Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)

Beneath the Planet of the Apes is the second movie in the series and my personal favorite. Probably the darkest of all five movies, the story begins with Taylor and Nova riding through the Forbidden Zone where the first one left off. Taylor mysteriously disappears, but Nova is able to find Brent, the only survivor of the crew sent to rescue Taylor. After seeing Ape City, Brent and Nova go into the Forbidden Zone where they find an underground city of mutants who worship an atomic bomb as their god. Meanwhile, the Apes are planning an attack on the Forbidden City. The story is very good and also examines the prejudices of the Apes that are so similar to the ones of the humans they so despise. This is not the happiest movie, especially the ending, but it is still a great movie and the ending does fit.

James Franciscus plays Brent, the astronaut who survives the crash, and plays it very well. His performance is similar to that of Charlton Heston's in the first one, and at some points they even look alike. Charlton Heston does make a brief cameo in the beginning before disappearing and then comes back in the last twenty minutes to help Brent. Kim Hunter reprises her role of Zira while David Watson takes the role of Cornelius instead of Roddy McDowall who was busy working on a different project at the time. Maurice Evans is great again as Dr. Zaius with James Gregory giving an excellent role as General Ursus, the leader of the armies bent on destroying anything they come across in the Forbidden Zone. Linda Harrison is gorgeous as Nova, and she even gets to say something in this one. Fans of the series will love this movie even if the budget was less than the first one, which is very obvious in some scenes. The Planet of the Apes is offered on DVD but each individual film is not offered seperately. Too bad, because these are great films. For fans of the Ape series, check out Beneath the Planet of the Apes!

I'll preface this review by saying 'Planet of the Apes' remains my favorite movie of all time (so far). And in an age where film has been reduced to terms like 'franchises', the prerequisite to even a sequel must remain 'is there a story to be told'? As both a writer and a member of the audience, I cherish the surprise but detest the fact that if I buy into itsomeone in an office somewhere thinks I'll buy into 'Star Trek, Indiana Jones or Star Wars 46'.

Planet remains the classicthe next three sequels are a terrific companion piece, adapting its suggested history and fleshing it out. Avoid Battle. The stories have been told.

Beneath has always remained the maligned, misunderstood one and I want to address that in my review. Being the only actual sequel (the other 3 being prequels), has something to do with that. I personally think it rose to the challenge of following a classic admirablythanks to the team of Jacobs, Dehn, Abrahams, Post and Franciscus.

The two most confused criticisms are Franciscus filling Heston's shoes, and that it somehow repeats half of the first film. Beneath is a film that I think you have to view a few timessometimes that's the sign of a good book or film. In this case, I think it is.

Taylor was a cynical character. An absolute individual. A man escaping something in search of something different. Something better. It's the beauty of the first film and Heston's portrayal. It allows us to care and become involved in what awaits and is about to confront him.

Brent as the next character can't be afforded the same luxury. That would be repeating. Franciscus (who contributed much of what he said and did on screen), has to play an 'everyman'. An astronaut in search of another; following the orders of his mission. His remarks in the opening passage to both his dying skipper and Nova reflect that. He's trying to remain hopeful and find himself in a strange environment. It's only after encountering both the Ape society and then the Mutants, he ultimately caves to any sense of hope.

Watch Franciscus's subtle portrayal of that rather difficult task. Quite a performance and massively underated. Heston, who cited Franciscus as a very good actor, was wrong about Brent's part. Playing an 'everyman' is very difficult and I think Franciscus's lines gave us a good sense of the character in a story that had two society's to contend with, this time around. Thematically, it was more epic in nature.

As for his being taken by Nova back to ape city (the repetitious aspect cited)very few seem to notice a marvelous thread being woven here: the opening flashback showing/teasing us about Taylor's strange disappearance (and really nicely handled visually), is what leads Brent (and us) back to a society now on the slide. Ape City is in a state of political change.

This is the point of this film. Zauis was the safeguard (perhaps) of the apes not repeating man's mistakes. Ursus's speech shows us military expansionism, a struggle for leadership, and sending an army to war ' in the name of faith', as he quotes their Lawgiver's words back to them.

The shadow spreads that the Apes will be no different, in the end, than man.

