When Rise of the Planet of the Apes was announced, expectations were not high. As a prequel to an awful remake of a movie that wasn't exactly an all time classic, its pedigree was sketchy to say the least. Thus came as a shock to nearly everyone when it became one of the biggest summer hits of the. Rise wasn't just watchable, or even pretty good; it's one of the best "B" movies of recent, entertaining and surprisingly human.

The series of events that will one day cause a time displaced astronaut to gaze despairingly upon the ruins of the Statue of Liberty begins not surprisingly with science. Medicine to be exact. Young researcher Will Rodman, played by James Franco is on the cusp of developing a drug that can cure Alzheimer's, his father's included. It just so happens that this drug not only repairs damage to the brain, but makes the subject smarter, as shown in trials with chimpanzees. Due to unexpected complications these trials don't exactly work out in the end, and the test subjects are put down. But one of them had a child, Caesar Raised like a son by Rodman, Caesar shows remarkable intelligence beyond even his mother, learning hundreds of words in sign language, understanding human speech, even scoring higher on intelligence tests than human children of the same age. There seems no limit to how much he can learn, or to what the drug that gave him his intelligence can do for humans. But this isn't an inspiring story of medical breakthroughs. A tragic misunderstanding and Caesar's own animal nature result in him being separated from his family, a prisoner among his own kind. He is not happy with his new situation, and he has a plan to change it.

The plot is hardly more complicated than I've described it, and is somewhat over reliant on coincidence and bad human decisions. Thankfully Rise is not driven by its plot, but by its central character. Caesar is quite simply a miracle of special effects. In only a decade CGI and motion capture technology has advanced to a degree that makes Lord of the Ring's Gollum seem almost listless by comparison. Caesar looks so real he could pass for a live chimpanzee if he didn't do things that no real chimp could ever be trained to do. Although he only speaks a few words late in the film, his facial expressions and gestures say more than enough.

Early on you can tell that Caesar is not only a thinking being, but a feeling one as well. Like a human he feels love, anger, desire, and fear. He understands the concept of family, and based on one overly sappy scene he seems to have a fair understanding of human mating rituals. When he finds himself caged in a primate sanctuary, he understands just enough of the situation to feel betrayed. And we can't help but feel sympathy for him. As he establishes his leadership over the other primates and plans his uprising, part of us roots for him, even though we know what it will eventually mean for humankind.

The first half is admittedly slow for an action movie, but when the action starts it really gets going. The sight of Caesar and his followers rampaging through downtown San Francisco makes for a wonderfully entertaining spectacle, which only gets better as the humans start fighting back. Much of what takes place is naturally ludicrous if you stop to think about it. Even with human level intelligence there's no way a hundred apes could overcome a major city police department, but their battle is so fast paced and cleverly staged that we're willing to suspend disbelief. If the ewoks could defeat the Empire then why can't Caesar's cohort make monkeys of the cops? Rise of the Planet of the Apes is by no means perfect. As mentioned the plot is standard B movie fare, and calamity could have been avoided if a few people hadn't taken unnecessary risks or just not been complete jerks. The human characters also aren't as well developed as their simian co-stars. Franco's boss in particular comes off as one dimensional and the film's attempt to make him something of an antagonist never really works.

That said, Rise is well paced and more emotionally engaging than any Planet of the Apes movie has a right to be. Coming on the heels of Avatar it also further showcases what the latest in FX tech can contribute to storytelling when used properly. And it delivers all the excitement a summer blockbuster should. Even if you were never a fan of the originals, this one is worth checking out on DVD or streaming.

This is a much smarter way to reboot a moribund series, taking the aesthetics into a new century while also updating the narrative to match with new technology. It also trusts the audience to empathize with a non-human character using that new technology, and then it includes the anchor of the human story which is simply not as strong.

Instead of trying to recreate any of the previous movies up to this point, Rupert Wyatt pushed the newest entry in the franchise in the Batman Begins direction of giving a grounded, modern take on a fantastical subject. Some chimpanzees are kidnapped from a jungle in Africa and sold to a company doing research into an Alzheimer's cure. A female goes on a rampage after she's infused, but it wasn't due to the cure but because she was protecting her baby she had delivered in secret in the lab. The chief scientist, Will, takes the baby home, discovers it has increased mental powers, and keeps the baby he and his sick father name Caesar.

