9
Enlightened Racism in Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Nearly every Rise of the Planet of the Apes review that I have read has zeroed in on the rather banal conclusion that the film’s crucial message is that “messing with nature” doesn’t pay. If t
Published on December 19, 2011 | Filed under editorial

Nearly every Rise of the Planet of the Apes review that I have read has zeroed in on the rather banal conclusion that the film’s crucial message is that “messing with nature” doesn’t pay. If that is the case then writer/producers Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver appear to have accurately gauged the movie going public’s desire to be mindlessly entertained by the same tired pandering. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time; their earlier films Eye For an Eye (1996) and The Relic (1997) are both reactionary genre re-treads. For my part though, such obvious and unchallenging conclusions always conceal something deeper, and as Rise of the Planet of the Apes is released just in time for Christmas I decided to take a closer look at the film.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (Rise) is of course, just a remake of the fourth film in the original series, 1972’s Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. That film told the origin story of the whole franchise (somewhat revised from Pierre Boule’s novel) in which domesticated apes become aware of their relative position in the human hierarchy and rebel. Conquest was made at a time when American culture was undergoing a major upheaval, and it makes quite blunt and intentional allusions to contemporary social conditions, namely resurgent Black political identity and unrest. Conquest could afford to explicitly critique U.S. racial conflict because it was not made by Americans. The film is so explicit in its narrative, and so sympathetic to the apes that it is literally impossible to watch it without seeing this. As a derivative, it is also nearly impossible for Rise to divorce itself from those politics.

Like its source, it starts with ‘primitive’ apes it adds intelligence, social awareness, and personality quickly and as in Conquest, the apes in Rise are constructed as a Black racial other, their specific difference merely acts as a convenient cover. Rise has to be much more subtle because in our “post-racial” cultural milieu, admitting the continued existence of White Supremacism is rather taboo, but there are a number of dead giveaways. Nearly every ape whose character is developed in the film conforms closely to Black archetypes identified and described most poignantly by film historian Donald Bogle in his book Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies and Bucks: An Interpretive History of Blacks in Film and Marlon Riggs in his film Ethnic Notions: Black People in White Minds. They and other writers have traced the persistent appearance of these stereotypes from the earliest days of Jim Crow through our contemporary media.

Racialized human characters in Rise lend additional weight to this argument and act, like the obvious difference in species, as a foil for the racial overtones of the film. The Sikh cab driver and Latino family who appear briefly serve to create the superficial appearance of diversity. More telling is Mark’s girlfriend Caroline who in addition to being the only female character, serves a double duty. Like the Sikh and Latinos, she adds color to “our side” of the story, making the primary conflict appear to not be about race. Yet Caroline also lacks depth, and despite minor instrumental value, she has no role in the narrative. She is clearly a woman of color, however she is given zero cultural background (or character development) leaving her essentially undifferentiated, assimilated and with no identity of her own. She is effectively de-raced and thus serves again merely as a visual distraction and as a convenient reassurance that Will is not concerned about race.

The only exception to this lack of color depth is Will’s boss, the Steven Jacobs character. Yet he too is merely a stereotype. Instantly identifiable by his accent as a foreigner (a Britton), and his quickly changing moods, especially hostility, identify him as untrustworthy. Furthermore, his insatiably greedy and over-reaching CEO is concerned with power and profit recalls the recklessly ambitious pusher/gangster stereotype we’ve seen over and over in every genre. In this case he really is selling drugs, regardless of the dangers to public health. Both he and Will engage in dangerous experimentation, but Jacob’s blatant immorality and dark blackness identify him as profoundly “different” and again highlight Will’s temperance and good intentions.

Will’s morality is an important point because the message that is delivered at the end of the film would otherwise be a hard pill to swallow if it wasn’t for his benevolence and desire to recreate the normal family (a universal metaphor for “normal” society). In the end, our protagonist comes to the same conclusion held by all the other characters; namely that “apes” cannot be safely integrated into our society. The fact remains that throughout Rise, we’ve been (successfully) led to sympathize with the apes. Thus, because we ostensibly care about them, we cannot help but agree with this reluctant endorsement of segregation because it is for their own good. This is further driven home when the revolutionary figure of Caesar, leader of the Other also concludes that separation is “natural”. The apes, carefully established as Black have now returned to their correct, natural and separate place.

It is quite possible of course for one to enjoy a movie that makes feel-good conclusions so simple. For that reason, I too was captivated by the visuals in Rise of the Planet of the Apes. However, by letting a film (or any other pop culture media) spoon feed us such offensive moral and cultural norms without questioning them is to become a passive recipient and thus liable to perpetuate and re-inscribe the messages (good or bad) that we receive. The assertions made by Rise are not new; they’ve been present in cinema since The Birth of A Nation insisted that Black savagery and inherent primitivism would presage the collapse of white civilization. In that sense, Rise is nothing more than an unoriginal but sparkly return to a “rational” racism.

