Cyberpunk Photoshop Edit
Original
Edited
I have edited an image to make it into the style of Cyberpunk using Photoshop. I did this by using the Camera Raw Filter and tinting it to be more blue and pink. I also used the brush tool to slightly change the sky to make it stand out a bit more.
Cyberpunk has many characteristics, one of the main characteristics of the Cyberpunk genre is the bright neon blues and pinks. These signify to the viewer that it is futuristic and not in the present tense. Many cyberpunk works show a world similar to our own, with high streets and the same layouts, but there are many big differences. The worlds in Cyberpunk films are often dystopian in nature and show negative times in the relatively near future. One of the main themes in many Cyberpunk films is technology and how if used incorrectly, it could have devastating effects on the world and its people.
​
Some very famous examples of the Cyberpunk series include the game Cyberpunk 2077, and film series' such as The Matrix, Bladerunner and Tron.
Photo Shoot One
I have taken these pictures myself to use for editing and projects in the future.
Colour Theory
Different colours can represent different emotions and make people feel certain ways towards your film or brand.
The Matrix is a sci-fi film directed by Lilly and Lana Wachowski released in 1999, and has two followup films, both released in 2003.
​
The main plot line of the Matrix is that life as they know it is not real. They are living in a simulation as the original Earth was destroyed because of humanity. Morpehus' crew made it their mission to try and save people from the matrix and let them escape to the real world. Neo (Keeanu Reeves) is believed to be "the one". This means that they thought Neo would be the one to save everyone. In the film, Morpheus and his crew, including Neo, go back and forth between the real world and the Matrix on their mission to save people and unplug them from The Matrix.
​
Hues are used in The Matrix to show the difference between the two worlds. When they are in the simulated Matrix, there is a green tint to everything. This is because in the 90s when this film was released, most computer monitors had a slight green tint. Putting this green tint in the film made it easy for 90s audiences to understand that they were currently watching what was happening in The Matrix, without outright telling them using text. When the action is taking place in the real world, the film is tinted blue instead.
​
The use of colour greatly added to the film. All the characters wear dark, usually black, clothing. This fits very well with their roles as they are trying not to get caught by Agent Smith. The blue tint in the real world shows that the real world was not flashy, it makes it seem dark and cold. The green tint also creates a lulling effect, it represents a dream state.
Edits
Original
Mystery
The colours in this image were inspired by the mystery show Sherlock, which makes heavy use of muted colours and blues.
Drama
The colours in this image were inspired by the many dramas I have seen in my life, as they usually have dark and muted colours.
Fantasy
The colours in this image were inspired by Disney fantasy films. Many of them use colours such as blue and purple to show that it is not real, and that the characters are in a fantasy or alternate universe.
Action
The colours in this image were inspired by films such as John Wick where the colour scheme is red to show anger and the want for revenge. It is also red to show a hostile atmosphere and that there is tension in the area, The red tint also shows us that there is a sense of danger and urgency.
Comedy
The colours in this image were inspired by a vast majority of comedy series and films, where the colouring is bright to signify that there is a happy, upbeat mood as opposed to a drama where the mood is sadder and more emotional.
Horror
The colours in this image were inspired by a vast majority of horror films, where the colouring is red to signify that there is danger, tension, and urgency. Red also signifies blood and killing, which is synonymous with the horror genre. I added some grain to show that horror films can often be unclear and mysterious, and the settings are usually unclean.
Western
The colours in this image were inspired by western films and series which I have seen. The colours are yellow and orange as in western films, the climate is often hot and sweltering as they take place in a desert.
Festival
Design Brief
Project Title
The title for this project is "Branding a sci-fi festival."
Type of Project
The project is to create promotion for a film festival. These include designing a website, merchandise, an app, posters and a video advert.
Goal
The goal of this project is to entice people to buy tickets to the film festival. The desired outcome is to create enticing designs so that more people will be enticed to buy tickets. The aim for this project is to sell 35,000 tickets.
Project Details
The goal of this project is to entice people to buy tickets to the film festival. The desired outcome is to create enticing designs so that more people will be enticed to buy tickets. The target audience for a sci-fi festival will be very wide, as people don't grow out of sci-fi. The target audience is ages 18-50, and is male and female.
