It’s 2024, and once again, we find ourselves in a world where apes reign supreme, humanity is on the brink of extinction, and Wētā Digital wizards have worked their CGI magic. Directed by Wes Ball, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes ushers in a new chapter in this iconic franchise, now standing as the fourth installment in the rebooted series. But is it a worthy continuation of Caesar’s legacy, or does it swing and miss?
A Visual Spectacle: Wētā Does It Again
There’s no denying that Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is a visual masterpiece. The digital effects team behind the film, once again led by Wētā, have outdone themselves. The apes look more lifelike than ever, their expressions so finely detailed that you can see every muscle twitch and every flicker of emotion. From fur textures to the intricate ways the apes interact with their environment, it’s a feast for the eyes. One can’t help but be in awe of how much CGI has evolved since the days of the original series. If you came just for the visual effects, you won’t leave disappointed.
However, while dazzling effects can elevate a film, they can’t completely mask issues in pacing and narrative depth, both of which the movie struggles with.
A Journey Into a New Era
Kingdom is set hundreds of years after the death of Caesar, and while his legacy lingers, the world has drastically changed. Humans have regressed, becoming mostly mute and feral, while apes have splintered into distinct clans. The central ape this time is Noa, played by Owen Teague, who embarks on a coming-of-age journey alongside his companions. There’s an interesting dynamic between the apes’ evolving society and the remnants of human civilization, but the film sometimes struggles to fully explore these themes.
Much of the story revolves around Noa’s quest for vengeance against a rival clan led by Proximus Caesar, portrayed by Kevin Durand. It’s a familiar trope of young hero versus villain, but with a twist of inter-species conflict. The plot tries to balance action with deep philosophical questions about the nature of power and legacy, but doesn’t quite reach the intellectual heights of its predecessors, particularly the Matt Reeves films.
While there are poignant moments—such as Noa’s reflections on the complex relationships between apes and humans—the film often feels like it’s biting off more than it can chew. There’s a lot it wants to say about leadership, survival, and the echoes of Caesar’s influence, but it never quite manages to pull these threads together into a cohesive narrative.
Pacing Issues: A 90-Minute Story Stretched Thin?
One of the biggest criticisms of Kingdom is its pacing. At two hours and 25 minutes, the film feels overstuffed. The opening act is slow, with extended scenes of apes riding horses across vast landscapes that, while beautifully shot, add little to the story’s progression. There’s a sense that the filmmakers tried to stretch what could have been a tight 90-minute adventure into a bloated runtime. The result is that some key moments—especially character deaths—feel rushed or underdeveloped. Just as you’re beginning to connect with a character, they’re taken out of the picture, leaving emotional gaps that the film doesn’t quite manage to fill.
At the same time, there are moments of brilliance within the film’s pacing. The second act picks up considerably, leading into a thrilling and emotionally charged final confrontation. Director Wes Ball knows how to craft intense, visceral action scenes, and the movie does deliver in that regard. The climax, where Noa and his companions face off against Proximus’ clan, is both visually and emotionally impactful, though it still leaves some unresolved questions dangling.
The Cast: Strong Performances in a CGI-Heavy World
Owen Teague’s portrayal of Noa is a highlight, blending physicality and emotion seamlessly, despite acting through motion capture technology. His performance manages to convey both the vulnerability of a young ape and the simmering anger that drives him. Kevin Durand as Proximus Caesar is appropriately menacing, though the character is written as more of a stock villain than a fully fleshed-out antagonist.
Freya Allan, playing Mae—the sole human who can still speak—brings an interesting dynamic to the otherwise ape-dominated world. Mae’s arc offers glimpses into what remains of human civilization, and her mission to restore humanity’s former communication abilities adds a layer of intrigue. However, her character’s potential often feels underutilized, and some of the interactions between her and the apes come off as rushed.
Peter Macon as Raka, an orangutan who follows the teachings of Caesar’s Order, gives the most emotionally resonant performance, his gravitas grounding the film in the same emotional complexity that made the earlier movies so compelling.
Themes: The Weight of Legacy and Leadership
Like the previous films, Kingdom grapples with big ideas. Legacy, leadership, and the cyclical nature of power are front and center. The film poses intriguing questions: What happens when a society, built on the ideals of a great leader, loses its way? How do different factions interpret that leader’s message? These are compelling questions, but the film doesn’t spend enough time answering them.
One of the most interesting aspects of Kingdom is the way it explores Caesar’s legacy. His legend looms large over the ape society, but it’s interpreted differently by the various clans. For some, he’s a symbol of peace and equality, while for others, he’s a justification for dominance and conquest. This dichotomy provides rich thematic material, though the film struggles to fully capitalize on it.
Mae’s mission to restore human civilization introduces another layer of complexity. The film flirts with the idea of a possible reconciliation between humans and apes, but ultimately, it leans more heavily into the conflict. While this tension is gripping, it leaves some thematic loose ends that might have been more satisfying if they were explored in greater depth.
Conclusion: A Flawed Yet Entertaining Entry
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is a film that will likely divide audiences. Fans of the previous trilogy will appreciate the continued world-building and stunning visual effects, but they may find themselves missing the more introspective, character-driven stories that made Dawn and War such standout entries in the sci-fi genre.
While it may not reach the narrative heights of its predecessors, Kingdom still delivers in terms of spectacle and action. It’s a visually stunning film, with moments of genuine emotional power, but it’s weighed down by pacing issues and an overstuffed plot. Wes Ball has laid the groundwork for what could be an intriguing new chapter in the Planet of the Apes saga, though the series will need a tighter focus in future installments to truly recapture the magic of Caesar’s story.
For now, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is a solid, if uneven, continuation of a beloved franchise, offering just enough thrills and spectacle to keep audiences invested—if not fully satisfied.
FAQs
Does Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes continue Caesar’s story?
- No, the film is set many generations after Caesar’s death, though his legacy remains a central theme throughout the movie.
Is the CGI in Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes as good as previous films?
- Absolutely. The CGI is even more refined than in the previous films, showcasing the incredible work of the visual effects team.
How is the pacing of the movie?
- The pacing is uneven. While the second half picks up, the first act drags with unnecessary filler scenes, making the movie feel longer than it should.
What are the main themes of the film?
- The film explores themes of legacy, leadership, and the cyclical nature of power, particularly how Caesar’s legend is interpreted by different factions of apes.
Is Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes worth watching?
- If you’re a fan of the franchise, the film’s visual spectacle and action scenes make it worth watching, though it may leave you craving the emotional depth of the earlier films.
