A Discourse on Fandom

I realized recently that my reviews have sort of turned into a very topical outlet for me. There are things about this world that I still struggle to understand and it’s really fun to try and work through those things via reviewing films for all of you. I can only hope that you enjoy the journey as much as I do. This year has been a year that has left me questioning what I should reasonably expect from those properties that I enjoy. Last weekend was SDCC in California. It’s a fantastic time of year for nerdom as all of the producers of geeky stuff roll out the red carpet and use any tactics they can think of to tease and entice us with previews of things to come. There are product previews, movie trailers, and panels with key people who create the stuff that we nerds love. I’ve never actually been to ComiCon, but even I find myself looking at news outlets from time to time searching for the new happening with my favorite properties.

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not nearly as plugged into the Internet as I could be. I do the Facebook thing, but don’t follow me on Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit, or any other such foolishness because I don’t have accounts with most of those sites, and my Twitter has never been used. I don’t really see the appeal, but to each their own. Some people crave attention and those are definitely outlets for attention. Be that as it may, I get a lot of media related news a little bit more slowly because I don’t subscribe to these things, and more importantly, I don’t connect with other people over my fandoms as much because of this fact. I’m going somewhere with this, but first, let’s look at a horror/suspense classic from all the way back in 1990, Stephen King’s Misery.

Misery is the tale of a writer named Paul Sheldon who crashes his car in a blizzard, causing significant injury to himself, and totalling his car. He should have frozen to death and died, but he’s saved by one Annie Wilkes. Prior to his accident, Sheldon had just finished writing a novel based in a series for which Wilkes was a huge fan. Wilkes begins nursing Sheldon back to health, and as a thank you, Sheldon lets Wilkes read his manuscript. It’s all very nice, but takes an abrupt turn south when Wilkes realizes that the character that she adores so is going to die at the end of the book that Sheldon has just written. Wilkes’ demeanor switches from sweet, but kinda creepy to full on homicidal in an instant and she sets Sheldon up with an office insisting that he rewrite the novel according to her liking. This is especially interesting because it happened in real life. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle made his fortune writing Sherlock Holmes, but he wanted to move on and so he wrote a piece where Holmes dies. The outrage was so vehement that Doyle very quickly went back to writing Holmes stories, and not happily I should add. Anyway, so as to not spoil every little detail of this cinematic masterpiece, things do eventually resolve in as good a way as can be expected. Sheldon escapes, Wilkes dies, and everyone moves on.

There are a lot of positives to this movie. There’s definitely a reason it’s considered a classic. The script is wonderful. There’s this play between the straightforward and the creepy, foreboding undertones that really lay a good framework for every other aspect of the film. The acting is superb. Kathy Bates walks a fine line between innocent naivete and homicidal monster, and she plays the dichotomy of those two characteristics flawlessly. The immediacy with which she’s able to switch between them is uncanny, and lends itself to the frightening nature of the character. James Caan also does an amazing job in his role. He goes from grateful survivor to plotting survivor sprinkled with a little bit of false Stockholm syndrome very well. The power struggle between the two characters is beyond intense. It’s disturbing at times with outright violence, and then at other times, it’s really subliminal. It’s all very well done.

The pacing of the film is incredible. The movie uses suspense extremely well. One thing that I really appreciated is that the story knows how to ebb and flow with the suspense in order to maximize the impact of that suspense as everything unfolds. That would not have been possible if the pacing hadn’t been as complex and well developed as it is. Again, that all falls back on the well crafted script, but it also says a lot about the director, Rob Reiner. He really handled this project masterfully. This buildup of suspense is also accomplished in part by the music. The score just uses the right type of musical cue at just the right time. This is a movie that I can wholeheartedly recommend without any reservation. It really holds up as a masterwork of cinema.

I could go on singing the praises of this movie, but that’s not why we’re here today. Today, we’re looking at some themes that the film presents for discussion. We’re looking at themes as intended by the writer, and themes that I picked up on because of what’s happening in the world around me. Stephen King has acknowledged that Misery is an allegory for substance abuse and his battle to overcome that. He has said that Annie Wilkes represents that addiction and how it isolates you and saps your will to live. In that light, I don’t think that this movie could ever not be poignant, but like great storytelling, it offers the possibility of someone applying to it their own unique ideas and perspectives. This is where my previous ramblings come to play. The year 2016 has left me questioning just exactly what and how much I should be allowed to expect from my fandoms. I’m not sure I’m coining the use of the word ‘fandom’ as a noun to describe something altogether intrinsic in nature, but it’s the best descriptor that I could come up with. I myself consider Star Trek, Batman, Ghostbusters, most 80s cartoons, and a handful of other sci-fi related franchises to be my fandoms.

I’d prefer to classify myself a moderate fan of most of the aforementioned things, but that really depends on the thing in question. I do, for example, really enjoy my Star Trek, but I only consider myself a casual fan of some of the sci-fi related shows that I watch. This is important because as Misery is about to teach us, there comes a point where someone crosses a line in their fandom. They cease to be a fan, or even a superfan, and they become an extreme superfan. If it’s not obvious why this movie came to mind to talk about this subject, consider yourself shamed and continue reading for further enlightenment. Annie Wilkes represents a fan, and her fandom is the Misery book series by Paul Sheldon. It’s not even veiled. It’s established in the movie that she considers herself his biggest fan. So I’m taking the entire premise a bit literally, but it really works on that level, which again, is the mark of great cinema. The entire progression of the film’s story is an excellent parallel to how fandom has evolved over the last 25 years.