​
The target message I am trying to push is for people to buy tickets to the event.
​
I would like at least 5 adverts made. The dimensions will vary based on where they are being advertised.
​
There is no required quantity. There is no requirement for wording to be written for me. No stock images need to be used as I am providing all my own content and images. The design isn't based on one particular image, but is based on a style of image called glitch.
I duplicated the definition so that there were two copies of it. I then changed the colours, by getting rid of red on one copy and getting rid of blue on one copy. By moving each one in the opposite direction it creates the blue and red shadows. I then rasterized the text layers and merged them together. Then I cut random parts out of the text and uses "paste in place" to get the certain parts onto a new layer. I moved and resized these parts to make the glitch effect.
I duplicated the definition so that there were two copies of it. I then changed the colours, by getting rid of red on one copy and getting rid of blue on one copy. By moving each one in the opposite direction it creates the blue and red shadows. I copied and pasted these text layers and put them in the background with a low opacity.
​
I then rasterized the text layers and merged them together. Then I cut random parts out of the text and uses "paste in place" to get the certain parts onto a new layer. I moved and resized these parts to make the glitch effect. I did the same for the background layers.
I duplicated the definition so that there were two copies of it.
I copied and pasted these text layers and put them in the background with a low opacity.
​
I then rasterized the text layers and merged them together. Then I cut random parts out of the text and uses "paste in place" to get the certain parts onto a new layer. I moved and resized these parts to make the glitch effect. I did the same for the background layers.
This is the logo that I will be using for the festival. All of the images with "JOEL" written on them will instead have this on them in the final version.
To edit the original image into these 20 edits, I added textures and backgrounds I had previously made in Photoshop and changed the blending modes and opacity. I also changed the order of the layers to make different effects, such as the text being in front or behind of the colours.
To make these patterns, I drew on a white background using the brush tool and varying thicknesses and softness levels. I then used the liquify tool to make it look more abstract.
​
Then I used the gradient map tool to add and change the colours.
​
For the one with three different colours (blue, black and red) I selected certain parts of the black colour using the magic wand tool and filled them in with black using the paint bucket fill tool.
New Name and logo
To make these, I used the base images from my old designs and added the new text. I then added gradient maps and some other adjustment layers such as contrast to edit them. I also glitched the text by using "paste in place" and moving it slightly. I curved the text by using a built-in filter in Photoshop called Twirl. For some of the edits, I added a layer of small thin lines to give the effect of a glitched screen.
​
To make the old designs (MCRFF) I added textures and backgrounds I had previously made in Photoshop and changed the blending modes and opacity. I also changed the order of the layers to make different effects.
Glitch Video
I am using After Effects to create a glitched video which will be used in an advert for the film festival.
The first step was to import the footage I had recorded
I then added a purple solid to be the basis of the glitch effect.
I also added a static effect, this is what gives the video the glitch effect.
For this effect, I changed the blending mode of the static effect and added a green solid.
From here, I just changed different settings such as opacity, blending modes and contrast to get different types of images.
For this edit, I rotated the glitch layer. This creates the effect to the viewer that it is out of this world, and that something isn't right.
In this version, I made the green slightly brighter and more visible.
For this edit, I was seeing what it would look like if I removed the purple layer. I decided it did not look great, so I did not keep this version.
For this edit, I was seeing what it would look like if I removed the colour from the glitch effect. This looked weird and I did not keep it.
Final Video
A glitch is defined as being a sudden, temporary malfunction. Glitches happen when technology goes wrong. Glitch art is random and has no set patterns to it.
Glitch is effective as an artform as it is abstract and catches a lot of attention because of how different it is to the normal art you see.
It is linked to sci-fi as sci-fi films often show the real world with one defining alteration or something going wrong, just like glitch art is a normal image with something going wrong.
​
Glitch art would not be appropriate for sophisticated companies like banks, as banks want to be presented as easily understandable and formal.
