A Series Review: Planet of the Apes – Part 1
Posted by jat59072Others: Reviews, Series
Every once in a while, a movie studio will decide that a movie is so good, and made them so much money, the public deserves something for embracing this phenomenally successful piece of entertainment. So, they will reassemble the cast and crew of said movie, and assign them to make something similar to the original product, but different enough that people will want to pay to see it. This is a sequel.
But, of course, you all know what a sequel is, what with the theaters filled with them come summertime. This summer alone we’ve had over a dozen sequels released, some madly anticipated (The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, Iron Man 2), and some not so much (Cats and Dogs 2: The Revenge of Kitty Galore, Nanny McPhee Returns). It seems like a fairly recent phenomenon, the release of all these sequels and prequels to such absurd franchises, but it’s been happening for a pretty long time. In fact, it was my disbelief that after the original Planet of the Apes in 1968, four (yes, four) sequels were produced in the following five years that’s sparked this sudden interest for me in sequels.
Planet of the Apes? Really? I was aware that the original was held in very high regard, and if Cats and Dogs gets a sequel, it shouldn’t be that absurd, but four sequels? I never realized that people were clamoring for Planet of the Apes movies so much in the 70s that Fox had no choice but to make a franchise out of this seemingly simple idea, but, hey, here we are. So, having been meaning to see the original Planet of the Apes anyway, I decided to take this opportunity to see where these five movies stack up against any of the other great franchises in movie history, how they all match up against each other, and if the makers of these movies eventually found enough material in the premise of a planet inhabited with apes to fill ten hours of screen time. And so, I present to you, The Planet of the Apes Series.
Movie #1: Planet of the Apes (1968)
There are some movies you put off seeing for years, having heard the best scenes from them quoted and parodied a dozen times from your friends and in other movies. Planet of the Apes has become one of these movies, known primarily for its revolutionary makeup, a ridiculously over-the-top performance by Charlton Heston, and its incredible twist, which, I’ll admit, still works. But there’s something about Planet of the Apes that just feels…off. With a movie like this, you need to convince your audience that what they’re watching amounts to more than its basic premise: a single, intelligent man is trapped on a planet full of monkey-people. And it’s in this attempt to stretch the idea beyond its ridiculous nature where it seems to falter, becoming fairly heavy handed, and somehow not taking itself seriously enough.
Now, by 1968, evolution was not a new concept, having been around since the mid-19th century, but even this far after its introduction to the world, there were still people arguing over the possibility of such a bizarre idea. Planet of the Apes works as an ironic debate between the parties who are both for and against the idea, with the apes, evidence of evolution, denying it in favor of their god, The Great Lawgiver, and the belief that apes had always been the primary species, and Heston’s astronaut, George Taylor, a member of the inferior human race, as its proponent. It’s an interesting argument, mostly because of those doing the arguing, but little smacks of irony upside the head, like exclamations of how ridiculous “Ape evolving from man” is, the laughter caused by the idea of human domestication and the fact that an hour in the movie turns into a courtroom debate about the possibility of evolution, well, it just makes you wish for a little more subtlety in your movie about talking apes with humans as pets. Also, little touches like “You know what they say: human see, human do”, and a courtroom reenactment of “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” from an ape tribunal get a little too cutesy, when I felt a little gravity would’ve better served the big picture.
Aside from the heavy-handed messages and silly puns, however, there is a lot here to like. While very dramatic, actors like Heston, (as well as Roddy McDowell, and Kim Hunter as Heston’s ape friends Zira and Cornelius) give the movie a legitimacy that I think few other stars of the time could’ve provided, and there’s some pretty great set design and action set pieces. As highly regarded as the makeup is, it’s still surprising to see how well it holds up, and how impossible it is to find any flaws when looking at any of the apes facial features. And while it is a little much at times, Rod Serling (I’ll watch anything he writes) and Michael Wilson do a lot to make this more than an extended episode of the Twilight Zone, of which its ending seems pulled right out of.
The good here outweighs the bad, and I can understand why so many people have embraced Planet of the Apes, raising it above its somewhat cheesy science-fiction classification. It holds up well, and considering the endless amounts of computer graphics and modern filmmaking we’re used to seeing these days, it’s nice to know that a movie like Planet of the Apes still has a place in this world.
7 out of 10.
See Part 2: Beneath the Planet of the Apes here.
Related posts:
- A Series Review: Planet of the Apes – Part 2
- A Series Review: Planet of the Apes – Part 4
- A Series Review: Planet of the Apes – Part 3
- A Series Review: Planet of the Apes – Part 5
- A Series Review: Friday the 13th- Part 1
No Comments »
« Overheard Opinions – Volume 1 | Home | A Series Review: Planet of the Apes – Part 2 »