Let’s get more specific. Trouble really starts when Sheldon lets Wilkes read his unpublished manuscript. At that moment, Sheldon has granted Wilkes the perception of a little ownership in his art. In much the same way, when we watch TV shows and movies, play games, and buy related products, we begin to feel a sense of ownership over the franchise that we’re supporting. Once Wilkes realizes that Sheldon intends to end her favorite book series, she goes into a homicidal rage. She makes Sheldon burn his manuscript and rewrite the book, giving feedback the entire time and making him start over whenever there’s something to which she objects. This is definitely akin to the kind of outrage that hits the Internet whenever there’s an announcement that something about a thing with fans is being changed. Case in point, what little online presence that I do have is geared toward Facebook. Saturday at SDCC, it was announced that the new Star Trek show had a name and there was a teaser of test footage of the new ship. It took all of about 0.005 seconds for ‘fans’ to collectively lose their crap over the appearance of the ship. Now, it’s one thing to be aesthetically repulsed by the appearance of a computer generated object, but the levels of hate being spewed were embarrassing. There I said it, at that moment, I was embarrassed for a bunch of Trekkies. There were so many comments pleading with CBS to change the ship, and this was within the first 24 hours of the announcement.

That segues wonderfully into the next aspect of extreme superfandom that Misery demonstrates. Annie Wilkes insinuates in one scene that without the Misery books, she would feel as if she didn’t have a reason to live, and that she might end her own life. Sheldon placates her with some generic platitudes and although she doesn’t indicate for sure that she’ll be okay, she stops alluding to suicide. I think as people in general we have a habit of overvaluing the influence we can have on the world around us. That’s not to say that we can’t influence our world, but when someone is posting to a Facebook group, or to Reddit that such and such corporation needs to make this change to so and so TV show that they really enjoy,and expecting tht their rants will actually accomplish something,  then there’s probably some overvaluation going on. The stark truth is that CBS probably will never see your post pleading with them to change the ship design, Marvel probably won’t ever get around to looking at that online petition you started to get Captain America a boyfriend, and here’s why.

James Caan’s performance captures this brilliantly. His relationship with Annie Wilkes goes from grateful and amiable to tense, and then to resentful contempt. The extreme superfan wants to believe that their spewing hate all over the Internet will make a difference. However, the fact remains that unless you work for the company that makes the thing that you’re a fan of, there’s a high probability that as far as they’re concerned, you don’t exist. We live in a world of pseudo connections. Between online social media, and the like, we forget that two people can view the same relationship in very different ways. I think this is most evident on Twitter. A person will send a Twitter to a celebrity, and then get a response, and to most, that’s a cool thing. To the extreme superfan, they’re best friends. Even moderate fans might get a little star struck. However, there are a lot of celebrities who pay social media gurus to keep up their presence on the Face-verse. Ergo, sometimes that dialog that we perceive that we’re having with that person might end up being nothing like that at all. It’s kind of disappointing, but let’s face it, celebrities are busy people too and they don’t typically have the time to answer ten thousand Twits a day. Therefore, our influence on the creators in minimal at best, and that’s assuming that it even exists at all. That’s why it’s fundamentally important to balance our sense of ownership over a fandom with the reality of the real world. Yes we love this thing, and yes we feel like our liking it adds to its uniqueness, but we need to understand that the best way that we can exemplify a fandom is to be like a cheerleader for that thing. We need to channel our passions and excitement into calmly sharing with others reasons to love the thing as well.

Now let’s look at ownership a little further because this is an area where even the moderate fans can get a bit fuzzy. There’s a pervasive attitude that because we watch movies and shows, or buy merchandise, we’ve somehow earned partial ownership of our fandom. We look at the base ideology of consumerism and we think, “Well I bought this CD and so I own it. Surely it works the same way with my show, right?” It’s an interesting discussion because there are two very valid points to be made on two diametrically opposed sides of the aisle. On the one hand, you don’t work for whoever makes your fandom. No one has granted you the keys to that kingdom and told you to create. On the other hand, without fans, a thing ceases to exist. If all of a sudden, every Star Wars fan on the planet suddenly stopped supporting Star Wars and all of the merchandise sat on shelves to collect dust, and no one went and saw any movies, then Star Wars would die a quick death. Obviously that will never happen, but hypothetically speaking, Disney knows this. It’s why they put so much effort into releasing new and exciting Star Wars things. These are two valid points as I said earlier. As an example of crossing a line, I recently learned that Joss Whedon took some major rage hate for his decision to develop a semi-meaningful relationship between Hulk and Black Widow in Age of Ultron. I saw this movie and I thought that the romantic undertones were sweet because I kind of felt like the two characters got each other and they made each other better people. But apparently there were a lot of extreme superfans who disagreed with that point of view. Whedon wound up cancelling his Twitter account and going underground as a direct result. Once again, James Caan’s performance demonstrates some of what’s going on in these situations very well. He writes a new book, but in the end, he winds up resenting all that it represents so much that he burns that manuscript as well. As fans, we have to remember that while we are the consumers, we are not the designated official creators. As consumers, our role is to support our fandoms by giving them attention and money, and that that’s as far as our role extends. We shouldn’t be badgering the creators over petty little points via social media, or in worst case scenarios, making death threats.