​
Technology companies such as Apple also wouldn't use glitch text, as glitch text signifies a broken piece of technology so it would not be smart for a technology company to advertise using imagery of a broken piece of technology. This is because it would send a message to the viewer's that their technology and products are prone to failure and malfunction.
Glitch is effective as an artform as it is abstract and catches a lot of attention because of how different it is to the normal art you see.
It is linked to sci-fi as sci-fi films often show the real world with one defining alteration or something going wrong, just like glitch art is a normal image with something going wrong.
​
Glitch art would not be appropriate for sophisticated companies like banks, as banks want to be presented as easily understandable and formal.
​
Technology companies such as Apple also wouldn't use glitch text, as glitch text signifies a broken piece of technology so it would not be smart for a technology company to advertise using imagery of a broken piece of technology. This is because it would send a message to the viewer's that their technology and products are prone to failure and malfunction.
​
To glitch this image, they have moved certain parts of the image to other areas in a random way. This randomness shows that it has not been thought out and shows that it probably wasn't supposed to happen. I believe that the design is successful, as it clearly shows a glitch whilst also still showing what is behind the glitch.
Swirl Effect in After Effects
Using After Effects and following this YouTube tutorial, I made this effect.
Website Design
Website Design
Definitions
UI - UI is short for User Interface. UI is what the person visiting your website will see. A good UI is vital for the success of any website or app.
​
UX - UX is short for User Experience. User Experience is about the feel of the website, for example, if it runs smoothly or not. This is also vital for the success of your website or app.
​
If the UI or UX are not up to a good enough standard, the product will not feel professional and it will stop people wanting to visit the site or use the app.
Sci-fi Image Examples
Filler Text
Like the birds, the apes can be pretty scary when they get organised. That's what these opposable-thumb-possessors have got their hearts set on in this prequel to the 1968 Charlton Heston classic Planet of the Apes and its successors. It's a smart and highly entertaining popcorn thriller from British-born director Rupert Wyatt, cheerfully satirical in the tradition of this movie series, yet unpretentious at the same time. Somehow the scratching, screeching chimpiness keeps it down to earth. This is actually one of a startling double-bill of ape-centred films out this week, the other being James Marsh's Project Nim, reviewed below. One is fiction, one fact, but they really are weirdly similar in ideas and narrative.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a film in which digital FX technology has now evolved to such an extent that super-intelligent apes can be shown convincingly on screen for the first time. No more dressing up in comedy monkey suits, or as semi-transformed ape characters, such as Helena Bonham Carter's poignant, ridiculous but fondly remembered turn as Ari in Tim Burton's 2001 reboot of the first film. The simian star of this one is Caesar, whose movements and characterisation are provided through motion-capture technology by Andy Serkis, who similarly played the gorilla in Peter Jackson's 2005 remake of King Kong.
Caesar's mother is one of many primates caught in the jungle and brought to present-day San Francisco, where they are experimented on in the labs of a drug-research corporation that is amoral and profit-driven in the time-honoured manner. There is one terrifically Ballardian scene in which the inmates, driven apeshit by new drugs, smash their way into the sleek boardroom and cause chaos, before being taken down by stun darts. The experimental programme is hurriedly closed down, to the horror of Will Rodman (played by James Franco), a decent, troubled young scientist who has been willing to accept these procedures in the search for an Alzheimer's cure. His poor old dad Charles (John Lithgow), who lives with him, suffers from dementia. Will sneaks a baby chimp home – little Caesar, as it were – and feeds the experimental cure to both the ape and his own dad. Meanwhile, just to keep us in the narrative-saga loop, a throwaway scene reveals that a certain manned space-rocket has blasted off to Mars.
This really is a very enjoyable film: suspenseful and involving, and Caesar is a great character with mannerisms and expressions that are neither simian nor human but bizarrely convincing as a combination of both – dramatically and comically, if not scientifically. Caesar should be absurd, but never at any time will you feel the urge to laugh at him, though you might laugh with him, as he grows up and realises his destiny.
