Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) User Reviews

"We were following Taylor's trajectory, so whatever happened to us must have happened to him."

[The_Movie_Cat · 6/10 · 21 April 2001]

Beneath was the best Planet of the Apes film bar none. Everything was bigger and better this time around: bigger sets, more gorillas, the whole of New York instead of a mere Statue of Liberty, and, best of all, faceless, telepathic mutants than can kill with the mind. Yes, I was once ten years old.

Watched again with many years of hindsight, it's clear that, while entertaining, Beneath was produced without anything approaching artistry. The ultimate in sequels, it tries to tell the same story twice as big, but with only half the success. Until Battle came along and picked the flesh off Apes' rotting carcass this was the worst sequel because it did nothing new with the format. Even the working title - Planet of the Apes Revisited - betrays the lack of thought and the desire for finance that went into this one.

A virtually identical plotline rattles along at a fair pace, meaning all subtlety is jettisoned. The allegories are also confused by not really being allegories at all. Look at the metaphor for anti-war protestors by casting chimps as ... er, anti-war protestors. A look at how man often judges another man on the colour of his skin is alluded to ... er, by having an ape judging a man on the colour of his skin. (On this note, perversely for a film that purports liberal satire, the only one of the mutants to demonstrate real cruelty was Don Pedro Colley, the sole black character in the film. And despite its worthiness, I don't think I've ever seen another film where a man's credit is given as "Negro"). However, I did have to smile at the chimp that punningly complains about "gorilla brutality".

The decreased budget (a sensible studio idea to cut the finance of the sequels to a hit movie) shows with some of the ape extras having decidedly ropy masks in the crowd scenes. The opening of the picture also recaps the first, cannily highlighting the glaring difference between Roddy McDowall's and David Watson's performances as Cornelius. Watson, standing in for an absent McDowall, does reasonably well but really doesn't look anything like him, even under latex. Note too how all the ape masks give the actors lisps, something I never noticed before. Never mind apes, anyone would think James Franciscus had landed on the planet of the Pertwees. There's also some abysmal back projection work when Franciscus is wrestling on top of the horsedrawn carriage. The mutants are pretty good, though their prayers to "The Holy Fallout" are a little silly. Why do they wear human masks anyway? Where do they make them? I dunno, I don't make the rules up, do I?

Of course, the main problem is the pointless game of one-upmanship it plays with its source. There's no longer any element of surprise that this is Earth, so the ruined monuments, nice as they are, no longer have any great effect. It misses the point, also: the Statue of Liberty is not just a relic, but a symbol. New York Subway is just where people caught trains. And as impressive as the effects are, if not directed well – which they aren't, particularly – then it becomes fatuous.

It's weird how all four sequels were made within a year of each other, yet at least two of them tried something new. Beneath came two years after the original yet has a rehashed "in it for the money" feel all the way through, right down to its abrupt, slightly unsatisfactory climax. Yet despite the many, many faults I've levelled at it, Beneath the Planet of the Apes is still a very enjoyable film. Not in the sense of the first, which genuinely had something to say, but in the guise of pulp SF then this sequel is well worth seeing. In fact, despite the slating I've given it, I still awarded it 6/10.

What Might Have Been.....

[Eric-62-2 · 24 May 2000]

"Beneath" is a film that epitomizes the best and worst that a sequel to a masterpiece, as "Planet Of The Apes" was, could be. For me, it is the most watchable of the sequels only because it's the only one that stays in the familiar territory established by the first film. But oh that ending....

I really can not understand why the heck Richard Zanuck allowed Charlton Heston to talk him into going with that downer ending that has already been referred to by others. The only reason why Heston pushed it wasn't because it made for good cinema but because he wanted to singlehandedly see to it that he never have to do another Apes sequel again. It's a pity that Heston never realized that the best sequel story one could have explored was what happened to Taylor and Nova afterwards, and could have made for some equally compelling drama as the first film did. To me, the main appeal of the first film wasn't the Ape society, it was the character of Taylor and his fascinating odyssey from misanthrope to defender of the species, only to see his earlier feelings borne out in the shock ending. The question that should have been addressed next in a sequel was, what would Taylor do now that he realized he was on Earth? What other things were there to discover on the planet? (Heck, you could have easily made a sequel movie without the apes returning, as far as I'm concerned!) Alas, because of the plot device imposed by this film (and Heston's inability to realize what a good thing he might have had going for himself), the rest of the series had to veer off into what was for me, a more uninteresting story line focusing on the Apes and their inevitable rise to power.