That’s not to say that as fans and consumers, that we can’t also create. Misery actually has a scene where Wilkes is explaining to the sheriff that in light of Sheldon’s apparent death, she’s taken it upon herself to pick up that mantle and write her own Misery novel. Fan fiction has been around probably since the dawn of time. Certainly it can be traced back at least to the 1970s when Star Trek fans started publishing their own fanzines and writing their own stories. Star Wars’ expanded universe (RIP) came about because of fan fiction. There are definitely appropriate places and situations to use our own creativity and passion to build up those fandoms that we cherish. What we have to bear in mind is that the creators are doing these things because they find them fun, and they might stop doing these things if doing then ceases to be fun. I will shed a mighty tear the day that a fanbase destroys its own fandom, and I sincerely hope that that never happens. But it could if we continue to live in a world where we debase and hate against decisions made concerning our fandoms one moment only to turn around shortly after and proclaim our undying love for that fandom. That sends a very confusing and frustrating message to those who work tirelessly to feed our fandoms, and it’s not even remotely constructive.

In the last 25 years, it’s become unprecedentedly easy to ‘connect’ with our fandoms. The Internet has given us all a virtual sounding board to share our ideas and our passions. A quarter century ago, we could only look on as spectators of our fandom for the most part. In much the same way, Annie Wilkes was acting as a Paul Sheldon fan. She knew all the little details of his life, but she’d never met him until he crashed. I imagine if this story were adapted to a more contemporary setting, she would be spending most of her days Facebook stalking him and leaving creepy messages on his Twitter feed. She’s probably attend conventions and take awkward pictures with him in order to feed that belief that she mattered in his life. Obviously, she’s an exaggeration of my point, but the point still stands. We need to remember to moderate our words and our actions. Discussing our fandoms rationally, and without malice is a great way to meet like minded people and also expand our thinking, but constantly expressing outrage over every little detail and development might be a sign that we need to seriously rethink whether or not we still take enjoyment from that fandom. Perhaps the answer is to simply live in the good old days of your fandom. That’s certainly possible. There’s no rule written or otherwise that explicitly states that you have to continue to support something if the joy that you used to take from that thing has soured. There are a lot of fans out there and they all love a lot of different things. It’s never our place to sour someone else’s experience simply because we feel that our own experience has been soured by something. It’s fine to not like something, but in a world of absolutes, we need to learn to live less in said absolutes. Only the Sith deal in absolutes and they are most often the losers. Don’t be a loser. Feel free to disagree. Discuss your feelings with those around. But understand that nothing is ever the best, or the worst. Because in 0.005 seconds, something else will come along that’s considered the best, or the worst. Like things, or dislike them, or even hate them, but do so in a way that doesn’t spoil the fun of those around you, and certainly don’t direct your rage at those who work so hard to create new things for your fandom.

I guess to tie it up, I’ll just say that this has been a harrowing exercise for us all. Just take a few moments to think about what that comment, or that Twit is going to accomplish before you throw it out there for the world to read next time, and consider being a force for good within your fandoms rather than a critical voice of dissent. Here’s a sea otter to make you smile…

Oh SyFy... Just When I Thought You Couldn't Get Any Dumber

You go and put out some great shows and TOTALLY REDEEM YOURSELF! Okay, that was maybe a little cheesy, and the reference may only appeal to my mid-90s Farrelly brothers demographic, but how often does this situation actually happen? For years SyFy has been on the ropes for programming. That’s not to say that they’ve ever been super good at what they do, but at some point, they decided to stop even trying anymore. In recent years, they did have some big winners like Stargate Universe, and the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica. However, they mangled their lineup with fodder like WWE, and various reality shows, like Ghost Hunters. These latter bits are not very science fiction-y.

Indeed, for years, Stargate was the SyFy bread and butter. The original show spun off two other shows, all of which lasted for, like, 20 years worth of programming I’m sure. During the Stargate years, SyFy supplemented that programming mostly with miniseries events. Shows like Children of Dune, Tin Man, and Earthsea offset the brief periods of programming when there wasn’t a Stargate something on. Ok, I jest, but as a casual watcher of the channel, it sometimes seemed that way. There were other ways that SyFy rounded out their programming. They showed reruns of older sci-fi shows like Andromeda, Eureka, and Farscape. And who could forget Lexx, or MST3K? There have definitely always been high points in SyFy programming, but within the last year, the station has apparently reached some sort of renaissance period. I’m only going to look at a few shows because they’re the only ones that I’ve watched, but feel free to chime in with your thoughts and suggestions.

For me, it started with Helix.I’m not even really sure what the show was really about even to this day, but it included some sort of virus, the Arctic, and corporate meddling. It was what I would call a mid-concept sci-fi show in that it dealt with themes, but not necessarily in each episode. Instead, there were meta-themes throughout and the week-to-week enticement was the mystery that was unfolding. It’s the same formula that I’ll talk about for all of these shows. It just didn’t quite catch on. Next, I found Ascension. Talk about a great show! There’s an ark ship barrelling through space with definite class stratification, and all the benefits, or lack thereof that come with. There was intrigue, mystery, murder, and some top notch acting. And the season finale! I won’t spoil it, but it definitely left me thirsty for more! It got cancelled so expect disappointment, but it’s still well worth the watch. These two shows are what I consider a major turning point for SyFy. They started tinkering with a model that was different for the channel, and that could be used to create new, exciting, and most importantly, sci-fi centric shows. It should be mentioned that all of these shows fit into a category that I like to call the viewer participant category. They offer the viewer clues about the story and let the viewer try to figure everything out before the information is revealed. It’s not groundbreaking, but it is effective.