There is unexpected tenderness and also tension in the family scenes in which Will presides over a household in which his father has been gloriously brought back to mental life, and which is also invigorated by the little kiddie chimp swinging around the house. Caesar is almost a son to Will and a grandson to Charles: Will realises that he is lonely, and that of course is where the beautiful veterinarian Caroline (Freida Pinto) comes in.
This prequel does not quite have the scabrous quality of the original 1968 movie, the topsy-turvy world in which apes rule over human slaves, nor its bold racial satire: a suggestion that having set about brutalising and dehumanising the black peoples, racist whites could now be reaping a karmic whirlwind. But there is something transgressive in the story of Caesar's relentless IQ-march, and a radical political education not attributable to the drugs. Locked away in cages with other apes in the hateful primate centre, Caesar achieves a kind of new Spartacist consciousness. He brings his fellow prisoners together, sees how the existing hierarchy is structured, and then moves in as the alpha-ape.
No prequel or sequel to Planet of the Apes can avoid the great statue-shaped shadow of that famous finale, one of the most brilliant endings in Hollywood history. Burton unsuccessfully tried putting a new twist on it. I wondered if Wyatt would try to show us exactly how a certain part of the New York skyline came to be changed. The action takes place in California. Would we be getting over to the eastern seaboard some time before the closing credits? The final scene involves an airport, and I was quite certain I knew what catastrophe was on the cards. But no. Perhaps Wyatt was thinking what I was thinking, and rejected it as too obvious. Well, his monkey business is perfectly acceptable without it.
Science fiction — it is the genre of future societies, alien invasions, and robotic technologies.
Of the many dozens of genres and subgenres in film, science fiction has always been my favourite, ever since I was a boy. To me, science fiction has to be the most imaginative genre, particularly in the highly visual medium of film.
Here are 3 reasons, and there are plenty more, for not only why I love the science fiction genre but why I feel that it’s film’s best genre.
1) Science fiction has created societies and political systems as a reflection of us, for better or for worse
Often times in science fiction, filmmakers are keen to use the future in order to examine issues that we’re going through today. Science-fiction filmmakers create idealistic, peaceful societies, or dystopian, tyrannical states as a way to help us deal with our problems right now. This is usually done by creating governments and/or corporations that have either stopped or accelerated environmental problems, economic issues or other social issues. For example, the science-fiction movie Snowpiercer asserted that when trying to combat global warming, both government and corporate efforts ended up accelerating it, causing peril to humanity as well as planet Earth.
This would be different from the idealistic future of Star Trek, where humanity gets together, puts aside their differences, and ends up stopping world poverty, hunger, disease, famine and war. These are just two examples of science-fiction filmmaking that took two polarizing views of Earth’s future. While both examples may never happen (for better or for worse), they’re considered equal reflections into the future. And yes, I’m aware that Star Trek began on TV, but Star Trek also has 13 feature films that touch on social issues just like the original TV series did back in the 1960’s. More on that later.
2) Science fiction has inspired current technology
From Star Trek’s communicator inspiring the first cell phones, to Minority Report inspiring gesture-based user interfaces, to Total Recall inspiring driverless cars, we have seen many examples of future technologies in past science-fiction films come to life. Even Star Wars, a mostly fantasy science-fiction saga, has inspired some of today’s most innovative technological advancements, from real life battle droids, to Hologramsm and even a 3D chess board that was inspired by the one on the Millennium Falcon.
If that wasn’t enough, please check the article from the Smithsonian Institute entitled “Ten Inventions Inspired by Science Fiction.”
The first one on the list I find to be one of the most fascinating and I’ll give it to you. It was the submarine, inspired by the film adaptation of Twenty Leagues Under the Sea, which was written by sci-fi pioneer Jules Verne. Considering that there’s no shortage of science-fiction films being made around the world, I personally cannot wait to see what’s next.
3) Science fiction can talk about the present without ever being in the present
Related to my first reason, science-fiction films do not just create societies, governments, political system and political situations as a way to reflect on today’s societal problems but they can do and have done so much than that.
