The Power of the Apes
The best science fiction makes us reflect and question our own world. Through subtext and allegory challenging ideas and contentious issues can be examined, safely removed from our everyday biases and beliefs. The qualities of humanity, for better or worse, are open to creative exploration and deconstruction. From the Aldous Huxleys and Joanna Russes in literature to the Gene Roddenberrys of film and television, science fiction can ask the hard questions we may struggle to acknowledge or want answered.
For nearly 50 years one cinematic franchise has been at the forefront of socially conscious science fiction storytelling. Over eight installments (depending on how you count them) the Planet of the Apes series of films has presented audiences with a fantastical concept that is laden with social commentary. In a world turned upside down the words and actions of characters, human and simian, are far enough removed to be unreal but at the same time close enough to be eerily relatable.
Overall the Planet of the Apes series paints a bleak and nihilistic view of humanity, not only through the human characters but also the anthropomorphic apes who ultimately assume the position of being the dominant species on Earth. Depending on which entry you’re viewing the apes are used as analogues to represent both sides of humanity’s nature — being the oppressors and the oppressed, living in unity and in fear. We are them, and they are us.
One recurring, overarching theme found in all of the Planet of the Apes films is of tribalism, and the associated concepts of subjugation, inequality and the abuse of power. The humans and the apes are largely viewed within the series narrative as incompatible, and efforts for peaceful coexistence are viewed as nigh-on impossible. The films present societies that believe one must have dominance over the other, and the arising conflict when that established order is called into question or its continued existence is threatened.
In the original 1968 film the human astronaut Taylor, played by Charlton Heston, is denied his identity as a sentient, intelligent being by the dogmatic theocracy of ape society. The two chimpanzee scholars who support Taylor fear of being branded heretics for their discoveries — their research threatens to undermine their society’s deepest-held beliefs and doctrines about ape superiority. Scientific progress and societal development is halted to preserve the established order.
The original film and its immediate sequel, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, depicts humankind as being fundamentally worse than the apes. Mankind fought amongst itself to the point of mutual destruction, thus allowing apes to take over. And at the end of the second film, Taylor chooses to wipe out all life on Earth with a human-made doomsday weapon, proving Dr. Zaius’ assertion that man is only capable of destruction.
In the third film, Escape from the Planet of the Apes, chimp survivors, Zira and Cornelius, travel back in time to the 1970s during mankind’s dominance. During an interrogation the emergence of ape civilization is described as beginning with a revolution against humanity’s exploitation using them as slave labour. To prevent this future from coming into being the American government imprisons them. When they escape captivity Zira and Cornelius are ultimately murdered to protect the future of humanity, little realizing that their child has survived and will become the leader of the ape rebellion. In a parallel to the first film human society seeks to halt progress, using extreme and violent measures to preserve their civilization, while unwittingly planting the seeds for their own downfall.
Tim Burton’s 2001 re-imagining does have allusions to the series’ themes, but is bogged down by the unfortunate ‘white saviour’ trope and an end-of-film twist that is neither shocking nor insightful. The makeup design is great and there are nice details depicting ape society, but altogether this big budget take is a clunky and ill-fitting sidestep in the Planet of the Apes franchise.
(note: Rise and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes bear similarities to the earlier Conquest of the Planet of the Apes and Battle for the Planet of the Apes, respectively. Because of this I’ve skipped to the 2011 and 2014 films to avoid potentially repeating myself.)
Ten years after Tim Burton’s attempt to refresh the franchise, Rupert Wyatt took the director’s chair for Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Choosing not to follow the continuity of the five entries from 1968 to 1973 the film offered a new origin for the apes ascendancy, once again forced by man’s actions.
A young chimpanzee, Caesar, is the genetically altered and super intelligent result of a pharmaceutical company’s research into curing Alzheimer’s. Not accepted in our society he is caged inside a habitat where he and others of his kind are subjected to abuse and inhumane treatment by human hands, prompting the enlightened Caesar to take action. Using the experimental cure to artificially heighten the intelligence of his fellow captives he leads them in a revolution against their oppressors, and together attempt to escape from humanity’s reach.
Throughout the film Caesar is shown to be, at least, intellectually equal to his human peers, but is ostracized for being different — for being ‘other’. In several instances people react to Caesar with disgust and contempt, viewing him as an inferior and dangerous animal. The keeper of the ape habitat expresses to Caesar’s adoptive parent, “They’re not people, you know,” believing ‘they’ don’t deserve the compassion and respect afforded to humans. Caesar can’t expect human society to give his kind the rights and freedoms they deserve — they must seize it for themselves. They must rise from their degradation, and fight together for their liberation.
In a twist to original story the fall of humankind in Rise is not nuclear war, but instead a viral outbreak. The same cure that elevated the apes mutates into a devastating contagion that infects the entire world. Man inadvertently created the means for his own destruction, enabling Caesar and his kind to live a new world free from human tyranny and subjugation. For a time…
Matt Reeves’ Dawn of the Planet of Apes resumes Caesar’s story years after the fall of human civilization. The apes have created their own society and written their own laws. They live in peace and without fear of humankind’s destructive impulses. When an unexpected human expedition discovers their society Caesar fears the distrust among them and his own will escalate into conflict. After a reactionary show of force against the human encampment Caesar is gradually persuaded by a human family that they can accomplish their goal without the need for hostilities.
Despite the animosity in both camps Caesar’s faith that humans are capable of being honourable appears justified — there is a chance for peace. But a dissenting ape, Koba, doesn’t want co-existence. He wants dominance.
After attempting to assassinate Caesar, Koba leads the apes in an costly attack against the humans, forcing them into surrender and submission. He kills and imprisons apes who question his authority (breaking a fundamental rule of ape law), prompting an joint human-ape insurrection against his new order. After Caesar’s return and defeat of Koba’s tyrannical reign the damage has already been done. Human reinforcements are on their way, and Caesar knows the humans will never forgive what happened — condemning all of the surviving apes because of Koba’s single-minded hatred for mankind. Both sides have lost the chance for peace. Caesar must protect his family and his society, and doing so means waging a war he never wanted to happen.
He knows there is goodness in people, but not enough to save them from the war to come.
The tensions and conflict in Dawn are built upon fear, suspicion, and prejudice. The human leader, Dreyfus, characterizes the apes as untrustworthy and incapable of reason (“They’re animals”). Because of his treatment by humans before the virus Koba wants them all to suffer by his hand, even if it means betraying and causing the needless death of his own kind. Parties on both sides adopt the view that “it’s either them or us.” Even when it appears cooperation and diplomacy is working there is resistance — individuals and groups who can’t imagine a future where mutual respect and equality can be a reality.
Reading the themes found in Dawn and the other Planet of the Apes films leaves us with a difficult question: how is peace possible?
The upcoming installment, War for the Planet of the Apes, will reveal the turning point in the human-ape conflict — whether the future will be built on conquest, end in mutual annihilation, or offer the faint glimmer of hope. Can the wounds between the species be healed, or is remaining world beyond saving?
Thoughtful science fiction rarely provides us with the answers because life doesn’t afford us that luxury, either. The best storytelling doesn’t shy away from the troubles present in our lives. It shares in the struggle.
For Caesar and the planet of the apes, the struggle goes on.
Coming soon: Everyone’s a Critic
