely has an agent, publicist, a manager and even a web guy. [serkis.com]

Re: It must kind of suck being Serkis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024824)

Er... what? Top-tier stars make tons of money. Sure, it may be a few million dollars less after the fees you mentioned, but in the end it's still millions of dollars.

Wow, that ape can act! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024644)

No really, true story. At one point, an ape was dying and I caught myself thinking, "Wow, that ape can act!". lol

Best action movie of the summer.

I thought it was pretty good.. (1)

Kaitiff (167826) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024792)

I saw it yesterday and thought it was pretty good overall, regardless of my 'room temperature IQ' as some posted. The only really 'BAD' guy in the film is the one ape handler, and I didn't think he was really over the top either. The next door neighbor I kind of felt sorry for; poor bastard reacted pretty much the way most people would I think. The one thing that irritated me a A LOT was the typical Hollywood 'I want a really cool shot where apes are flying through the air!' so they did... chimpanzees flying through plate glass windows stories above the ground and acting like it was nothing. That, and the inconsistency with the size of the chimps. Golly, I didn't know that if a chimp stood up like a MAN it would auto-magically grow about a foot... aka Cesar looking eye to eye with his 'father'. That, and the aerobatics Cesar was able to perform while running through the house. Unnecessarily over the top. Oh, and in typical fashion once the miracle drug was administered to the apes at large, they were all able to organize and become a cohesive fighting unit instantaneously and be able to communicate perfectly.... all within a day.

stupid idea..again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024804)

From all the great sci fi novels and short stories out there, do really had to use the retard idea again.

Charlton Heston compelling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024808)

To hysterical laughter maybe...

for good sci-fi, see Attack the Block (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024872)

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.

The plot and the Idea (4, Interesting)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024884)

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.

All I can say is (1)

BetaDays (2355424) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024964)

"If you're wondering how he eats and breathes / And other science facts / Then repeat to yourself 'It's just a show and I should really just relax". Lalala" - mstk3k

Warning: RETCON! (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 2 years ago | (#37024972)

This movie retcons the original story.
Therefore, this movie is wrong and bad by default.
The fact that this movie is stupid and bad on its own merits doesn't help things.

The original story is that a disease killed off all the cats and dogs and such. So we took in apes as pets. Then we started using and treating them more and more as helpers, laborers, and eventually, slaves. Apes became more numerous, more intelligent, familiar with human tools and machinery, and angry. Humans became weak, dependent, and lazy. When the uprising started, humans were caught with their pants down facing a dumber force, but one that was numerous, in their homes, and physically superior.

This movie posits that a drug makes apes smart and people dumb, and that this new intelligence difference is enough for a few dozen apes to mount a successful, small-scale rebellion against modern day humans. The movie doesn't end with Earth being overrun by apes (of course not - you need room for a sequel to the prequel), but the idea that they get to the point they do is laughable enough.

I give it a Triple F Minus.

Trailer CGI looked terrible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37024982)

Having only seen the trailer, it appeared that the CGI absolutely sucked. Has it been redone since?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...