Science-fiction films have spoken about racism, genocide, slavery, colonialism, public health issues, HIV/AIDS, the aforementioned climate change, tyranny, and the effects of war when every single one of those issues were considered taboo or impolite to talk about — or even when open discussion could land a person in prison. One of the beauties about science-fiction cinema is that it gives an outlet for filmmakers to talk about sensitive subjects in a way that’s indirect and yet can cause thought-provoking discussion.
This has also led to many science-fiction films to be banned all over the world, which is something that was common in the past yet still practiced today. A famous example is the German science-fiction classics M and Metropolis, which were banned in Nazi Germany because director Fritz Lang’s mother was Jewish. The Soviet Union was also infamous for banning material critical of communism. However, a few Eastern European filmmakers were able to sneak through films that indirectly critiqued communism due to the wonderful subjectivity of film.
Overall, science fiction is not only my favourite film genre, but it’s the most subversive, most creative, and the most imaginative one due to the endless possibilities the genre brings. Oppressed filmmakers have indirectly criticized oppressive governments using science-fiction films, which have also given us new and wonderful technological advancements; and science fiction helps humanity reflect on our current societal problems. For all those reasons and dozens more, I consider science fiction the greatest film genre of all time.
It's tricky, but try to imagine a time before Star Wars. Close your eyes, concentrate hard, rewind those famous scrolling credits until there's just blackness. Good. Back in that dark, pre-enlightenment age, 20th Century Fox conducted some market research on their forthcoming sci-fi adventure.
Researchers armed only with a title and brief synopsis came back with some worrying results: only males under 25 expressed a desire to see a film called Star Wars. As a direct result of this research, Star Wars was deliberately packaged to attract older and female cinemagoers: the humans were pushed centre-stage and the film's epic, fairy-tale qualities were emphasised in the publicity material. When Star Wars came out in the summer of 1977 it had been focus-grouped, and to great effect — everybody went to see it.
By November, it had dethroned Jaws in the all-time box office charts, a position it held until Independence Day. Blimey, even the novelisation sold two million copies, and let's not get started on the merchandising. So what happened? After all, nobody's attributing Star Wars' epoch-making, culture-shifting success to a wily decision to put Princess Leia on the posters. The answer is timing.
The 1970s, Hollywood's second golden age, were characterised by baby-boomer film students making pictures personal and dark enough to reflect the political morass of post-Watergate, in-Vietnam America. Though The Exorcist and Jaws are credited with kicking down the doors of the Blockbuster Age, these were not family films. Star Wars was. George Lucas, feted after American Graffiti had made $55 million off a $1.2 million budget, started writing his moralistic space opera in 1973. He worked on the script for two and a half years in a back room containing a Wurlitzer jukebox and a portrait of Sergei Eisenstein, during which he could never remember how he spelt all those crazy names (Wookiee was different every time he wrote it). It's said that he based maverick Han Solo (bearded, originally) on his pal Francis Coppola and Darth Vader on Richard Nixon.
Influenced by Joseph Campbell's writings on the power of ancient mythology, Lucas created a cosmic Western, the "black hats" replaced by Vader and the evil Empire, and the "white hats" by farmboy Luke Sky walker (Solo was the equivalent of the drunken gunslinger). Lucas' movie brat mates thought he was nuts, and indeed, by the end of a tortuously difficult shoot at Elstree Studios, he very nearly was.
Meanwhile, in an old warehouse near Van Nuys airport, the newborn Industrial Light And Magic had spent $5 million of the $9.5 million budget and not produced a single usable effects shot in one year of working. Of course when they did, ILM redefined movie effects as sure as the finished film would redefine the experience of "going to the pictures ". We all know why Lucas felt the need to digitally tidy up his original trilogy for the great, money-hoovering 1997 reissue, but it set a worrying precedent for The Phantom Menace, where too much technology smothered characterisation and story.
Star Wars' timeless appeal lies in its easily identified, universal archetypes — goodies to root for, baddies to boo, a princess to be rescued and so on — and if it is most obviously dated to the 70s by the special effects, so be it. We all love the stormtrooper banging his head! To remove that digitally would be a crime. Mark Hamill said he felt "like a raisin in a giant fruit salad" when making Star Wars; 20 years later, Liam Neeson almost retired from screen acting after his experiences on The Phantom Menace. But George Lucas does not make actors' films — his interest is in the Star Wars myth, not the cult of some Hollywood star.
