Ok, now that the dust has settled, was it a good trilogy?

Ok, now that the dust has settled, was it a good trilogy?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=gs3IRbg17Y0
twitter.com/AnonBabble

meh

First two were good, third not so much

Classic. Among the great trilogies. 1st was ok. 2nd much better. 3rd made Caesar legendary.

...

>trilogy

Why would people spend scare ammunition to kill each other istead of monkies?

...

1>2

It was the best trilogy released lately but that doesnt say much
6/10

The most racist films of all time?

only cucks enjoy this. literally movies about BBCs making real humans extinct. gay cuck monkey superiority fantasy, nothing else.

3 was a treat for the eyes and ears, but the story could have been much better

Not really. Each movie was so fucking predictable and basic hollywood formula shit. These films are worth noting because of how great the ape effects are, and for starting a debate on whether or not actors like Andy Serkis deserve more formal recognition, but other than that they are totally unremarkable.
The logic of the decisions characters make do not hold up AT ALL on repeat viewings.

>3rd made Caesar legendary.
explain

I mostly agree with you.
I liked watching the movies, but feel no need to watch again.
I love the classic saga (except the last useless chapter).

seek help

>BBC

lollllll

Look at this faggot - threatened by a fictional species in a fucking sci fi movie. Get help.

Second movie is legitimately great.

1 - 7
2 - 9
3 - 2

I felt bad for the the Northern Army

niggers ecks dee

the third one was just passion of the christ with a chimpanzee.

Giv mute loli gf to protect

I love how she just didn't give a fuck that the apes straight-up murdered her dad but cried over that literally who gorilla that put a flower in her hair one time

not him, but i enjoyed the 3rd, too.
it may have lacked the action start to finish that the second enjoyed. but it showed escalation in the trilogy with more emphasis now on the apes & their community.
it also showed Cesar's struggle & vulnerability better than the first two in my opinion.
don't get me wrong, the 3 entries are great, but each one of them had its heart centered around something different than the other 2, & i saw that not as a flaw but as growth.

First is good, second is alright with some good moments, third is downright retarded.

If by that you mean that the movie is yet another pretty looking piece of shit with high production values then you're absolutely right.

I liked it really set up the future planet of the apes, the apes learned about mlitarization from the humans, the same way the apes are fed is how the humans are fed in the future, but yea it was a bit biblical with the promised land across the desert and Moses not being allowed inside

That's right.

More like Exodus? It's Old Testament, but instead of a punishing God, there's the unforgiving Mother Nature (mutated virus, avalanche)

dawn is by far one of the greatest sequels ever released. the third really dropped the ball, since the original writers left and were only attached as producers. it should've been a perfect trilogy but the third movie was rushed too much

Best sci fi trilogy since Back to the Future. Just rewatched War last night and it is kino as fuck.

I will never understand people who think the first is the best in the trilogy. It isn't actually good until half way through when Caesar gets sent to Ape pound, and it has some of the most out of place fan service moments like the "damn dirty ape" line.

What was wrong with War?

WHATS THE MATTER WH*TE BOY

Dawn>>>>War=Rise

After seeing Dawn and War, I'm confident Matt Reeves' Batman is going to BTFO Nolan's trilogy.

Dawn = Human POV
Rise = Human/Ape split POV
War = Ape POV

Wyatt's style wasn't as good as Reeves, but it was still a comfy movie. Wouldn't put it in first place, but it is the comfiest, and the fake science behind it is believable in context. i.e. a good origin story.

not him, but one of the problems i didnt like was Woody Harelsons character wasnt given enough time to develop , i mean sure we get some of his back story but i think he shouldve been more of a long term villian and make a sequel top that movie. thats just my opinion

>implying that first "NOOOO" isn't the best goddamn scene in the entire trilogy
>youtube.com/watch?v=gs3IRbg17Y0

It objectively isn't. Precisely because it has that corny fan service line.

someone finally stands up to house slytherin

I didn't say it wasn't good, but it's easily the weakest of the three.The first half is almost comedic and the big climax set piece on the bridge doesn't have much emotional weight to it. The best part of the movie, by far, is Caesar's jaunt in jail.

Overall, it's just far less consistent than either of the sequels. Probably because it was still trying to be a quasi-reboot with all the baggage that comes with it. The sequels were freer to be their own things.

I didn't feel like Woody needed any additional development. We knew he who was and what he stood for. There's nowhere else for his character to go. Moreover, the movie is about Caesar and his journey. Woody's character is simply the required foil.

This, imo

Watching Caesar become a leader of his people in the first one is awesome
Watching Koba fall to his death as the angry monkey in a cage he always was is awesome
Third one doesn't really have much to say, which is kind of a shame, because it could've had something profound to comment on how a human society reacts to an unspoken understanding that it's doomed while its competitors are going to supplant it

And there's no real emotional philosophising or conjecture there, it's just Woody Harrelson in some spiteful, pointless little feud with another faction of humans as they use apes as slaves for obvious bad-guy markers and emotional appeal

Compared to the first two, that's kind of cheap, imo, but still 2/3 ain't bad

I can see that, too. I just meant that besides that it's just two hours of Cesar getting whipped while being tied to a cross.

The first one is just Genesis with monkeys. The second one is just Julius Caesar with monkeys. The third one is just Exodus with monkeys. I think it would be hard to seriously argue that one is thematically more resonant than another.

They are good because they approach the subject matter seriously and with earnest, in stark contrast the majority of modern blockbusters that are consumed with irony and constant winks to the audience.

Isn't the work camp only like the last third of the movie?

Full on half. I still think it worked because it really evoked the campiness of the originals pretty well. Nothing wrong with a little humor in a series based off a 60s movie about guys in monkey suits.

Woody's character is not meant to be a "villain" in a capeshit sense of the word. He is a tragic antagonist, a flawed leader haunted by his own mistakes, facing the extinction of the human race. He just tries to do what is best for his kind, and fails miserably. And it's not entirely his fault (or Caesar's.) Nature has made its choice and no one can do shit about it.

Good remake with its own take on the concept. I really like the 3rd one story, I was a great idea imo to go for a heart of darkness type of story when most people expected something more straight forward.

Nope, the last one is a quiet disappointing.

>reminder it will get cucked for best visual effects oscar and the trilogy will go 0 for 3

The gorillas face is the best part of this scene

Maurice is BEST ape and you cant prove me wrong.

I WILL debate you on this.

dudes a pedo

You're absolutely right