Skip to 2015. It was a great year for the channel. I first caught wind when Netflix picked up Dark Matter. I’m going to give credit where it’s due here because this show didn’t originate on SyFy. It originated on the Canadian station Space, but kudos to SyFy for picking a winner! The show revolves around six people on adrift on a ship. They have no idea where they are, or what they’re doing on said ship. No one even knows who they are. In fact, no one remembers anything preceding their waking up from stasis. The entire show becomes about these people trying to find their past, and their exploits along the way. It’s pretty much a meta-mystery, but it does that so well! There’s a lot of action, there are red herrings thrown at the viewer, and the way that the characters are developed makes them pretty relatable. Because you’re trying to figure out a mystery, you’re always left wanting a little more of the puzzle to use and it makes the show pretty addictive. I binged through it in two days because each episode leaves you on a mini-cliffhanger. It’s very fun!

Next in the lineup is Killjoys. A friend recommended that I give this one a try since I enjoyed Dark Matter. I was not disappointed. Once again, this show started on Space before SyFy picked it up, but that was a good move. If Dark Matter Is all about characters discovering who they are, Killjoys is kind of the opposite. It’s about the main characters running away from who they are. Out of all these shows, I understand the setting of this one the least, provisionally speaking. With Dark Matter, it’s intended that you know very little about the setting as a whole. With Killjoys you’re actually given a lot of information about the setting, but not in a way where it all falls into place. As a result, you really have to think in order to put the pieces together. You follow a crew of bounty hunters, one of whom is running from her past where she was actually trained to be a cold-blooded assassin. There are some really fun twists along the way, and by the time I finished season one, I couldn’t wait to see more!

Finally on this list is The Expanse. This is a SyFy original, and it really delivers! The show is about the power struggle between Earth, Mars, and the asteroid belt. Thanks to the dichotomy of the three ‘organizations’, there’s a lot of politics involved, and where there’s politics, there’s intrigue, and there’s drama. I’d say this is the most complex of the shows I’m talking about in the article, and the reason I say that is that the storytelling is pretty innovative. The show centers on the mysterious disappearance of one woman. But, all the action, and all the mystery is driven by three different groups investigating her disappearance. As a result, you’re given pieces of the puzzle that may not appear to fit at first. That aspect keeps you coming back for more as you try to solve the mysteries presented.

So what’s the point of this little editorial piece? First, the train of thought was spawned by a comment made by Chris Pine not to long ago where he said that you couldn’t make intelligent Star Trek anymore. I really feel like all three of these shows conclusively demonstrate just the opposite. Lumping all of the previous three shows together; they’ve all got huge boons working in their favor. Each is relatively smart in the writing, each has great casts of characters that are all utilized well, each has an interesting and well developed setting to play in, and each manages to find a really good balance between the cerebral and the physical, or the smart and the action. Each one of these shows is doing many of the same things as all of the others, but they manage to establish their own unique identity. It’s actually quite refreshing. It all establishes that sci-fi can still be about the ideas and the themes, but still integrate sexiness, and action as well. It gives me hope that we might see a return to good science fiction again instead of silly slug fests with shoddy CG, and terrible make up.

The second point to this week’s discussion is to give praise where it’s due. I’ve been in a sci-fi funk as of late with all that’s transpired within the Trek community. Huge divisions have been created between the studios and the fan base, and we officially live in an era where intelligent sci-fi is actively being shunned by a franchise that was built on intelligent sci-fi. It leaves one feeling somewhat downtrodden at times. But then there are these great shows on SyFy of all places that are showing the world that there are still a lot of people hungry for intelligent science fiction, people who want to see thought provoking material presented in a way that is fun and interesting, and most importantly, showing that action and sci-fi are not exclusive things. They can exist in harmony within the same tapestry. Shows like these are giving the Chris Pines of the world the proverbial finger, and they’re giving guys like me who crave good science fiction both hope and something to satiate those cravings. I never thought I’d say this, but good job SyFy! Keep up the good work!