Isn't it ironic then, that Star Wars remains a rewatchable classic because of the characters and the performances behind them (especially Ford, Fisher, and James Earl Jones). Sure, you can snigger at R2-D2 trundling along the sand like a wheelie-bin, but his signature beeps and clucks are as essential to the personality and momentum of the film as the rousing John Williams score. Just as it's hard to remember what cinema was like before Star Wars, it's impossible to view the original film in isolation now. In 1977, it was not Episode IV, it was a self-contained pleasure that made it okay again to cheer at the screen.
Like the birds, the apes can be pretty scary when they get organised. That's what these opposable-thumb-possessors have got their hearts set on in this prequel to the 1968 Charlton Heston classic Planet of the Apes and its successors. It's a smart and highly entertaining popcorn thriller from British-born director Rupert Wyatt, cheerfully satirical in the tradition of this movie series, yet unpretentious at the same time. Somehow the scratching, screeching chimpiness keeps it down to earth. This is actually one of a startling double-bill of ape-centred films out this week, the other being James Marsh's Project Nim, reviewed below. One is fiction, one fact, but they really are weirdly similar in ideas and narrative.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a film in which digital FX technology has now evolved to such an extent that super-intelligent apes can be shown convincingly on screen for the first time. No more dressing up in comedy monkey suits, or as semi-transformed ape characters, such as Helena Bonham Carter's poignant, ridiculous but fondly remembered turn as Ari in Tim Burton's 2001 reboot of the first film. The simian star of this one is Caesar, whose movements and characterisation are provided through motion-capture technology by Andy Serkis, who similarly played the gorilla in Peter Jackson's 2005 remake of King Kong.
Caesar's mother is one of many primates caught in the jungle and brought to present-day San Francisco, where they are experimented on in the labs of a drug-research corporation that is amoral and profit-driven in the time-honoured manner. There is one terrifically Ballardian scene in which the inmates, driven apeshit by new drugs, smash their way into the sleek boardroom and cause chaos, before being taken down by stun darts. The experimental programme is hurriedly closed down, to the horror of Will Rodman (played by James Franco), a decent, troubled young scientist who has been willing to accept these procedures in the search for an Alzheimer's cure. His poor old dad Charles (John Lithgow), who lives with him, suffers from dementia. Will sneaks a baby chimp home – little Caesar, as it were – and feeds the experimental cure to both the ape and his own dad. Meanwhile, just to keep us in the narrative-saga loop, a throwaway scene reveals that a certain manned space-rocket has blasted off to Mars.
This really is a very enjoyable film: suspenseful and involving, and Caesar is a great character with mannerisms and expressions that are neither simian nor human but bizarrely convincing as a combination of both – dramatically and comically, if not scientifically. Caesar should be absurd, but never at any time will you feel the urge to laugh at him, though you might laugh with him, as he grows up and realises his destiny.
There is unexpected tenderness and also tension in the family scenes in which Will presides over a household in which his father has been gloriously brought back to mental life, and which is also invigorated by the little kiddie chimp swinging around the house. Caesar is almost a son to Will and a grandson to Charles: Will realises that he is lonely, and that of course is where the beautiful veterinarian Caroline (Freida Pinto) comes in.
This prequel does not quite have the scabrous quality of the original 1968 movie, the topsy-turvy world in which apes rule over human slaves, nor its bold racial satire: a suggestion that having set about brutalising and dehumanising the black peoples, racist whites could now be reaping a karmic whirlwind. But there is something transgressive in the story of Caesar's relentless IQ-march, and a radical political education not attributable to the drugs. Locked away in cages with other apes in the hateful primate centre, Caesar achieves a kind of new Spartacist consciousness. He brings his fellow prisoners together, sees how the existing hierarchy is structured, and then moves in as the alpha-ape.