This opening is largely dominated by the human side of the story, and it suffers a bit for it. Will is played by James Franco who's more of a performance artist than an actor and doesn't really deliver much terribly convincingly. The antagonist is a money-grubbing corporate type with a British accent, Jacobs, and he's flat and uninteresting. The scientific stuff is not terribly convincing, feeling like Hollywood dealing in stuff it doesn't really understand. What saves this part is really John Lithgow as Will's father, Charles. He's a quality actor playing the disheveled and confused old man really well and with a depth of humanity that is missing from the rest of the performers.

However, it's at about this point that Caesar begins to take center stage. Caesar the character and performance by Andy Serkis is the single greatest part of this movie, and he's great, one of the single greatest things about the franchise up to this point. Caesar grows from an innocent baby monkey into a cynical and hardened leader who uses what tools he has to stand apart from humanity and push ape-kind into a new direction. The digital performance, captured from Serkis' own motion captured performance, is subtle and touching.

Caesar ends up defending Charles from their butthead neighbor (another flaw in the movie since he's so thinly drawn and cartoonish, but the part is small, so there wasn't a whole lot else to do) and gets ordered by the court to remain in an ape sanctuary just outside the city of San Francisco. It's there that Caesar first encounters other apes, sees their limitations in contrast to his own heightened intelligence, and how, despite how nice Will and his girlfriend Caroline were to him, Caesar is still a step lower than humans in this world. It's a situation he can't stomach after a while exposed to the unvarnished truth. This is where he hardens, searching for a new truth, and it's all done wordlessly, anchored entirely by facial performances. It's great.

Caesar's solution is to expose the rest of the apes along with him in captivity to the compound that Will had been working on, breaking out and stealing it from Will's own refrigerator since he had been doing so much work on it, giving it to his father, outside of work (thin, but okay). With his newfound alpha status and a few dozen suddenly intelligent apes (the scene where they wake up and understand what's going on around them significantly more is a great quiet moment), Caesar decides that they won't live in captivity. Instead, they will escape to the Redwood forests on the other side of the San Francisco Bay.

It's pretty much at this point that the human side of the story finally and completely becomes mere support to the main story of Caesar's journey, and the movie improves greatly. Caesar works to get his people free, the movie embraces some action conventions with the apes freeing the apes at a zoo and the remaining apes at the genetics lab before grabbing spears and fighting off the police and Jacobs over the Golden Gate Bridge. It's a satisfying use of action elements because of the clear emotional anchor that is Caesar.

Now, a moment about callbacks. In my review of Tim Burton's re-imagining of Planet of the Apes, I complained about the callbacks, saying that they were poorly placed and ill-used, arguing that they could never rise out of guffaw territory. Well, Rise of the Planet of the Apes has several callbacks, perhaps more than Burton's movie, but they work significantly better. Let's take one for example. Tom Felton's character, Dodge, is facing down Caesar at the beginning of his revolt, and Caesar grabs Dodge. "Get your stinking paws off me, you damn dirty ape," Dodge cries out, giving the audience that moment of recognition to something it knows, but then the movie immediately undercuts that with a big emotional moment, Caesar saying his first word, "No." The sudden "No!" undercuts the guffaw moment and brings the audience immediately back to the emotional reality of what's going on, focusing us on what Caesar is doing. So, the movie gets its callback to a famous line from the original film, fits it into the situation rather organically, but then moves on very quickly to keep the focus where it needs to be, Caesar. It's a very good way to make callbacks work in dramatic situations, essentially making sure that they aren't the focus.

Anyway, if the focus were more on Caesar, the film would be great, but because we spend so much time with the uninteresting and rather bland humans through the first half, it's not as good as it could be. It's not that the human stuff is bad, it's just that it's not terribly interesting especially in comparison to what Caesar goes through. Still, it's a solid way to reboot a moribund franchise in a new time.