Plot holes and depressing ending notwithstanding, "Beneath" is still worth watching to see the traces of what could have been a great film that are there. The mutant storyline and their dwellings underneath the remains of New York still has an irresistible viewing quality to it. I do not recommend watching it in tandem with its magnificent predecessor though, because that's only going to make you more angry about the ending of this film.

Far Beneath the original Apes Film

[Bogmeister · 6/10 · 28 May 2006]

This first sequel to the '68 science fiction hit has all the markings of something rushed into production. There was no time to craft a story which explores the truly interesting possibilities of astronaut Taylor's continuing odyssey on a future world turned upside down. The story could have and should have concentrated on the evolving struggle between the ruling class of apes and the backward humans. Instead, the filmmakers created a new threat for this film, a secret society of human mutants living underground. They show up in the 2nd half of this feature and, in prolonged scenes, show off their telepathic powers in torturing the heroes. The heroes, in this case, are another astronaut (Franciscus) who followed Taylor's trajectory to this other planet and Taylor himself (Heston, reprising his role briefly). Wow, what an original concept - another astronaut, who, in an accelerated version of the first film's events, also finds Ape City, encounters two sympathetic chimps, gets captured and escapes. Are we watching some kind of a repeat?

The quick pace of this picture is probably its best aspect; this stresses action. However, the pace is so fast that some crucial points in geography are sacrificed: getting to the Forbidden Zone from Ape City is just a short walk in a tunnel for some, while others have to trudge for days overhead. In a slight nod to the satirical aspects of the original film, we do get to see religion being mocked (the original satirized the social & political anchors of a community). But, it's not a very subtle jab. The mutants profess to be more intelligent than either the heroes or the apes, which they seem to prove with their advanced mind powers, but they spend most of their time worshiping a nuclear bomb, chanting silly songs - they really picked a strange form of idolatry, but maybe they're simply crazed. This movie throws together a lot of science fiction concepts but the resulting brew is rather bland. It's a decent action piece, not much more.

Franciscus shows he is no Heston; he overacts in most of his scenes, as if he had no clue on how to depict a man realizing where he's actually landed, but then again, he wasn't the skipper on this 2nd ship (the lead officer dies soon after they crash-land); we're not watching a leader but a follower try to carry the picture. I was struck by how Heston towered over him in their brutal fight scene. McDowall is also missing; his role of Cornelius is played by actor Watson. Evans & Gregory are pretty good as the ape leaders but whoever stuck them in ape suits for the sauna scene should have thought about it a few more minutes. This movie ends everything on a grotesquely conclusive note, but they managed to find a way to continue the story in "Escape From the Planet of the Apes."

A slap in the face to the original

[pappysprite · 2/10 · 28 February 2020]

So poorly done with no respect to the legacy of the original film. Obvious signs of budget cuts everywhere, especially with the ape makeup. Generally in every scene, outside of a handful of apes in the front of the cameras, most apes were done up with cheap ill-fitting rubber masks, poorly constructed costumes etc. To put in bluntly, it was a poorly made film with a very poor budget. Don't waste your time on this one.

Beneath the Planet of the Apes suffers from many issues arising in sequels, namely that being bigger doesn't equate to better.

[IonicBreezeMachine · 5/10 · 19 December 2023]

After a ship crash lands on the planet Earth, Brent (James Franciscus) is the sole survivor of a mission to rescue Taylor (Charlton Heston) and his crew. Brent eventually comes across Nova (Linda Harrison), Taylor's companion who is wearing his dog tags and leads Brent to the ape city where they find help from Taylor's chimpanzee allies Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (David Watson). As Nova and Taylor attempt to venture into the Forbidden Zone intent on finding Taylor, General Ursus (James Gergory) and his legion of Gorilla soldiers are ramping up for a military invasion into the Forbidden Zone as Dr. Zaius (Maurice Evans) and the citizen's council attempt to maintain order.

