8 minute read
Eternal Recurrence
"We want monkeys! We want monkeys!" Is the chant every time 20th Century prove they're not a bunch of yellow bellied cowards and release another Planet of the Apes film. Naturally, they can be bad, no-ones saying they can't be, we've all seen Battle for the Planet of the Apes, but we whole heartedly approve of all monkey movies cause that's a hell of an animal, that's the beast I'm ogling at the most every time I visit Chester Zoo as I try to work out whether these things really are our ancestors or is that a load of nonsense as Poppa Wu declared on the opening track for Wu Tang Forever? So, whatever the answer, keep sticking them apes on the screens.
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, ok, what happened to the rumours that this was terrible in test screenings? Going from rock solid blockbuster kingpin Matt Reeves to young adult joker Wes Ball had the rumours almost confirmed too. Yet, I continued to remain optimistic and hope that what it appeared to lose in intellect, it would gain in dumb summer fun to tuck in to along with Godzilla X Kong. Consequently, it's a big surprise to announce that this film is actually really good, boasting an impressive screenplay filled with a few ideas of its own. So don't dismiss it so quickly! Was it saved in the edit or is it a case of you can't trust people, I guess we'll never know.
I've not seen this directly written anywhere but I believe that Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes works as something of a refreshing antidote to the current state of blockbuster filmmaking and in particular the overly familiar MCU model. This is apparent in both structure and themes. What is one of the biggest problems in filmmaking today at studio level? Messy and nonsensical storytelling carried across multiple interconnected films leading to the eradication of solo endeavours and clear individual identity.
Instead of making one decent film, they'd rather make the same incoherent and incomplete bad film several times over at a serious detriment to both the central character and the directors unique expression. They never make a Spiderman movie any more but another Avengers sequel. Nothing is expressed or resolved in the window of the film. You have to carry so much pointless information across an entire catalogue of movies that it's near impossible to keep up or better yet, care.
Coming in to the 10th film of the franchise that is effectively a prequel, the question here is when is this story set in the overall timeline. Quite frankly, a question I am sick of sometimes asking, wanting to just get on with enjoying the film in question. However, it is undeniably important when you're looking at a narrative involving the evolution of a species. Even the movies villain, Proximus Caesar, shares that he is on some Roy Batty mission, looking for ways to allow his species to increase their intelligence and evolve quicker in his life time by conquering the skies like the Wright Brothers. Anything the humans did, they want to do. Therefore, you'd think that progression lies as a straight narrative? No.
Turn your minds to True Detective's Rust Cohle and his brand of pessimism and nihilism. The master of beer can origami to explain his bleak ideas to the world. In a now famous moment, he slams his hand in to a can and says, "time is a flat circle". But where does that cool iconic line actually come from? Feel free to read the rest of this explanation in Matthew Mcconaughey's voice. It relates to the theory of Eternal Recurrence, originating with the stoics in Ancient Greece and resurfacing in the 19th century with some of Nietzsche's books. Central to the concept is a belief that the universe is periodically destroyed and reborn but each universe is exactly the same as the one before and so we continue to repeat the same actions over and over for all eternity without change.
Fundamentally, I believe this, whether intended or not, is what Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes demonstrates. In the first act, we are dealing with misremembered past and corrupted legacy as a means to ensure that nothing ever changes. What a way to start things up again after Reeves's glorious trilogy. You can't continue smoothly, history doesn't work that way and for cinema it's too clean and convenient avoiding conflict.
The true Casar of Reeves's films was a supporter of human/ape coexistence and fought many battles to achieve this. However, in these times our protagonist, Noa, has had little contact with humanity and so doesn't have the same bridge or connection leading to little trust. Alongside this, we have violent apes pillaging villages in the name of Caesar, something he would never have stood for. They have not only misinterpreted his words but have exploited the meaning of them to give their nasty cause purpose, reason and justification. Look no further than Proximus Caesar's name. The times may change but the battles over human/ape coexistence remain.
In the second act, which is the type of old school plot we haven't seen in a while, Noa and his 2 companions must travel across the land and relearn the history of the two species and why coexistence is important. It's a western given the science fiction spin and told in reverse. Blockbusters today are often at fault of losing the protagonist with too many side characters so I can't describe the pleasure in having an act like this where the characters are reduced and it becomes this observatory act as they travel across the empty roads. Becoming not an epic action spectacle but a visual spectacle. A departure from the herd for the main hero to learn a thing or two, I was beginning to think they didn't make them anymore and that sort of slow character driven approach a thing of the past. Normally, any of these aspects get lost in a disorderly mess once called a narrative and dumb humour is used to hide the holes.
At first, I thought act three was going to be this overly familiar disappointing let down. We've seen plenty of these films have the apes going full Che Guevara revolutionaries, teaming up to escape from prison and fight their oppressors. As cool as it is, it's been done, a lot. Alternatively, this is when it most nails its point of Eternal Recurrence. Inside a sealed military bunker, lies Proximus Caesar's answers to faster evolution within his own lifetime. Weapons he could only dreams of getting his damn dirty paws on. There could have been a nuclear bomb in there too to revive the old Oppenheimer themes of the franchise and this would significantly improve the film but let's be honest, a nuclear bomb would improve most films so this isn't saying anything.
At this point though, I was scratching my head thinking about that old annoying question, well how does this work for the rest of the timeline? Surely, if the apes evolve too quickly, then it makes the rest of the films redundant and loses the potential for other stories covering that slow development? You've sacrificed the future of the franchise for a single big set piece? That's the typical Marvel move isn't it? And exactly what triggers the most ridiculous and unbelievable writing going to keep the story in motion.
Above all, what has always been the appeal of the Planet of the Apes films? Going back to the very first one. And probably even more so than it's anti-war themes. It's that intended surreal lack of continuity and the anachronisms in iconography. The visual spectacle of seeing statues and objects from our present in the distant future. Things can and have occurred out of place. They can go backwards. Teachings can be unlearned. Items can be lost to time. Proximus Caesar's weapons are destroyed before he can reach them and there may be several other hidden bunkers scattered across the planet no-one will ever know about. Reinforcing this idea of time as a flat circle.
Let's be clear, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is not necessarily the solution to the flawed nature of serialised storytelling but it certainly has come the closest to making a cohesive artistic statement on the incohesive matter and feels like a big fuck you to those geeks who do try to piece the impossible together. The statement here being that who cares, we're looking for a through line in what's actually a circle. Maybe we need to ease off what is essentially nonsensical continuity and not try to think of the whole but turn our attention to individual level storytelling, that's the lesson here. Rather fittingly as Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes shows us, one we may forget and re-learn several times over.
