or, “The Silver Bowl of Dill-Flavoured Chips”: A spoiler-free mini movie review.
2 out of 5
“…there is a fear among studio executives…about some of the subject matter [of modern independent movies]. …everyone is going to films based on IP or something that’s very familiar, and that is the absolute antithesis of filmmaking…”
Sometimes, a great performance can elevate an under or over-written character in a film (Hilary Swank in “Ordinary Angels”). Other times, a well-written role – or interpretive slate – is botched by a performer’s over/under-acting, or good suggestions potentially vetoed (Michelle Dockery in “Flight Risk”). And, once in a while, the wrong actor gives a misguided turn as a bland character.
Playing Black Widow may have connoted Scarlett Johansson as the perfect choice for “Jurassic World Rebirth’s” Lara Croft-esque heroine, but she’s ultimately miscast.
“Planet of the Apes 10” (or “X”), at almost two-and-a-half hours, is too damn long. I wanted a Charlton Heston-style pun with “YA BLEW IT UP”, but I couldn’t figure one out.
I’m no historian either, but wasn’t there a time when movie studios wanted shorter films in theatres to increase the number of showtimes in a day? But the era of butchering overlong “auteur” films has been over for a long time, hasn’t it? Last-century classics like “The Wild Bunch” and “Once Upon a Time in America” were championed once their unaltered versions were repatriated, but it seemed left-minded executives could come in whenever they wanted and cut scenes they thought were superficial. Today, it’s the studios producing these overlong movies, maybe in their post-COVID attempts to revitalize theatrical box-offices with tentpole “experiences”.
I grew up with the “Apes” films up to “Conquest” and I’m always down for a monkey movie. “Kingdom” starts nobly, not only by having lots of different kinds of monkeys in it, but by taking place “generations” after the other entries, serving as a soft-reboot of sorts for the resuscitated franchise. I liked the dialogue’s seasoning of existential despondency and the throwback soundtrack, both which recall the 1968 original. “The Witcher” ‘s Freya Allen successfully auditions for “Tomb Raider” with her role. And the special effects were pretty good, including some effective mo-cap, and a high-angle of some windy trees in the prologue that was eye-catching on a big screen.
But the film is purposeless other than as distraction. Its formulaic first act set-up of rescue & revenge segues to a meandering middle and a predictable end, with too many “what ifs” for a road picture and not enough actual adventuring. Extended passages like a campfire and a cameo from William H. Macy are too much texture for a monkey movie. The worst element is character actor & pasty White guy Kevin Durand’s main antagonist Proximus, for which Durand adopts a problematic Keith David impression. Producers should have just hired Keith David instead.
Nothing here couldn’t have been done in a hour-and-a-half – the median length for all four original Apes sequels. No wonder there’s a conscious audience shift to streaming: who wants to pay modern prices and leave their home to take an uncomfortable nap?
Poster sourced from impawards.com. Do you have any good Charlton Heston or Planet of the Apes puns or jokes? Leave yours in the comment box below!
“Tarzan 2016” is a thing. What starts promisingly with Christoph Waltz & the great Djimon Hounsou squaring off is squashed once the title screen arrives, and conscious viewers notice the ‘registered trademark’ icon next to the logo. It still begs belief eight years post-release and reeks of corporate interference & franchise ensnarement. It’s mind-boggling thinking of what legal finagling forced such a decision – then you pause the movie on Netflix and it displays the logo on its idle screen without it. It isn’t even on the poster!
You can’t say the writers didn’t try to do something different: instead of another origin story, we open with an edified, middle-aged Tarzan, who retrogresses when he’s used as a pawn in the Congolese mineral trade. But then Waltz’s bad guy devolves into the one-dimensional schtick we’ve seen him do in every role since “Inglorious Basterds”, dragging Margot Robbie’s Jane from one set-piece to another while Alexander Skarsgård’s admittedly-shredded Tarzan is in hot pursuit. The action becomes the only point to the Sisyphysian push-and-pull, and the action scenes are a mish-mash of poor CGI & muted colours. While they’re thankfully not hyper-edited, anything in motion just looks like blobs – particularly the swinging-through-trees, which recall the ‘surfing’ from the 1999 Disney film.
The Casting Director got their budget’s worth, though. Acting is Tarzan 2016’s strongest quality, but was this caliber of work necessary here? Even Samuel L. Jackson had a chance to ham it up a bit, but he’s relatively low-key as the sidekick. There’s a five-second shot where Jackson lands on a tree branch and looks down, and he’s supposed to be hundreds of feet in the air but in reality it’s probably just a green screen beneath him, and it’s believable. I wish the cast’s effort had gone to a story with more follow-through: if not a “Birth of Tarzan” then maybe “Tarzan in Europe”.
2 out of 5
Poster sourced from impawards.com. Screenshots were author-obtained. Think I’m being too hard on Christoph? How about too easy on everyone else? Like yourself a good monkey movie? Planning to watch it before it’s “removed from Netflix”? Comment why don’t ‘cha!
theory of a daskeman 