After the success of Planet of the Apes, 20th Century Fox became interested in making a sequel. After original film's co-writing Rod Serling proved unavailable to deliver a treatment in time for when Fox wanted it, and a concept called Planet of the Men by author of the original Planet of the Apes source novel Pierre Boulle was rejected, producer Mort Abrahams came up with the story elements that would become Beneath the Planet of the Apes and entrusted screenwriting duties to Paul Dehn who at the time was best known for Goldfinger and The Spy Who Came in from the Cold. While the film enjoyed healthy box office (though not matching the longevity of its predecessor) critical reception tended to skew negative with many lamenting the focus on large scale action over the atmosphere and social commentary of the original. While elements of Beneath the Planet of the Apes have worked their way into popular consciousness (regular viewers of Futurama will notice one or two references), the film just doesn't have the novelty or ideas needed to match its predecessor.

While Beneath the Planet of the Apes features a larger number of apes on display at any given point with a major selling point being the Gorilla army, the story begins to crumble following the abridged recap of the original's iconic ending. While James Franciscus had been a staple of TV with Beneath the Planet of the Apes his "big break", Franciscus' character is such a hollow placeholder for Taylor that there's nothing about him aside from serving as an audience proxy (for information we're already aware of). While I may have had my issues with Heston's over the top performance in parts of the original, at least he had a fully developed character as a misanthropic cynic with an acerbic sense of humor that made him compelling. I'll admit I'm not all that familiar with Franciscus' body of work so I can speak to his abilities as an actor, but I just never resonated with Brent in any way. Structurally speaking the first 45 minutes is basically a mini-remake of the first film with Brent going through a heavily abridged arc of everything Taylor went through (including discovering it was Earth along which has a "so what?" feeling to it.). Once we do get something new with traversing into the Forbidden Zone and actually going "beneath" as the title promised us we do get some new elements but they're not all that interesting or developed. While there are attempts at doing social commentary in the vein of the original film, most of it either feels like half-hearted lip service or "been there, done that" with the most prominent placement being a scene where protesting chimpanzees (the society's intellectuals) are rousted by the more thuggish and war hungry gorillas. There's certainly plenty of action on display in Beneath the Planet of the Apes, but there's so little structure or stakes to the plot that you end up not really caring all the way up to a bleak ending the movie really doesn't earn.

Beneath the Planet of the Apes has everything that made the 1968 film a classic, only without the structure, intrigue or humor as it instead opts more for showing off a greater number of apes on screen and neglecting to make them interesting in favor of more battle sequences. While the second half almost has some inspired moments, it ultimately never delivers a satisfying experience.

"Oh Mighty Bomb"

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 25 August 2013]

It took two years for the sequel to Planet Of The Apes to get to the big screen, henceforth 20th Century Fox would space them out about a year at a time. Beneath The Planet Of The Apes seems to have been inspired a lot by Dr. Strangelove played far less tongue in cheek by the cast.

Kim Hunter, Maurice Evans, Linda Harrison, and Charlton Heston return for this first sequel. And James Franciscus is the only survivor of a rescue ship sent after Heston and his crew. Of course he finds the same simian civilization that Heston found and with the same problems and friends among the apes.

Franciscus goes into the forbidden zone that Heston entered, but now the apes have a military chieftain who wants to enter and conquer the previous forbidden zone. He's played by a thuggish James Gregory.

Maurice Evans is the scientist who has a vested interest in keeping the ape orthodox traditions inviolate. He doesn't want to go into the forbidden zone where Heston and Franciscus have gone, but the force of public opinion is working against him. He tags along with Gregory's military expedition to watch out for their culture.

Of course there are humans there and of a higher order than the simple creatures who were thought to be below the simian on this planet. What happens when they encounter those humans is for you to see the film for.

No doubt the force of public opinion influenced 20th Century Fox to make this sequel. Today's sequels to popular films are the result of certain teaser questions put into the plots of the originals. That was not done back then clearly because of some rather clumsy writing in Beneath The Planet Of The Apes. And certainly the ending here did not anticipate yet another sequel.

