 |
| Planet of the Apes (2001) DVD Cover |
Encompassing genetics, evolution,
Hominid origins, and primates, physical anthropology is a prevalent theme in
the world today. Despite the importance
of modern anthropology it is the discipline’s depiction in popular culture that
can lead to false and sometimes negative views on the subject. In this essay I
will discuss the film, “Planet of the Apes” (2001), in regards to physical
anthropology. I will analyze its accurate information, however misconstrued,
the inaccurate information, and how this information can either inform or
misinform the general public concerning primate characteristics and behavior.
When
analyzing and discussing the movie industry’s portrayal of apes the accuracies
are very important. For although most people will never have a personal
experience or learn much about the animal, it is the portrayal in popular
culture that can often times lead people to make negative and biased
assumptions. The accuracies I have come across while scrutinizing this film are
few and the information is frequently misconstrued. For example, in reality, chimps
as well as gorillas are known to beat their chest, make grunting noises at one
another, and touch hands to communicate. While beating on the chest can be a
sign of aggression or feeling playful the movie portrays this action only
during fight scenes as well as showing aggression toward the humans. Just as
well, in nature apes also have a series of call sounds, ranging in high pitch
and low frequency to low pitch and high frequency, used for communication. These
sounds can be made in order to warn of danger or let the others know that there
is food near. In the film these sounds are used to show aggression towards
either the humans or the lower ranking males in the group. One small detail
that remained accurate in the film, though did not surface often, was the
action of the animals touching the back of their hands together, this is an
action that is “…a signal of appeasement and friendliness” (Rhawn Joseph). In
the film this is shown when the leader of the military, Thade, a chimp, is
visiting his dying father, Thade offers his hand and he and his father touch
the backs of their hands together , though just briefly, another example of
this is when the leader of the human rights movement, Ari, also a chimp,
confronts Thade in order to seek asylum for the fugitive humans, she kneels
before him and offers her hand. In addition another accuracy among the film is
the dominance represented by the character Thade. Although there would be no
chimp that would be alpha male of gorillas and orangutans collectively, the
portrayal of him as an alpha male is parallel to that of chimp hierarchy. This
representation is incorrect because despite the fact that these apes could
coexist in peace with minimal conflict a chimp would not be alpha male of both
gorillas and orangutans, as they would have their own elected alphas. Not
necessarily the largest or strongest these alpha males can simply be the most
persuasive and political of the group (Kibale Chimpanzee Project).
When
considering the inaccuracies of the film there are simply more to point out and
easier to spot. For example the physical characteristics of the apes are
misrepresented as well as their temperament. Such things that are changed about
their physical characteristics are their size, locomotive patterns, hair, and
facial prognathism. The size of both the chimps and the gorillas are skewed
from fact. In the movie the chimps are represented to be the size of a human
and in actuality chimps usually only grow to about 4 to 5.5ft and about 70 to
130lbs. (National Geographic). Additionally, gorillas standing height ranges
from 4 to 6 ft. and get from 150 to 400lbs. (National Geographic), though in
the film they are portrayed to all be about 6ft tall and though not weighing
400lbs, the actors who play them are very large and bulky, always wearing heavy
military gear. This misrepresentation is related to the tone of the film and
the emotional response desired; by illustrating the apes as larger it instills
a deeper sense of fear.
One of the larger differences portrayed in the
film is the locomotive patterns of the apes. In reality both chimps and
gorillas are bipedal with exceptions. Although their spine can support bipedal
motion it is short term. These creatures are quadrupeds that can sustain short
term bipediality, though in the film they are represented as having a more
permanent bipedal motion. This coupled with the portrayal of the immense
throwing capabilities as well as jumping, further instills a fear in the
viewer.
In regard to characteristics,
the hair and facial prognathism have been altered in order to ascertain a more
human like appearance. Having little to no hair on the faces, comparable to
chimps, the women seem to sport a sort of “up-do” in terms of hair style,
having more hair on the tops of their heads and being styled in a manner
similar to human women. It is also obvious throughout the film that the facial
prognathism in all forms of apes represented has been lessened, especially so
in the chimpanzee women. The film portrays the apes as having more gracile
features without the robust protruding jaw, this marker is indicative of the
desired capacity in making these “malicious” apes more humanistic.
