Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

"Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" was more critically successful than its predecessor and it is easy to see why. The story is well written and other very noteworthy cinematic elements include the acting, drama and special effects. As for myself, I enjoyed this sequel about as much as its predecessor. The reason why I like the original 1968 film the most is because of its originality, its plot and its screenplay. While the stories are great in both reboot films, they just aren't as special each time you watch them.

Director Matt Reeves also made "Cloverfield" and both films are obviously very different from one another except for the lighting. Also, the tint of the colour yellow in both films is pretty much identical. Considering that this is Reeves' third theatrical film, he did well. There is one shot in the movie where the camera is mounted on a tank and that really brought "Cloverfield" to my recollection. The film opens with a frightening sequence of the spread of the Simeon Flu and its horrific consequences. Worldwide communication is affected to the point that it fails. One part of the main story I like is how loyal Rocket is to Caesar. Rocket was a bully towards Caesar in the first film but it looks like he is now forever in debt to Caesar for freeing him. Rocket's son Ash was even shot in this film by a human but he still listens to the leader of the family. Many of the motion capture performances are quite noteworthy such as the look on Koba's face after his life is spared in his first fight with Caesar. I also like how they aged the apes ten years in terms of performance and appearance. Caesar for example is a very convincing leader. It is in this movie that he learns a powerful lesson, which is that bias can have just as grave of consequences as racism. Caesar almost loses his life because his maintains too strong of a belief that all apes are better than humans. Showing mercy to Malcolm should have been coupled with distrust of Koba. Carver is a great villainous character. You just hate him from the start. I was expecting Dreyfus to be the prejudice one but his desperation is the source of his wrongdoing. Carver on the other hand is stupid. I like how the movie begins and ends with Caesar's eyes. Speaking of that character, Andy Serkis is one of Hollywood's most underrated actors. To me, he is no different from an actor using makeup except the "makeup" in this case happens to be digital. Another comparison is that he is a masterful puppeteer operating the face and body of a digital character. The best motion capture performance after Serkis' and Toby Kebbell's (who plays Koba) goes to Nick Thurston as Caesar’s son, Blue Eyes. He had some dramatic moments that felt genuine. This accomplishment of fully replicating an actor's performance on a digital character more than justifies the Oscar nomination for Best Visual Effects that this movie received. Gary Oldman is great at playing villains but this time, his character is in that grey area and I don't mind that. Keri Russell was great as Ellie and I also appreciated Kodi Smit-McPhee's work. Oscar-winning composer Michael Giacchino was a good choice because he has done sequels and adapted other musical scores before such two "Mission: Impossible" movies, the recent "Star Trek" films and "Speed Racer". He even wrote the music for the end credits of Reeves' "Cloverfield". Both Reeves and Giacchino are huge fans of the original 1968 film by the way. Giacchino is able to retain the theme or feeling of the original 1968 musical score but make it fresh at the same time. His score on this movie did fit for the reboot franchise.

I think that a lot of people will enjoy this film and I did too. I just wasn't as entertained as I wanted to be and I even think that "Rise" was a tad bit better. As with "Rise", "Dawn" did not win the Academy Award for its visual effects but that's because it had to go up against Christopher Nolan's "Interstellar". I applaud the story of "Dawn" and its drama as well as the performances both motion capture & live action. I knew I wanted to see the next film in the franchise but I did not expect it to be better than its predecessors. That doesn't usually happen in filmmaking but it can and did.

3.5 Stars