• Klordok@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’ve seen the Charlton Heston one, and the 2001 Mark Wahlberg one. The original was obviously better. I hadn’t seen any of the current cycle until I saw Kingdom last weekend. It was fine.

    I listened to a recap of the previous 3 films and it didn’t matter. Kingdom takes place “many generations” after the third movie so all the other characters are dead. Kingdom’s story works fine as a standalone film. It’s not amazing, but there’s nothing particularly awful about it. Now I’ll probably see the next couple, but they’re not high on my list.

    • Dadd Volante
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I liked Kingdom but it was weaker than the trilogy of movies that came before it.

    • Alto@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      They’re solid generic blockbuster action-ish movies. They’re not amazing, but they’re fun enough that I think they’re worth a watch if you can’t decide what to watch one night.

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I find the movies conceptually interesting because there aren’t many movies in which humans are just explicitly the bad guys, or in terms of the most recent one just a supporting entity that exists on the periphery of the story. Avatar kinda does that, too, but the Avatar movies are also puddle deep genre fiction and the “of the Apes” movies are at least structurally and narratively competent.