Planet of the Apes: Brilliant, Physics Bending Social Commentary

In recent years, movie going audiences have been treated to stories of science gone amok and the consequences mankind faces in the wake of their own arrogance. I’m referring to the recent Planet of the Apes series. This recent foray into the world of talking monkies has garnered quite a bit of praise even if it hasn’t commanded the level of fanfare that say, a new Marvel film would. Still, it’s been great to see this universe and the ideas attached to it back on the big screen. As good as that is though, many will forget that Planet of the Apes has a rich history that stretches way back to the good old day of when the original Star Trek was on the air. Well, maybe not. Most older folks probably recall that there was a Planet of the Apes film released in 1968. I can’t vouch for the younger generation, but hopefully, most of you reading this at least know this much. However, far fewer are probably aware that Apes was a huge deal. The 1968 film was only the first in a series of five movies, and that movie in particular was the first movie ever in history to extensively employ a merchandising campaign related to the film. There were books, comics, records, lunch boxes, a live action spin off series, a Saturday morning cartoon, and a whole slew of other merchandise related to this movie and the masses ate it up. Of course, there was bound to be a sequel, but no one could have predicted four. Yes, Planet of the Apes was the Fast and Furious of its day. It made an interesting mark on history, and just because I related it to a franchise known for awkward dialog, fast cars and big explosions, don’t assume that the formula behind the Apes series was anywhere near as shallow. Indeed, the series did some great analogizing, and its overall structure is unlike that of any series that had come before, or that has come since so let’s look at these movies and maybe I will blow your mind along the way, and if it isn’t terribly clear based on the subject matter, this will probably a pretty long read...

Planet of the Apes: 1968

It probably goes without saying that the original Apes film is considered a cinematic masterpiece. Most people who have watched it are able to recognize the depth of both the plot and themes being presented. Some may not know that because of these two things, getting the movie off the ground in the first place took two years, and required the backing of Charlton Heston, who thought the script was brilliant. There were a couple of firsts involved in this film. It was the first movie to make extensive use of prosthetic makeup, the first to use an extensive tie-in merchandising campaign, it was one of the first really cerebral science fiction movies to be released as more than just a B movie, and it was the first movie ever to include a score that was written atonally. What that last one means is that the music didn’t conform to any set chord progression, but instead used random and unrelated chords to create a great deal of dissonance. That will be important later. The movie had a star studded cast for its day. Charlton Heston led, but Roddy McDowall, Kim Hunter, and Maurice Evans also lent their star power to the film. These are all actors who had done some high profile work before and who were well respected in the industry, and because such accomplished actors took on the project, the acting is second to none.

Let’s talk about the story and the setting. I love older films because they know how to take their time telling a story. It’s less about downloading as much information as possible within the running time, and more about making sure that the quality of the information being presented is top notch, and Apes does this incredibly well. The premise is that Charlton Heston’s character Taylor and a small crew had launched from Earth in 1972 on a trip to the vast reaches of the cosmos. It’s never made clear where they’re supposed to be going so the idea is probably that they fly through space in suspended animation until their ship finds a habitable world and then they land and explore. Something goes wrong and instead of soft landing, they crash into a lake. In the scramble to abandon a sinking ship, the only concrete information they’re able to get is that the atmosphere won’t kill them and the year, according to their chronometer, is 3579. The structure of the film is really easy to follow as there’s a pretty straightforward three act deal going on. The first act is meant to be extremely disorienting to the viewer and it does a superb job there. As such, we’re given very little information about the situation. We do get some background on our characters, but there’s no real indication of where they are, or what’s really going on. There’s not even an effort made to keep the viewer up with how long they’ve been where they are so you’re just left guessing the whole time, but that really gets you into the story. After some wandering in the desert, Taylor and crew discover a civilization where apes are the dominant species and humans can’t speak. The entire setting turns what we know of our world completely on its ear, and it’s not shy about it. This is one of the things that makes the original Apes series so fascinating to watch. No one involved was shy about shocking the audience. The apes have a barbaric quality to them. They experiment on and dissect live humans, they lock said humans in caged for entertainment, and they wholeheartedly believe in their absolute superiority over humans. No measure is spared to make the setting as unfamiliar and disturbing as possible. This is where the score comes in. The music, which is composed by Jerry Goldsmith,  plays a huge role in solidifying the unease that the viewer is supposed to be feeling and takes the movie up to the level of a full blown experience. At the point where one starts to see the apes as representing humans is where we start to get into the metaphorical realm a bit.

The apes are a metaphor for humans. They, and by extension we, are being portrayed as barbaric and parasitic. The writer is essentially saying that we have no regard for the environment in which we live. Beyond that, there are themes of anti-war sentiment, there’s a pretty strong warning about the mishandling of nuclear weapons, there are pretty blatant comments on racism and social stratification, and there’s some great commentary dealing with religion versus science, as well as the separation of church and state. There’s even a little bit of commentary on the counter culture movement that was taking place at the time. Most people get the cautionary tale of the misuse of nukes, but like any great film, this movie is incredibly layered.

Eventually, we learn that the scientific leadership of the apes knew that humans had been a technological and intelligent species, and that they had hid that from the masses. There’s one final struggle before Taylor takes his horse, his gun and his girl and rides off into the unknown. The ending to the movie is totally iconic as Charlton Heston rides up on the head of the Statue of Liberty and we’re made to realize that mankind nuked himself into near oblivion. He curses us all and the film just ends. There’s no real happy ending here and I really have to commend that. There’s also no effort made to tie up any of the questions that we may have by the end of the movie, and again, I commend that. The end of the movie leaves the viewer to try and digest and analyze what they just saw. It invites the audience to really think about all of the commentary that’s been made. It really is intelligent cinema at its best. I can’t praise this film enough! If for some tragic reason, you haven’t seen it, get a copy however you can and give it a watch. It should be on everyone’s must see list!