Despite that though a lot of good social commentary about the world and America got into this film, maybe even more than in the original Planet Of The Apes. Nobody could mistake the protests of the young chimpanzees to the military expedition for anything else, but criticizing the war in Vietnam and Nixon's incursion into China.

As in the first film my favorite is foxy Maurice Evans, protector of the orthodox ape religion and culture. Fans of the series will be pleased with him and the film.

There's just so much great stuff in the second half, but the first half doesn't support it

[davidmvining · 6/10 · 31 August 2020]

In terms of follow ups to surprisingly great films that should never have had a sequel, Beneath the Planet of the Apes is almost the exact kind of movie that it should have been to come after Planet of the Apes. It expands the world of the film in a new and interesting direction, continues the feeling of weirdness that helped the original, and even moves the thematic ideas of the original into even darker directions. However, to even get to that the movie repeats the original, almost beat for beat, in its first half, introducing a new, not terribly necessary, protagonist, and spends so little time actually establishing the conflict that defines the second half that it all feels like wasted potential more than anything else.

The problems originated from the fact that Charlton Heston gave a flat refusal to starring in the sequel, eventually being talked into working on the film for two weeks total as long as his character of Taylor died. So, the writer and director decided that the best way forward was to give us a new astronaut, Brent, who had followed Taylor into deep space and ended up in the same place at the same time. That means that all of the revelations about the planet need to happen again to a character who's a full movie behind the audience. He finds Nova, follows her to Ape City where he discovers the upside down nature of the place, meets Zira and Cornelius for reasons, and then escapes again. At the movie's halfway point, he ends up in an abandoned New York City subway station and has his revelation in much smaller and less visually impressive environs than Taylor got at the end of the previous film.

Along with this action is some really ill-defined brewing conflict between the apes led by Dr. Zaius and General Ursus, a gorilla, and the Forbidden Zone. There's a line of dialogue about how scouts had gone missing which seems to be the sole motivation for taking an entire army into the Forbidden Zone, and it's thin stuff. The thing is that Dr. Zaius spoke in ways, at the end of the first movie, that seemed to indicate that the ruling class of the ape society knew a lot more about history and the Forbidden Zone than they told everyone else. It would have been easy enough to make the connection that Zaius knew of the mutant humans under the ruins of New York City, but not in any great detail, and assumed that Taylor was part of them, creating the argument that the mutants were expanding into ape territory, providing the impetus for the entire action. As it is, we spend so little time with them and so much time with Brent discovering what the audience already knows, that it all ends up as thin as possible.

The movie doesn't even really feel like a sequel until the second half once Brent and Nova go deeper into New York City through the subway. It feels like that's the actual beginning of the movie, and it should have been Taylor going in instead of this new character Brent. And the second half of the film has a bunch of stuff that I love. The mutants who worship an atomic bomb? Yes, please. I love that. They're wearing masks that look like real skin to hide their mutated selves beneath? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but I love it. The religious ritual that's held in the remnants of St. Patrick's Cathedral and uses Catholic prayers with bomb and fallout replacing any mention of God? I love it even more. It's the exact kind of twisted stuff that 60s and 70s science fiction excelled at. Another thing that that era of science fiction loved was nihilism (which made Star Trek stand out because it was hopeful in a sea of nihilistic science fiction), and the movie ending with Taylor blowing up the world because screw it, it all sucks, is something I love.

Not everything in the second half is great, though. The use of Brent requires a late introduction to Taylor that feels out of place. There's a fight scene that doesn't really work for me. And, most important of all, the conflict between ape and mutant was so thinly established that when the gorilla army shows up and attacks, it feels really empty. There are some surprisingly great visuals here like when the gorilla army is marching into St. Patrick's with the sole remaining mutant standing before the golden doomsday bomb, but they're empty because, again, the conflict itself is empty.