As Brent and Nova escape this, they fall into the hands of the Mutantsand this madness is heightened (to an uncomfortable but an unbelievably imaginative climax). The combination of faith flag waving, and the weird embracing of death culture is thought provoking (and unfortunately, still very timely).

There in lies the amazing thing about this film. It took the magnificant implication of the first film's ending, and offered a very dark, wonderous tone poem conclusion to it.

It tells its story and it has its own ideas, its own shape, scope and insights. It also had the guts via a science fiction film to state " look what we do to one another in the name of faith or with the idea that God is somehow on 'someone's side'.

I also think that it wove a marvelous conclusion to Taylor's attempted escape of the world and mankind; to where it ultimately led himand finally what it ultimately asked of him.

For those about to view or about to rewatch itit's not Planet of the Apes. It wisely understood that story had been told.

It has its own storyhowever dark. It dared to be different and not a 'franchise set up'. It also has some real questions it asks, some marvelous performances (Franciscus and James Gregory as Ursus), some inspired direction and a very good score by Roseman. Oh yes, lest we foreget ... and Heston as Taylor.

Buy Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) Now

Beneath the Planet of the Apes is the typical sequel that has to follow the plot and hold the same standards as its phenomonally successful original. "Beneath," as I will continue to call it, does it's job better than most. The plot is well thought out, the new characters, Nova, Taylor, and Dr. Zaius hold up very well, and it keeps many of the original film's aspects with it.

James Franciscus may have had the most difficult acting challenge. Since Charlton Heston did not want a sequel, and agreed to do only two cameos, Franciscus had to fill in the main character slot, and give a performance as strong as Heston's. He does a really good job at it. The main character, Brent, is very believable and obviously has a devotion to friends. His quest to find Taylor goes a lot farther than most humans would care to go. Brent's character is also helped by the fact he is new, so has no risk of not being like his past characterizations.

Ursus, the gorilla commander, is played by James Gregory. His performance is everything you would want out of a POTA gorilla. Dr. Zaius remains as the only original ape character to not have an alerted personality. He remains the same type of hard-headed, aristocrat who is the sole witness to Earth's past. Taylor's character is no longer misanthropic, but then again he was like that since the end of the first film.

Now here come the problems. The budget on this film was obviously cut. The exact price was $ 3,000,000. That budget would be about 80 or 90 million dollars in today's blockbusters. This resulted in the fact that not all the qualified make-up artists returned. Zira now has somewhat of a double-chin and a catfish-like appearance, and Zaius's design is not as...aristocratic. Corneilius looks different, but that's becaus Roddy McDowall was directic a film in London and the part had to go to David Watson. Speaking of chimpanzees, Zira and Corneilius's personalities are too altered. Zira is now headstrong and tempermental, and her husband is no longer a reluctant hero. After Paul Deihn wrote the story, Michael Wilson should have been hired to re-write the script, almost word-for-word, but keep the characters the same. Also, Ted Post was a good director, but brining back Franklin Schaffner would have been better.

This film is very good, and does a great job at following the success of the original. In the plot, Brent crashlands on Earth following Taylor's path, and finds Nova (Linda Harrison). Taylor is lost in the Forbidden Zone, and with Zira's help, Brent goes out to find him. The apes declare war on a mutant race of humans with faces from Graves Anatomy, and Taylor and Brent must save the entire globe, apes, and humans.

Read Best Reviews of Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) Here

This movie I believe is one of the most underrated movies of the Planet of the Apes series. The movie shows the apes greed and how corrupted they have become. Also the mutant humans how they have their doomsday bomb. The point of this movie is that are own worst enemy is ourselves. The end of the world will be caused by just a few greedy people. Oh yeah Nova is very hot in this movie!

Want Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) Discount?

I too prefer the hairy apes to the mutant apes underground (remember humans are apes). The mutants are cold, hypocritical, unnecessarily violent, bizarre and those are their good points. Uexplained are points like :do they know they are living in the rewmains of what used to be the great city of Manhatten? I feel this movie is only a semi-rehash of the first (hey Taylor found no mutant apes in film one did he?). I wish to point out that war is ok'd in the Holy Bible so I am not entirely anti-war but the mutants apes lose me in sympathy when they try to kill Nova and Taylor and company when they have a perfectly strong jail cell to put them up alive in. No irony for me in seeing future NRA president Heston getting gunned down at the end of the film.