Author’s statement on the use of terms:
I agree with a number of well known writers who contend that it is the job of the cultural critic to uncover the messages in pop culture, and that is what I have tried to do however haltingly at my site Lost Video Archive and here at Paracinema. Of course, I knew that some of the words that I chose to use in the original version of this editorial are offensive. I decided nevertheless to use them because by directly naming what I believe the film is trying to slip through, I could strip away its disguise. To not directly confront these White Supremacist notions (as we would face-to-face with an individual acting in a similar manner) is to allow them to remain unchallenged and thus to accept them. While I sometimes make mistakes in my analyses, I hope that Paracinema readers understand that I never meant to offend, though I apologize for having done so. As always I welcome your feedback.

Author:
The Goodkind resides in the Pacific Northwest where he splits his free time between a drawing table and a cathode ray tube. His favorite movies are the ones that appear to have no redeeming quality. But of course, he also believes that appearances are deceiving.

MORE FROM PARACINEMA:
FROM AROUND THE WEB:
  • b4bad

    I came here after an argument with my friend about how this movie is about human arrogance over nature and the blatant subjugation of animals for our own benefit.

    Meanwhile my friend insisted that it was about Black people in america.

    • Trollsvarg McNuggets

      Your interpretation is closer to mine. The race thong is only secondary, maybe even tetiary, or subconscious.

    • Lola Guin

      Your friend doesn’t sound very bright. Sorry, I just had to say it. Race-obsessed America just can’t resist comparing chimps to black people. I wonder, if it were “Rise of the Planet of the Horses”, would these comparisons still be made? Let’s all face facts. The ONLY reason people are bringing up race is because these people think that blacks resemble chimpanzees and other apes. That’s the bottom line.

      • swoowoo

        except that as a black man, I know from life experience and history that we have been likened to apes and subhuman for a very long time. Which is definitely something the original movies (at least starting with conquest) took advantage of to grapple with the issues of race in this country.

  • jakelucas

    urgh. the film is a real head ache to categorise. i feel like the whole planet could effectively be trolled by this film, and still be none the wiser.

    i could get into it, but whats the point.

    1 rod serling was the writer, and he was not known for being racist, but the opposite. he used twilight zone to push a lot of progressive arguments that wouldnt have been accepted outside of sci fi.

    2 charlton heston vs a killing a monkey invasion

    either one of these on their own look like proof positive of conflicting arguments. i conclude that this film is a massive troll on humanity and the fact it was made in 68, really just means it should really maybe not have been made.

    fkn apes? really?

  • Lola Guin

    “Most people”? You really believe that “most people” are comparing chimps to black people? Stop projecting your own think onto most of the population. You have no idea what most people are thinking. I never even thought about race watching this, not until I saw some idiot bring it up. Would you still think it was about blacks if it were called “Rise of the Planet of the Giraffes”? I get the impression that the ONLY reason people are saying this is racist is because they themselves believe that blacks and apes resemble each other. There is NOTHING racist about this movie. You have to go into the movie with preconceived notions to actually believe this. Your own biases and thinking are what is making this movie racist to you. I would be willing to bet that most people just enjoyed it for what it was, a science fiction movie. With people like you constantly viewing everything through the prism of race, is it any wonder that racism still exists? The very people who supposedly condemn racism are the same people who refuse to let the fire die.

    • Carlier

      Thanks for your comment. Maybe you are right: my response to Rise might say more about my views rather than expose hidden racist messages in the film, but do keep in mind that I did not have any concerns about the older version of the same film, as I wrote above. It is this particular film that I felt uncomfortable with.

  • Chaco

    A lot of white people seemed to be really offended by being called out like this and that to me is evidence that the above critique has hit a nerve in a way that gives it credibility. I appreciate that some people are able to see through how Hollywood is using a more subliminal racist message on a daily basis. We don’t live in a truly fair and equal country, just a passive aggressively dormant racist one.

  • Guest

    The only foolish notion is that the races are equal. Human races (aka, breeds) aren’t equal anymore than any other species’ sub-species are equal in all things. Were I to ask you, “Given a marathon race, from which country do you think the winner will come?” I’m betting most of you will answer “Kenya”, and virtually none of you will answer “Samoa”. Does that make you a racist because you are assuming the people of one country are superior in long distance running to Samoans? Isn’t that the definition of “racist”? Holding the belief that one race is superior to another. Fact of the matter, each race has its own strengths and weaknesses, and to fail to recognize them is to embrace a blindness to reality in favor of being viewed as “not a racist.” But, the fact of the matter is, we are all racists. Most are simply too cowardly to admit it or to candidly recount the ways in which one race has excelled over all others in certain respects.