And, to top it off, I think that the inclusion of Brent wasn't just unnecessary from a storytelling perspective, but it was unnecessary from a production perspective as well. Some judicious use of body doubles and scheduling could have gotten Charlton Heston to carry his part of the movie completely in just a couple weeks of filming. The thing is that the ape society stuff needed to stand on its own without a human involved, having Taylor get lost in the mutant city early, spending time with Dr. Zaius to convincingly build the conflict with the mutants in the Forbidden Zone, and then leaning into the conflict as a continuation of the damnation of humanity that is the first film. I think it could have worked really quite well if there wasn't a need to remake the film unnecessarily in the first half.

Oh well, it's a mixed bad, but it definitely has stuff that works. Unfortunately, that stuff is outnumbered by the more mediocre material that supports it. It's far from one of the worst sequels to a great film ever made. It has too many interesting ideas and visuals to dismiss it completely, but it could have been better.

A blend of supernatural and nuclear

[AAdaSC · 7/10 · 31 July 2022]

This film is a direct follow on from the original as we follow the journey on horseback by Charlton Heston (Taylor) and Linda Harrison (Nova). At the same time, astronaut James Franciscus (Brent) and his captain crash land on the Planet of the Apes, also in the Forbidden Zone. Only Franciscus survives to explore the territory and meets up with the solitary Harrison. They ride together as we see flashback memories from Harrison as to the fate of Heston and Franciscus discovers where he has landed and sees the local residents. This duo are captured but eventually discover another society living beneath the Planet of the Apes.

I like how this film follows on directly from the original but it doesn't make sense for Franciscus to be part of a search party looking for Heston. I assumed he was part of a fleet that set off at the same time as Heston. That's the way it would make sense. In this film the gorillas take charge from the orangutans (or however you spell it) and force a military campaign. The chimpanzees, who were the intelligent group of doctors and scientists in the original, have now been down-graded to student-type time-wasters who carry out sit-down protests. That was obviously meant to mirror the anti-Vietnam war protests going on in real life at the time, but I found it a crass touch to be put into this movie.

However, the ending, once again, makes you think. Whilst the original film left you wondering about the origins and timeline of mankind, this film guides you specifically to what our destiny is. It has a very strong impact, especially in these times with lunatic leaders like Putin and Little Rocket Man from North Korea in possession of nuclear missiles, and other societies like Pakistan on the verge of developing them for themselves. I'm afraid the outcome for the human race is inevitable as, in time, it just takes one maniac to take everyone out. I just hope it is not during my lifetime.

I watched this film and then realized there is no point in denying yourself things that you like or that you may never get the opportunity to experience again. So, I immediately ordered a Chinese take-away as I like the crunchy water chestnuts that you get. It could be my last!

Action-Packed Worthy Sequel

[kevin-167 · 7 January 2001]

Very high quality sequel to the original. No, it was not quite as good as the original but the performances and the story were both strong. Just watched it on DVD and forgot about how creepy the underground mutant people were. Especially when they were chanting to their "god". James Franciscus gave a very good performance and Linda Harrison is simply HOT! The ending was a little too abrupt but the movie is well worth seeing and owning on DVD.

Fatuous extension of its predecessor

[moonspinner55 · 4/10 · 7 June 2006]

First sequel to 1968's "Planet of the Apes" makes a laughable attempt to continue with the story (the filmmakers really boxed themselves into a corner with the original, hindered further by star Charlton Heston, who didn't want to continue with his role). Heston-lookalike James Franciscus plays an astronaut searching for the original missing space travelers and gets caught in that same old time-warp wherein he's eventually confronted by the apes; he also discovers an underground army harboring an Atom bomb. Heston does make an extended cameo in the film, but getting his character in and out of the action proved to be too much--it just keeps getting sillier. Fetching ape-scientist Kim Hunter is hardly around this time, and what happened to Roddy McDowall as her partner? The film's production is fine, and the underground sets are incredible, but this installment is a pale imitation. ** from ****

A good sequel to a good film

[Ref65 · 6/10 · 30 April 2008]

Beneath the planet of the apes is a continuation of the first.Astronaut Brent is sent on a rescue mission to find Taylor and his whereabouts.Brent ends up on the same strange planet that Taylor did and is captured by the apes and suffers the same faith as Taylor did only in a shorter version.Brent also discovers a mysterious under ground place where mutants worship an atomic bomb as their god.Little does Brent know the ape army is trying to track him down and kill him.Brent gets reunited with Taylor but the ape the ape army are getting closer and time is running out.