Summer 2011 will go down in history as one of the more disappointing seasons in many years when it comes to movies. This is the time of year that people rush out in masses to see the latest action extravaganza, and to be fair, some films have delivered on that promise -- "Harry Potter," "Captain America" (though I have yet to see either of them and am simply relying on general reactions) -- but there's been a whole lot of disappointments, too, and the worst part is that people still seem to be flocking to them, almost out of necessity than wont ("Transformers 3" and "Pirates 4" both made over $1 bil worldwide, which is amazing, because they both sucked).

I think the last film anyone expected to reverse the trend this summer was a prequel to a franchise that has been consistently poor over the years since its original incarnation in 1968. Indeed, the first trailer for "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" focused on ape carnage and mayhem, and although a subsequent one highlighted the dramatic underpinning of the film, it seemed like Fox was just trying to turn around its marketing and fool people into thinking there was more than meets the eye.

Alas, the second trailer turned out to be a far more accurate reflection of the movie than anyone would have expected. "Rise of the Apes" is most likely the best film of the blockbuster season, full of heart, carefully crafted and professionally delivered on every level.

Sure, the story has its fair share of clichés -- the "evil caretakers" played by Brian Cox and Tom Felton seem bad just because the film requires them to be, and Felton's performance in particular is so over-the-top that it's almost a caricature -- but because of how the film is packaged, and because it spends so much time focusing on the character of Caesar (played magnificently by Andy Serkis), you are willing to overlook many of the flaws. You care about the characters and the story, even when you kinda know where it's headed and feel like it's a variation of a prison break-out movie with apes in place of humans.

The human cast, as has been noted by many critics, is nothing to write home about. James Franco doesn't exactly phone in his performance but it's not the sort of role that is going to be lining him up for any awards. Toby Maguire was originally lined up for the project before he was dropped (he reportedly came to Fox with script notes, and they promptly cut off discussions with him), but Franco does seem a more natural fit, and does well enough in a role destined to be sidelined by the apes.

And the apes are awesome. No, we haven't quite mastered fully realistic CGI yet -- especially when it's mixed with live actors. (WETA claims that the technology here is superior to "Avatar," but it's not as convincing, perhaps because the CGI so rarely interacted with human actors in "Avatar," and thus we were able to accept the fantasy world more willingly.) However, this is some of the best seen to date. Serkis (who previously played King Kong in Peter Jackson's remake) translates a brilliant performance, for which the film owes a great deal; Caesar is really the crux of the whole thing, and a poor or less realistic performance would have undermined the whole thing. It's the subtle stuff here that makes a difference -- the emotions captured in Caesar's facial expressions, or the glint of sympathy in his eyes when John Lithgow's character begins to suffer from Alzheimer's. There's a moment of genius in that particular scene where Caesar exchanges a sad, knowing glance with Franco's character, and it's eerily touching.

Director Rupert Wyatt follows blockbuster blueprints from beginning to end, but by enriching the first three-quarters of his film with character development and an actual *story* (something so many blockbusters these days seem to be sorely lacking), when the big action sequence arrives at the end, you're invested in what's happening -- and you actually care.

I confess to never having watched many of the "Apes" films. I do recall seeing the Tim Burton remake in theaters a decade ago, and even as a 12-year-old kid, I thought, Wow, this sucks. "Rise" is infinitely better, more creative and more emotionally stirring -- as aforementioned, it's nothing completely unique or novel from a storytelling standpoint, but it's well-crafted in an old-fashioned, refreshingly familiar way, and the addition of groundbreaking CGI makes it a "must-see" rather than something to catch on television. Fox isn't known for pleasing fans with their remakes and sequels (whether it be Die Hard or Wolverine), but Summer 2011 sees two of their biggest properties successfully reinvigorated: first "X-Men First Class," and now this. For my money, "Apes" is better -- perhaps the best blockbuster of the season -- which I never in a million years expected to say.

Without spoiling anything, the film sets itself up for a sequel. Considering it's on track to smash expectations and take in $55 mil this weekend alone, it's pretty much a sure-thing that it will happen. Hopefully the follow-up takes heed of this film's strengths and doesn't abandon the character development in favor of boisterous action sequences. The fact that audiences are reacting strongly to this movie is an indication of what's been lacking all summer: stories with characters we care about. Go see this if you want to end a disappointing summer on a positive note.