Beneath the Planet of the Apes: 1970

Originally, no one expected the first Apes to be very successful, let alone for it to become a runaway success. The ending, ambiguous though it may have been, left very little opening for a continuation. Charlton Heston was well known for his staunch anti-sequel stance, and as such, he refused to come back for another film at first. However, he eventually relented, and Beneath was made. This movie takes many of the same approaches that made the first movie successful. There’s another crew who crash land on the same planet, and at roughly the same point in time as Taylor and his late crew. It’s just far enough in the future for some progress to be shown. There’s a very brief recap for all those squares who missed out on the first movie (remember these were the days before home movie entertainment). Then we just jump straight into things. The new main character, Brent, goes through much the same process as Taylor did in the first movie, except condensed to the first act. He finds Taylor via Taylor’s partner, Nova, played by the lovely Linda Harrison, and brought back from the first film. Kim Hunter’s Zira, and Roddy McDowall’s Cornelius come back, although Cornelius is played by David Watson as McDowall was unavailable, but you really wouldn’t be able to tell, unless it was pointed out to you. Sorry? Once again, the audience is meant to be somewhat disoriented as they watch. That same backwards society that made us uneasy during the first movie is back in full swing, only this time it’s the militant gorillas who are driving the wagon.

The gorillas believe that there are humans in their ‘forbidden zone’ abducting and killing apes. They naturally want to track down these humans and exterminate them. This really opens up some new dialog metaphorically. Sure there’s still the racism theme going on, but layered on top of that are themes of the over extension of the police/military, ignorance for the good of the people, the illusion of safety through the promise of mutually assured destruction, and some Vietnam war commentary. It’s all handled very well, and once again, it forces the viewer to really think about what is being presented.

In this movie, Brent and Nova learn that there is a colony of human survivors from the nuclear holocaust living below ground who have developed the ability of telepathy over the millennia. They’ve remained alive because they’re able to use their abilities to trick their enemies out of encroaching on their territory. They’re not presented as inherently violent, but we do learn that they’ll resort to violence if backed into a corner. They’re last resort is a leftover nuclear device, which they worship as a deity. The film climaxes as Brent and Nova finally track down Tayler. They’re all held captive, but escape just in time to get caught up in a battle between the apes and the troglodytes. In the final scenes, Taylor and Nova are killed, which was one of Heston’s conditions for returning. Brent dies as well, and at the very end, Taylor uses his dying breath to activate the nuke and incinerate the whole planet. That was an addition to the script that was made by Heston as he didn’t want any chance of yet another sequel.

I really have to give respect to a franchise that was willing to literally nuke its own universe. Yet again, this movie really doesn’t end on a happy note. However, it uses part of the formula that would become a staple for the series and drops the audience out of the story very abruptly so as to encourage reflection on what has just been seen. While this movie definitely isn’t one of the stronger films, it does take the series in the most obvious logical direction. I personally wanted to see more of this dystopia after watching the first movie. I wanted to understand it a bit more and see more of the effects that time had had on our world in this universe. This movie does that. It may seem a little silly at first, but bear in mind that we’re made to know that these humans lived unoppressed for two thousand years. Who knows where we could be in that time? I’ll admit that things aren’t ironclad, but they’re not completely nuts either. The movie does have a lot of strengths. The sets and the lighting are incredible and really add to the atmosphere of this fallen world. The makeup for the troglodytes is creepy, but not completely foreign,which makes it unsettling, but also relatable. In all, this is another movie that I can highly recommend. The only question you may have now is, “How did they come back from that?” Find out the answer to that question… Right now!

Escape from the Planet of the Apes: 1971

I didn’t really think that I would take very much away from this movie as it appears deceptively light in tone, and therefore, a little bit of a departure from the series usual mode. Don’t be fooled. This film is pretty dark and just a little disturbing, more so because it appears to be a lighter movie. Thus, I took nearly as many notes for this movie as I did for the original, and rightly so. There’s a ton of metaphor and commentary going on! First, let me get out of the way that for obvious reasons, there’s a great deal of retcon going on in this film. It had to be so because they literally nuked their setting in the last movie. However, a decent job is done mending the mythology, as it were, and so long as you can get past the knee jerk desire to roll your eyes out of their sockets, it winds up being a really solid film.

Once again, there’s an effort made to keep the viewer a little disoriented, and in order to accomplish that at the beginning, a little bait and switch is employed. A spacecraft just like the ones in the previous two movies lands in the ocean. The military goes to recover the craft expecting human astronauts, but are surprised to find that the craft was staffed by chimpanzees instead. We’re kind of dropped into the middle of the story again, but I think I’ve been getting that impression because the methods of storytelling have evolved quite a bit in the intervening decades. There’s very little pretext involved in these films. They just kind of start going and that’s it. The movie follows Cornelius and Zira from the first film as they attempt to fit into human society, and endure the rigors of a presidential board of inquiry. It sounds boring on the surface, and it does lack in action, but if you’re a cerebral sci-fi guy like me, you’ll eat it up. Eventually, Zira lets slip that apes are going to usurp humans as the dominant species and steps are taken to stop the two apes from breeding (Zira is already pregnant). This set up of having the apes thrust into human culture works extremely well with this story because it lends commentary toward how we as humans might react when faced with the potential of being dethroned from the top of the food chain. If you like your commentary sugar coated, these movies aren’t for you. They’re extremely curt in what they have to say, and they don’t pull punches. Anyway, by the end of the movie, Cornelius and Zira are murdered, but their newborn is clandestinely spirited away to live with Ricardo Montalban at the circus, thus leaving the door open for a potential sequel, but not blatantly so, which drives me crazy about most films today, but that’s a topic for another post altogether. It should be mentioned that in order to keep the audience engaged, there’s some fantastic cat and mouse play throughout the third act, and as has become a staple of this series, everything just kind of ends without any lead out.