Some bad acting and stupid parts of this film made me give it a 6 rating.This is a classic but to me its losing some of its magic.Recommended to Planet of the Apes fans,sci-fi fans and people who finds Planet of the Apes interesting.This is enjoyable to some but not all.I hope the next sequels are as good as this.

Horrible

[view_and_review · 2/10 · 3 April 2019]

This was horrible. Totally drained of any intelligence, any creativity, and certainly any originality. Everything that was good and admirable about The Planet of the Apes was missing in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. It was replaced with cheap special effects, inexplicable sci-fi, and a race of subterranean quasi-religious humans that seemed to have no real purpose.

I couldn't finish watching. I gave the movie an hour to correct itself and explain its new direction. It could not and did not, so I moved on.

A Souvenir from the Twentieth Century

[richardchatten · 6/10 · 24 March 2021]

James Franciscus gets top billing on this sequel, but producer Arthur Jacobs fortunately entrusted this (and the instalment that came after) to the sophisticated imagination of writer Paul Dehn, who nearly twenty years earlier had already shared an Oscar for his previous nuclear nightmare 'Seven Days to Noon'; and also wisely brought in Leonard Rosenman to write the new score.

'All Things Bright and Beautiful' will never be the same again once you've heard it chanted by the telepathic, cave-dwelling, bomb-worshiping mutants ("Glory to the Bomb and the holy fallout") who bear an eerie similarity to the ghouls Charlton Heston soon afterwards had to deal with in 'The Omega Man'.

Direction is by Ted Post, who also a good job on the underrated Harry Callahan dystopia 'Magnum Force'; while Linda Harrison once again resembles Raquel Welch's chic sixties cave girl in 'One Million Years BC'.

Still a good film

[r96sk · 7/10 · 26 February 2022]

Quite a far way off its predecessor, even if 'Beneath the Planet of the Apes' is still a good film.

Charlton Heston reportedly wasn't initially interested in returning for a sequel, though, to his credit, did in the end return briefly to tie up his character's loose end - and apparently even gave his fee to charity. That's why we don't see much of him here, which is a shame but given the aforementioned it came out well enough.

James Franciscus takes over from Heston and does a fine job, the latter is definitely the better of the two but Franciscus is passable. Kim Hunter, Maurice Evans and Linda Harrison do return, though the first two basically play second fiddle to others - including newcomer James Gregory's bunch of characters; Gregory is solid, fwiw. As for the film's other parts, make-up etc., it's basically the same as the original. The plot even feels similar for a fair chunk of this production, though it eventually goes its own way.

I'm even more interested to check out the subsequent sequels, given the ending to this 1970 film was apparently intended - by those on the ground, so to speak - to be the final entry; the studio evidently wasn't in agreement.

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes cannot be perceived as a full-fledged sequel

[eva3si0n · 7/10 · 28 July 2022]

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes cannot be perceived as a full-fledged sequel. It's just a direct sequel to the first film. I don't understand why the film has such low ratings. In Beneath The Planet Of The Apes, action takes place rapidly, a new faction appears and the franchise's lore expands significantly. And it seems that I now understand where Bethesda got its inspiration when creating the cult of the Atom)

Very Good Sequel

[betchaareoffendedeasily · 1 September 2023]

First of, the this can be cheesy as times, and it feels like there are a few obvious plotholes. Second, the ending was pretty daring, in a way, more shocking than the ending of the first movie. This is a series that took a lot of risks. I know the background of these films, making the first movie was a massive risk, but it was a huge cultural phenomenon. The makeup in these movies was so groundbreaking, it cannot be overstated how important these films were in advancing visual effects makeup and prosthetics. I recently watched the 2012 Planet of the Apes, and story wise, these films are superior and, in my opinion, the effects hold up better. The CGI in the 2012 version has not held up well. It's entertaining, but honestly it feels so much more surface level than these old films, it lacks the deep philosophical themes and became more of a popcorn action flick.

