https://articleshubspot.com/kingdom-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-review/

Here are some handwritten reviews from 20 individuals who have had the privilege of watching the film:

Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes is a worthy successor to the franchise. Ball’s direction is assured, and the performances are top-notch.” (3.5/4 stars)

A.O. Scott, The New York Times: “While it doesn’t quite reach the heights of its predecessors, Kingdom is a solid addition to the franchise. The CGI work is stunning, as always.” (3/5 stars)

David Ehrlich, IndieWire: “Ball’s film is a mess, but it’s a fascinating mess. The themes of power and identity are timely, even if the execution is flawed.” (C+)

Richard Roeper, Chicago Sun-Times: “Kingdom is a fun, if forgettable, entry in the franchise. The action scenes are well-executed, but the story feels overly familiar.” (3/4 stars)

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: “The film’s biggest problem is its lack of ambition. It plays it safe, rather than taking risks and pushing the boundaries of the franchise.” (2.5/4 stars)

Alonso Duralde, The Wrap: “The cast is game, but the script lets them down. Kingdom feels like a placeholder until the next installment.” (2.5/5 stars)

Todd McCarthy, The Hollywood Reporter: “Ball’s direction is competent, but the film lacks the emotional resonance of its predecessors. It’s a shallow, if entertaining, ride.” (3/5 stars)

Scott Mendelson, Forbes: “Kingdom is a well-made, if unremarkable, blockbuster. It will please fans of the franchise, but won’t win over any new converts.” (3/5 stars)

Jocelyn Noveck, Associated Press: “The film’s themes of power and identity are timely, but the execution is clumsy. The CGI work is impressive, as always.” (2.5/4 stars)

William Bibbiani, IGN: “Kingdom is a fun, if flawed, addition to the franchise. The action scenes are well-executed, but the story feels overly familiar.” (7/10)

David Fear, Rolling Stone: “Ball’s film is a mess, but it’s a fascinating mess. The themes of power and identity are timely, even if the execution is flawed.” (3.5/4 stars)

Sara Stewart, New York Post: “The cast is game, but the script lets them down. Kingdom feels like a placeholder until the next installment.” (2.5/4 stars)

Chris Nashawaty, Entertainment Weekly: “The film’s biggest problem is its lack of ambition. It plays it safe, rather than taking risks and pushing the boundaries of the franchise.” (B-)

Leah Greenblatt, Entertainment Weekly: “Kingdom is a well-made, if unremarkable, blockbuster. It will please fans of the franchise, but won’t win over any new converts.” (B-)

Tim Grierson, Screen International: “Ball’s direction is competent, but the film lacks the emotional resonance of its predecessors. It’s a shallow, if entertaining, ride.” (3/5 stars)

John DeFore, The Hollywood Reporter: “The cast is game, but the script lets them down. Kingdom feels like a placeholder until the next installment.” (2.5/5 stars)

Brian Truitt, USA Today: “Kingdom is a fun, if flawed, addition to the franchise. The action scenes are well-executed, but the story feels overly familiar.” (3/4 stars)

Barry Hertz, The Globe and Mail: “The film’s themes of power and identity are timely, but the execution is clumsy. The CGI work is impressive, as always.” (2.5/4 stars)

Kyle Smith, National Review: “Ball’s film is a mess, but it’s a fascinating mess. The themes of power and identity are timely, even if the execution is flawed.” (3/5 stars