The plot is pretty straightforward, but the commentary more than makes up for that here. There’s a little sidebar about women’s equality going on, we see some thoughts on the predilection of the military to exploit and pervert the efforts of science, and there’s great debate over religious morality versus secular morality. Probably the best bit of commentary comes from the Hasslein character, played by Eric Braeden. He spearheads the presidential inquiry concerning the apes and gets rather involved in the news media as a result. Great efforts are made to show a progressive oversaturation of news pundit organizations, and Hasslein’s metamorphosis into a social justice warrior. True the term wouldn’t be invented for 40 more years, but the behavior and demeanor are exactly the same, even if the methods were crude. What blew me away about the series, but specifically about this film is how it felt like I was watching something that was geared towards today’s audiences. Update the wardrobe, and the setting using exactly the same script, and it wouldn’t exactly feel out of place, but we’ll get to that later.

In all, it’s a really good film, and a solid entry into a great franchise. I’d say this one more than any of the others, paces pretty slowly, but it’s really worth sitting through just to experience, but also to get yourself thinking about some of the issues that the movie points out. As with the previous two movies, and as with all of them really, it’s worth watching at least once.

Conquest of the Planet of the Apes 1972:

This is the entry in the series that I typically consider to be my favorite other than the original. The interesting thing about this film is that on the 40th anniversary blu-ray, there’s an unrated version. I was not aware that such a thing even existed until I bought the set, but now it’s the only version I ever watch. This movie sticks to the formula pretty well. The action just starts without pretense, and it gets back to that blatantly dark tone. This movie represents a turning point in the mythology because it’s the movie where the apes rise up against the humans. The primary character is Caesar, played by Roddy McDowall, and he really plays it to the hilt in this movie. The most important thing to note here is that the metaphor being relied on for this film is the civil rights movement. Because of that, this can also be a really hard film to watch as it’s brutally honest about the state of things. But I will attempt to tread lightly because I know that the subject is at the forefront of our social consciousness.

Caesar finds himself sold into slavery after Ricardo Montalban gets taken in for Gitmo style interrogation from the governor of I think New York City. Even though it’s been twenty years movie time since the previous series of events, the human government still remembers that there was a talking ape child potentially born and they’re ever vigilant in rooting out this potential evil in order to squash it before it becomes too large of a problem. Caesar, confronted with the life of menial forced servitude that his fellow apes endure, concocts a revolution, and all of the apes storm the city. They take down the government leaders, and declare that they’re the future, and that humans will now learn what it means to be made subservients.

The themes… The themes are tough to swallow at times, and sometimes a little vague so you have to really think hard about what’s presented here. However, the whole movie is a cautionary tale. The human population have enslaved the ape population to do all of the menial tasks that they don’t want to do anymore. But as with any evolution in human society, laws need to be made, and oversight needs to be employed in order to govern the continued sustainability of the status quo. So much like the technology that we enjoy today, the ape slaves kind of play to a metaphor that with major breakthroughs, humans give away their freedoms by degrees in order to keep up with recent developments. It’s much the same way that we allow corporations to monitor our comings and goings via GPS in order to get credits for free stuff, or more blatantly, the Patriot Act. But is that stuff really free in a world where the government might use that information against if it becomes ‘necessary’? It’s these types of questions that really make this series great! Words like ‘conditioned’ get thrown around in order to further drive the point home. We’re all conditioned by small degrees to accept a little more and a little more before, eventually, like in this movie, we’re living on the brink of a totalitarian government. It’s not quite 1984, but if that book had a prequel, Conquest would be that prequel. It definitely attempts to demonstrate the dangers inherent in putting too much control in the hands of big government due to things like dangerous agendas, and big business gaming the system. Interestingly, there are subtle themes of government overreach in the pursuit of terrorists. The leadership in the film go to hugely excessive lengths to track down Caesar and his cohorts. There is an unsettling warning at the end of the movie cautioning us that answering hate and violence with more hate and violence only begets more hate and violence, or put more simply, no one can ever expect a positive outcome to a social dilemma by trying to violently and forcibly sway the issue in any direction. I found that particularly poignant in light of recent events in the country, and certain people’s responses to those events. And just to put a cherry on top of the civil rights movement metaphor, there’s also a very clear power struggle between the rich (the humans) and the poor (the apes).

This movie… This is a gory and excessively violent film! It’s an extremely visceral experience! Especially for 1972. I’m referring specifically to the unrated version, which was edited in order to avoid an ‘R’ rating back in the day. There’s excessive use of blood, detailed portrayals of violent acts, rioting in the streets, and a speech at the end that can freeze the blood in your veins. It’s not for the faint of heart, but it does bring to light issues that we still struggle with forty years later. If you must have a ‘happy’ ending, the theatrical cut does end on a slightly higher note, and most of the gratuitous violence has been removed so it’s better, but it still got a ‘PG’ rating, which is the highest of any of the movies. It’s extremely thought provoking, terribly unsettling, and tremendously poignant. Give it a watch!

