‘Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes' is Good, But Lacks Darkly Ambitious Nature of Previous Films [Review]

The review embargo has lifted and review consensus for Wes Ball’s “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes” are fairly accurate. It’s good, not great. Matt Reeves’ cinematic flair is missing in this film. Still, it’s an entertaining entry and sets things up quite nicely for the inevitable next film.

That 67 on Metacritic is fair. If you’re a fan of the ‘Apes’ movies then you’ll be more than glad to catch this one. Despite a rocky start, it slowly builds in momentum and the last half hour is a thrill-ride.

One thing I did notice is, despite its 145-minute runtime, how much less ambitious ‘Kingdom’ turns out to be when compared to 2017’s “War of the Planet of the Apes” which was a majestic vision from Reeves. There’s a ton of world building here as it’s set several generations in the future, following Caesar’s reign and death.

The apes are now the dominant species and humans have been reduced to living in the shadows, in feral state. It’s been completely forgotten that they once ruled the planet. The crux of the story builds up when a new tyrannical ape leader, Proximus (Kevin Durand), builds his empire, with ambitions to turn it into something resembling the Roman empire.

There’s also William H. Macy’s Trevathan, a Vonnegut-reading human, who teaches Proximus everything he knows about human history. There’s a reason why Proximus doesn’t just kill Trevathan — he’s the key to educating our villain in the ways of control and power via past history.

However, one young timid ape, Noa (Owen Teague), his village pillaged by Proximus’s thugs, vows to seek revenge, undertaking a journey with Mae (Freya Allen), a human he encounters along the way. In the process, he slowly uncovers traces of the past, human history, that makes him question the future. After all, we did cage his ancestors and treat them like, well, wild animals.

Although the film is narratively old-fashioned, and feels a tad too familiar, the special effects in ‘Kingdom’ are second to none. Never once did my mind wander into thinking the apes were motion capture. The attention to detail, as with all of the ‘Apes’ movies, is staggering. In a way, that’s what continuously saves Ball’s film, the way it makes you believe in the realism of this fantastical world.

Cinematographer Gyula Pados’ camerawork is impressive, but also a little too slick for its own good. There’s large-scaled action here, and some of it is quite tense, however what’s missing is the efficient heartbeat that Reeves injected into his films. I know I keep going back to Reeves, and there’s good reason for that, he was the absolutely perfect filmmaker for this franchise by infusing mythological essence and cinematic flair to his stories.

Ball, on the other hand, is not as talented. His sense of pacing is a tad off here. You suspect where this is all going, and some of the characters come off as cardboard. His film also doesn’t go into the darker, more brooding places the predecessors did.

In the end, ‘Kingdom’ checks most of the boxes as a standalone story that sets up the future installments. What it lacks is the mystery and sense of wonder that we’ve come to expect with these films. [B]