All of these
inconsistencies paired with the apes constant violent nature towards the humans
gives the statement that apes are savage, when in validity chimps and gorillas
are quite peaceful animals that do not resort to brutality unless provoked. The
last, foremost inaccuracy in the film is the portrayed ability for apes to have
spoken language. It has been tested and published that apes, with emphasis on
chimps, cannot support verbal communication because the portion of their brains
most commonly connected with speech is not as developed as the human brain. Just
as well the vocal cords of apes compared to humans do not produce the same
proteins that are integral in tones required for speech. This is but another
tactic used by the film industry in order to make the apes seem more human and
that much more calculating and tactful.
This
information, prominently the inaccurate information, can misinform the public
about the nature of apes. If the viewer has no supplemental information about
the validity of claims made in films such as “Planet of the Apes” (2001) then
they cannot decipher the truth from the creative licensing and Hollywood magic.
People, especially Americans are often greatly influenced by Hollywood. Assertions
made about the violent and malicious nature of apes is quite damning of the
actuality of very peaceful creatures. There are few films that show the gentle
side of our primate cousins instead it is films such as “King Kong”, “Congo”,
and “Planet of the Apes” that misrepresent and give a negative perception about
apes.
In
conclusion, it is in popular culture and their representation of apes that
frequently cause unfavorable attitudes towards the species. It is in “Planet of
the Apes” (2001) and their depiction in regards to size, pedality, hair and
facial prognathism, temperament, as well as their ability to verbally
communicate that can instill a sense of fear in viewers concerning their
outlook. It is also in this lack of accuracies in cinema pertaining to apes
that has led to a misinformation of the public.
Works
Cited
Angelle, Amber. “Why Can’t
Monkeys and Apes Talk?”. Popular
Mechanics. Hearst
Communication. 16
April 2010.Web. 5 May 2014. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/genetics/why-apes-cant-talk.
Joseph, Rhawn Ph.D. “Chimps &
The Language of Signs”. Neuropsychiatry,
Neuropsychology,
Clinical Neuroscience. Plenum Press: New
York, 1993. Web. 5 May 2014. http://brainmind.com/Chimps.html.
Kibale Chimpanzee Project. World
Press. Web. 5 May 2014.
“Western Lowland Gorilla”. National Geographic. Web. 5 May 2014.
19 comments:
This post is interesting. I never gave thought to what Hollywood makes us believe about apes. Of course they do this for entertainment. But it is interesting to learn the difference of what the movie shows about apes and chimps compared to what their appearance is and what their actions are. It is true that the movie makes us fear the animals because if I wasn't aware that the apes are really nice than I would believe the movie.
This is an excellent post of how Hollywood does not use actual facts when creating characters for roles. It is interesting that portrayal of these animals is often misrepresented in their actions as in this film. I liked the part on the physiology of the apes.
While this piece focuses on apes, your comment about Hollywood bending the truth for the purposes of entertainment is correct, and one of many reasons why one should be very critical of any and all information that he or she is exposed to.
Never really took a look into the portrayal of apes and gorillas in Hollywood or in any way for that matter. My uncle actually studied apes for quite sometime and he found that they were awesome creatures (after training and building relationships of course. A friend I had worked for the Charles River Laboratory with apes and often found himself getting attacked. I guess what Im trying to say that it could depend on the environment they are in that affects the way they act.
Elizabeth Kettner
Apes are wild creatures, and when observed in their natural habitat they are known to be incredibly gentle creatures who only resort to violence when hunting or protecting themselves or their families. Often times humans find wild animals become much more aggressive when they are in confined conditions, which is associated most often with stress. What is interesting in regards to apes is that often they mimic the behavior of those humans around them and become violent as a result. In fact, there has been increased incidence of murder among wild chimpanzee populations, and this is attributed to them watching humans commit acts of violence and murder and mimicking the behavior accordingly. This conclusion was reached over several decades worth of study of chimpanzees in the wild and a comparison of the early studies (and minimal human exposure) to later studies (with generations of exposure to humans).