Charlton Heron is definitely woefully absent, he definitely boosted the first film, he is a much better actor than James Franciscus, who is kind of a Heston lookalike without the acting chops. He's just okay, more eye candy than anything. It's nice to see Nova again, and Linda Harrison does a fine job again. Most People will enjoy the eye candy, her outfit seems a bit more revealing than the first film.... All the Apes are well played again and believable.

On the whole, while I believe the way the plot progressed from the first film was slightly unbelievable and there are several big plot holes, somehow despite this, at the end, it still gels together and is entertaining. This wasn't written by Rod Sterling, and it shows, the writing is nowhere near the same level, the dialog is pretty bad, and again there are many things that don't make sense. Still, the themes of abuse of animals is there, but it is definitely on the backburner in order to push an anti-war message this time around.

The sets, makeup, costumes, everything is so well done, though many of the background cast members have masks rather than full blown prosthetics in order to save money. There is some really good makeup effects here, it's impressive what they've done. Of course theirs a deeper story here and it's not just surface level, there is a good cautionary tale here, and the pieces of the story are all there, the writers did not have the skills to pull off a great script, wonderful concept, mediocre writing, yet with all the other aspects of the film being so good, it ends up a good movie, but it cannot hope to match the quality of the first.

How could they mess it up THIS badly?

[paulclaassen · 2/10 · 18 June 2018]

How could they mess up a sequel so badly? This was not nearly as entertaining as the first film. What are the chances of another craft crash landing on the same planet the same year? The religious and racist elements are annoying. The film gets utterly ridiculous as it progresses and finally becomes almost unwatchable. The telepathic humans said at one point it is primitive to speak, but later in the film talks to each other anyway. Why? The visual effects are quite laughable at times. Give this film a skip.

Boring sequel

[veryape-887-913905 · 5/10 · 4 January 2014]

This movie had it's high and low points but i will remember it for it's lows this film stars James Franciscus, Charlton Heston & Kim Hunter in this sequel to the 1968 classic. Another astronaut named Brent (Franciscus) lands on the same planet as Taylor did in the first one on a reckless mission to find Taylor. This rescue mission leads beneath the planet of the apes where there lurks "mutant humans" who worship a nuclear bomb capable of destroying the entire planet. In my opinion this was an alright film but nothing special and a disappointing sequel to the first one, however if you enjoy the planet of the apes films you may want to give this one a watch.

**/*****

This is an okay sequel that is a huge stepdown from the original

[kevin_robbins · 6/10 · 15 January 2022]

Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) is a movie I recently watched for the first time in a long time on HBOMAX. The storyline follows another spaceship that was sent into the atmosphere to retrieve the passengers of the spacecraft from the first film when Earth lost track of it. Their ship crashes on the same planet as the ship from the first film and the lone survivor will face many of the same pitfalls as the first crew. He hunts down the main character from the first film in hopes of rescuing him and working together.

This movie is directed by Ted Post (Hang em High) and stars James Franciscus (Good Guys Wear Black), Linda Harrison (Planet of the Apes), Kim Hunter (A Streetcar Named Desire), Charlton Heston (Ten Commandments) and Maurice Evans (The Jerk).

This movie recycled so many elements of the first film, even casting a guy who looked like Heston and making him do virtually the same things. The underground civilization was a nice touch, though I am not sure I loved the mind control human plot. I will say the mask off moments were fantastic and contains great makeup, masks and special effects. The ending was solid but a step down from the first picture.

Overall this is an okay sequel that is a huge stepdown from the original. I would score this a 6-6.5/10.

Not bad (for a sequel)

[bowmanblue · 7/10 · 25 September 2014]

The original Planet of the Apes film was not just a classic, but - more importantly - a Surprise hit. Probably no one expected a sequel to be made, let alone so soon. And, as far as sequels go, it's quite good, even if it is a mixed bag.

It takes places literally straight after the events of the first film and we see the original film's hero (Charlton Heston's 'Taylor') riding off with his new girlfriend, only to run into some - unseen - trouble. But, hot on his heels, is another astronaut who has been sent to rescue him. This is where the story gets a bit odd. It's hard to put your finger on it, but you're given your original hero, only to have him taken away from you minutes into the film and replaced with someone who looks and acts a lot like him, but isn't him.