No prequel or sequel to Planet of the Apes can avoid the great statue-shaped shadow of that famous finale, one of the most brilliant endings in Hollywood history. Burton unsuccessfully tried putting a new twist on it. I wondered if Wyatt would try to show us exactly how a certain part of the New York skyline came to be changed. The action takes place in California. Would we be getting over to the eastern seaboard some time before the closing credits? The final scene involves an airport, and I was quite certain I knew what catastrophe was on the cards. But no. Perhaps Wyatt was thinking what I was thinking, and rejected it as too obvious. Well, his monkey business is perfectly acceptable without it.
​
​
​
​
​
Ape versus human – and hawk versus dove. These are the confrontations offered up by this exciting and stylish new film in the Planet of the Apes prequel franchise. It's great summer blockbuster entertainment with an intriguing brochimpmance between the noble ape Caesar and a liberal human called Malcolm. The hyper-evolved apes are holed up in a forest near San Francisco living hunter-gatherer apey lives, increasing their grunted English vocabulary and generally minding their own business. Things go bad when they encounter the last human holdouts in this post-apocalyptic world: a nervy survivalist community led by Dreyfus (Gary Oldman) whose instinct is to get tough with the monkeys: but Malcolm (Jason Clarke) wants to reach out and generally make nice with the apes.
As for the apes, they are led by charismatic Caesar, played in motion-capture by Andy Serkis, who himself is minded towards diplomacy. But Caesar's duplicitous lieutenant Koba, motion-captured by Toby Kebbell, wants all-out war. Caesar's name (given to him by his human masters in the previous film) connotes power, nobility and vulnerability to betrayal; screenwriters Mark Bomback, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver may want us to remember that Koba was Stalin's nickname, although Koba is more like Jeremy Irons's ferocious Scar in The Lion King.
As in the last film, the CGI apes are very impressive, with next-level mannerisms in swaying, screeching, lunging and teeth-baring; Serkis's Caesar is a very watchable digital-chimp, his face set in an asymmetric grimace-scowl, rather like Douglas MacArthur. The huge battle setpieces have a bizarre and mesmeric quality. As to where it is all leading … well, Apes fans will be agog to know how a certain New York statue is holding up, and whether this film can in narrative terms do anything other than mark time. (The death of a certain character sneakily leaves open a comeback possibility.) It's very enjoyable stuff.
Humans get sick, apes get smart, humans kill apes.” This is how Steve Zahn’s Bad Ape summarises the previous Planet of the Apes reboots. In the third of the Apes prequels (and director Matt Reeves’s second film in the series), the apes are out for revenge, led by a grizzled Caesar (Andy Serkis), whose driving “hate” is stoked by the death of his son at the hands of violent humans. Flanked by his second-in-command, gentle orang-utan Maurice (Karin Konoval), and two other apes, Caesar and co ride on horseback (an image I found beautiful, evocative and bizarre) across beaches, fields and snow-capped mountains to the prison camp where Woody Harrelson’s Colonel has rounded up the remaining apes to build a Trumpian “wall”.
Along the way they pick up a mute child (Amiah Miller) and Bad Ape, an eccentric zoo primate, who help to create and carry out the rescue plan. This isn’t a buddy movie but, rather, a psychological western that breaks and becomes a revenge thriller war movie; trench warfare and Apocalypse Now references are included in the price of the ticket. Michael Giacchino’s whirring score ratchets up the tension, while cinematographer Michael Seresin’s agile camera flies directly overhead. At times, the apes appear tiny, toy-soldier figurines from his bird’s eye perspective; on other occasions, the camera skims puddle-strewn beaches at hoof-level and swings with the apes as they clamber snowy pylons.
The film’s real technological achievement isn’t the rendering of CGI forests (though these are pretty good) but the motion-capture apes themselves, huge liquid eyes (“My God! Almost human!” the Colonel shudders) and facial expressions as thrillingly elastic and legible as the human actors who play them. All science fiction is philosophy; here, Reeves asks what distinguishes humans from animals. The twist is that as the apes get “smarter” (and the humans become crueller), they also grow softer, in a reminder that humanity resides in both the head and the heart.
Website
Home
Gallery
Gallery (Hover over image)
Store
Store (Buy page)
News
Contact/About
Text at bottom of page
Mobile version