This is really interesting. I never watched many fictional ape movies such as those in Hollywood but even from what I've seen of documentaries on apes, they're always portrayed as pretty violent creatures. I never stopped to think that maybe they would be gentle when in their natural habitat and undisturbed by humans.
Hollywood makes movies for entertainment purposes. The behavior of the apes is fictionalized in order to make an interesting and entertaining experience. Movies are meant to be a small escape from reality. That being said, it is somewhat disheartening that the apes are portrayed as violent creatures when we know that they are not unless they are being threatened in some way.
Courteney Hedicke, Anth 101
It is interesting to see how Hollywood can change our minds without really knowing the facts behind the movie. Before taking this class I watched this movie and believed what I saw that apes were violent creatures. Now that I know about apes when they are in their own habitat are gentle creatures. It just shows us that don't judge a movie by what you see unless you know the facts.
Erica Worswick, Anth 102
Which are critical thinking skills that you can apply to many other aspects of life, not just movies. :)
We live in a world that we can make anything seem like how we want it to look thanks to technology ad programs. i have seen planet of the apes, I know that apes have there own way of talking and yes we do experiments on them. In some parts if the movie we can tell that some times they streth out the truth and make it look bad.
Briana Banuelos
Anthro 102 1001
I think what the producers were trying to show is what would have happened if instead of humans breaking off from our common ancestor it was the other primates that evolved through the same conditions that gave the rise to humans. depicting how that would look like therefore switching places with the apes, and monkeys,
I also love articles about movies because it is my field of study I love. Hollywood's portrayal of everything is usually overly dramatized and fictional to grab the viewers. Apes are viewed in this film as very violent because that's the way the director wanted the audience to feel. Directors tell the story the way they imagine it so movies are basically directors thoughts on the big screen.
Very fun post!
Zachary Forrester
anthro 101 3001 summer
For me is very interesting to see how the entertainment industry focus in what they want to deliver to the audience and how they manipulate your mind and meaning of many things in order to sell (make money). This American science fiction film is totally a misinterpretation about apes. It obvious that the movie deliver a negative perception about apes they show the apes as larger it instills a deeper sense of fear because in the movie the apes dominate a race of primitive humans.
Eliana Llanos Antroplogy 101-3001
Wow the movie looked so real and accurate! It's interesting to know that some of the facts were misconstrued but a lot of movies misconstrue the factual aspects. Very interesting read, now I'll know what to look for the next time I watch this movie!
Even though I have never seen this version of Planet Of The Apes I am sure Hollywood does not begin to depict how these animals are in their natural enviornments. It is amazing how Hollywood can change ones perspective to suit their film making efforts.
Its interesting to know how much of the realization was changed in order to capture the audience's attention, what better way than fear. People seem to always remember something they are fearful of. I never thought how heavy of an influence Hollywood has on showing culture, even of other species. A person who has never seen an ape may have a preconceived notion about how they look and act.
Daniel Ruiz
ANTH 101-3001 Summer
The speed in which the evolution takes place is what bothers me the most. Yes, it was a movie that could only be so long, but mutations that advanced should have taken longer.
Jovie Black
After being in anthropology, and going over the lecture about apes I've questioned "Planet of the Apes". I was convinced that over time Apes and other primates will be able to act in such a manner. I say that because, its not way that certain animals can talk. Birds can mimic what you say, Koko does sign language. Its like their evolving. I just think some movies tell us what going to happen, in the nearby future.
Great analysis !
Being able to call apes a primate to humans is very interesting, especially with all this research you have done. The way they communicate and the different sides of the communication meaning different things in different situations is something talked about in anthropology and extremely important to understand and not to judge, even as an animal. Also, with the whole "Hollywood Magic" thinking about it is crazy how many facts I even use because I "heard it on that movie."
Qwynn Marquez, Intro to Anthropology
Post a Comment