Going Ape for Ceaser

Caesar: 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' (2011)

(SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW)

First things first- Caesar is an ape. The fact is irrefutable yet undeniable- one's first thought of a thing such as an ape being viewed as a villain would be "But he doesn't know what he's doing- he's an ape!" However, it is due to the unique context of the film he is in that it is indeed feasible to do such a study. His intelligence and cognitive ability is improved vastly due to a fictional treatment in the film. Predictable as any other cinematic medical advancement designed to 'change the world', the result is an experiment gone horribly wrong- Caesar breaks free and begins the titular revolution for primates world-wide. (Or in this particular installment of the narrative, the San Francisco area).

So, with that out the way, it is due time to categorise the test subject; firstly, his motivations. Caesar is firstly cared for within a safe environment and is then stripped of these luxuries and this care when sent to a nearby sanctuary, where he is abused. His 'revolution' in the second half of the film is symbolically begun by the exhuming of the very one who abused him- a cruel worker at the sanctuary. This act, and those that follow, can then be easily argued to be a part of the motivation designated M7 (An act of vengeance upon another character creates and drives the villain). Caesar is enacting vengeance for the cruelty he has felt at the hands of humans by taking over the area they claim as their own (I realise this is similar to the motivation M3, but this is not the reason for our perceiving him as a villain- it is merely the act he performs because of M7). One must keep in mind that he is also working to liberate fellow primates from the same clutches he found himself in- a rare example of a duty felt to a species. I would argue that this, though not as I had originally as described, would be an example of M2; Caesar feels a duty towards his fellow primates, and must commit evil acts in which to fulfil this perceived duty.

We must now decide, in keeping with the last post, whether he can be argued to be a villain by nature, or whether Caesar is a villain by objection. In my personal opinion, though it can indeed be argued from either side, Caesar is more clearly on the side of a villain by objection- his motivations are not in their truest form in fact 'evil', but it is clear that the humans of the Earth would probably prefer to stay as its dominant life form. (Of course, any objections, post in the comments)

Caesar's motivations are, in some ways, difficult to define, though easy to understand. Some who would label individuals such as Che Guevera and the Mujahadeen as examples of villains, should also bear in mind that any of these examples can also be defined by others as 'freedom fighters'- food for thought, I think.

With motivations similar to those of many resistance leaders through the ages, and a resonance to an aspirational feeling of valour and duty the audience ends the film aspiring to, Caesar is a rare thing- a simple character, yet one with the potential to develop into a great villain.

Or maybe he's just stopped giving a monkey's.