Battle for the Planet of the Apes 1973:

Once again, I found out once I picked up the 40th anniversary box set that there’s an extended version of this film. I’m going to save you a little trouble here and say that the extended version actually doesn’t add very much to the movie, and I think that the theatrical version is actually the stronger of the two versions. This movie sees the apes living in a community that could easily serve as the prototype for what we see in the 68 film. They’re mingling with humans, and the apes have all acquired the power of speech at this point, which is supposed to be about 20 years after the previous film. Caesar is feeling the burdens of leadership and musing that he wishes he could get some wisdom from his parents. His aide, a human named McDonald, tells him that tapes exist of his parents being interviewed. So Caesar, McDonald, and another of the apes make the dangerous journey to the old city to see if they can’t find these recordings. We find out that the old city has been incinerated by a nuclear warhead, and is therefore irradiated. The trio find the tapes, but alert a small group of humans still living in the underground portions of the city to their existence. This leads said humans to plot to destroy the apes in a final act of vengeance, because some men just want to watch the world burn, literally, and these irradiated humans put together a pretty well equipped militia. Meanwhile, Caesar is dealing with internal strifes via a gorilla named Aldo. Aldo believes that might is right and that he should lead the apes. All of this power struggling culminates in Aldo killing Caesar’s son the night before the city humans attack the ape village. There’s a battle, as promised in the title. The humans living with the apes are locked up by the gorillas and have to sit said battle out. In the end, the apes drive the city dwellers off to go learn telepathy. Aldo is confronted by Caesar concerning his (Aldo’s) breaking the first law that ape shall never kill ape. Aldo attempts to flee, falls from a tree and dies. The humans are released, and there’s a speech decrying the need for true equality. We then flash forward a thousand years where an ape adept is teaching a class of humans and apes, insinuating that there was a time of peace and equality between the two groups. It all appears very optimistic.

I feel like this might be the weakest of all of the movies. There was an end that was being worked towards, and I think the production staff could see it and were kind of in a hurry to get there. It’s still a pretty thoughtful, and thought provoking film, just not to the same degree as the previous entries. That said, some of the themes that it does present are really fascinating. It philosophizes about the double edged nature of knowledge, where gaining it can empower a being, but misusing it can lead to a being’s destruction. That idea that prudence is wise is seen throughout the film. There’s also a really interesting idea that confronting and learning to accept our darker nature is a necessary step in healthy societal evolution. It’s an interesting concept, and one that really makes you pause and think. The movie takes time to caution us that we can very quickly fall back into self-destructive habits if steps are not taken to avoid doing so. The theme of conscience and its role in our development also plays a part in the movie because the film tries to show that good things can be perverted into bad things and vice versa. So it’s not completely devoid of thematic layers, but by comparison to the meat available in the previous films, it is lacking a little.

It is a weaker film by comparison, but it has some stellar redeeming qualities. First, we’re back to that great set design that we see in the second film. All of the post-apocalyptic scenery is well designed and creepy. The acting is still top notch, as it all the films. There’s a great deal more action in this movie than in the other films as well. It boils down to an enjoyable watch, and as we’ll get to, it serves a really important purpose.

The Whole Picture:

Okay so we’ve looked at each film. Now let’s look at the broad strokes for a second. The series on the whole is a great series. The films are like a great book; you always pick up on something new each time you watch for the most part. The themes are still relevant even after 40 years, which in my opinion is a hallmark of great science fiction. The special effects have aged reasonably well over the years because they were used sparingly in the first place. The acting is second to none, and the stories are entertaining even if you’re just looking at the surface. There’s a reason that these films have endured. There’s one thing to consider though. Most people will view the series like this:

However, the series was actually designed to be watched like this:

See, once the second movie was done, and Heston had left the franchise, the production team had to look for a way to make the entire series interesting sans their huge star power. Thus, scheme was concocted the likes of which had never been tried before! Paul Dehn, the primary writer for the last four movies, decided to try and make the story cyclical. As such, you could start with any movie in the series and then watch the other four in the order shown above, and the story would still make sense at the ‘end’. It’s extremely mind boggling, and it does get a little dicey at times, but overall, it works.

Thematically, you can’t beat these movies. It amazes just how much commentary they lend. But that makes sense in context of the times. The 70s were still a painful period of growth for our nation. There were senseless acts of terrorism frequently, civil rights had not completely been worked out yet, women were working towards more representation in a lot of arenas, but most prevalently, the work force, and we were still in Vietnam so news outlets were starting to cover global happenings more fiercely, and as a result, the world started to look more bleak. With the Nixon scandal, there was a measure of distrust towards the government as well. It’s all captured in these five films like they’re some sort of time capsule. The disturbing thing about them is how easily their themes fit in the climate of today’s world. The more we think we advance as a species, the more we just spin our wheels at times, The most interesting things about these movies thematically is that they don’t attempt to offer any answers. This is another mark of great science fiction. These films bring the issues to your attention, but then they let you draw your own conclusions, leaving the commentary very open ended.

Absolutely give this entire series a watch. Don’t bother with Tim Burton’s film and wait a while until I do a review of the most recent reboot series to get my thought there, but watch these ones! I can guarantee that you’ll be thoroughly entertained and that you’ll be happy you watched them!