So we follow 'Taylor Mk II' as he too journeys into the kingdom of the apes (and all the trouble that comes with it). Then, it sort of glides from a sequel (i.e. new story) into a kind of rehash of the last one. 'New Taylor' meets up with the same apes and gets chased again then imprisoned (as Charlton did previously). However, the second half picks up. And, when I say 'picks up' I mean takes on an 'original flavour' while at the same time completely going in a different direction which doesn't feel like an 'apes' movie and more.

In case you haven't already seen it, I won't go into detail about what Taylor and his mate find 'below' the planet, but, even though it is a little weird sometimes, it is quite fun. It was certainly inventive for the time.

All in all, Beneath the Planet of the Apes is an enjoyable ride that falls victim of being a little uneven sometimes. Plus it would never entirely live up to the original due to being unable to match its predecessor's shock ending. Part 2 ends, in some people's opinions, unsatisfactory. I just thought it was different. But then the better part of the film was quite different, too.

Unique spin on the planet of the apes movies

[jordondave-28085 · 6/10 · 15 May 2023]

(1970) Beneath The Planet Of The Apes SCIENCE-FICTION

Continued where the first Planet Of The Apes had left off showcasing the Brent (Charlton Heston) galloping away while riding his horse with his mute girl friend Nova (Linda Harrison) sitting behind him until he came across an invisible opening which resulted to him to disappear unknowingly where he went to. The film then jumps to another astronaut who appears to be in the exact same situation as Heston did when he first crashed landed who personally had to bury his co-pilot, his name Brent (James Franciscus) and with some odd luck meets Nova. The film takes some liberties never seen before but with a pessimistic ending.

Good Premise Ruined By Downer Ending

[Eric-62 · 10 February 1999]

"Beneath The Planet Of The Apes" had a difficult, troubled production because of Charlton Heston's refusal to reprise his role as Taylor in anything beyond a cameo. As a result, what should have been an intriguing follow-up story to the masterpiece of the first film was seriously hampered as they were forced to use James Franciscus as a fellow astronaut looking for Taylor (which brings up a gaping hole in plot logic. The first film established that Taylor and his team were on a colonization mission, so what the heck is there a rescue mission?). Once you get past that bummer part of the plot, the film becomes a nice action/sci-fi thriller with a fascinating journey under the ruins of New York and the crazed mutants who have taken over. And then, the film is sadly ruined by a downer ending that incredibly enough Heston sold the production team on even though he had gone out of his way to contribute very little else to the film. The downer ending makes repeat viewing hard to do, and it also wrecks the fascinating possibilities that remained after the first film.

Does little to advance the mythology

[tomgillespie2002 · 5/10 · 27 August 2011]

With the recent release of franchise re-booter Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes, it seemed like a good time to re-visit the sequels to the original Planet Of The Apes film. The original is enormously popular even now and contains many popular quotes, but the sequels I can remember little of. I watched them as a child, but cannot recall which ones I saw and even if I saw them in order. This is the first sequel, I carries on immediately after we watched Charlton Heston on his knees in front of the half-buried Statue of Liberty at the end of the first.

Taylor (Charlton Heston) rides off on his horse with mute simpleton (and co-incidentally beautiful) Nova (Linda Harrison). When being met by a giant wall of fire, Taylor goes to check it out only to disappear into the side of the mountain. Meanwhile, an astronaut on a rescue mission who has followed Taylor's path, John Brent (James Franciscus), has crashed on the ape-ruled planet, and discovers the apes plans to march on a mysterious underground city they believe may be run by humans. With the help of friendly ape Zira (Kim Hunter), he gets there first along with Nova, only to discover it is run by strange telekinetic humans in crap costumes that worship their God - a nuclear bomb.

While this was a perfect opportunity to develop and enlarge the franchise's mythology, the decision to introduce the mind-reading humans was a bad one. The best thing about the original was the role-reversal of the apes and humans, the former being vastly intelligent and powerful while the latter being silent and enslaved. The humans in there cheap- looking futuristic costumes and rather silly abilities, clash with the original's ideals. And the fact that so little action is focused on the apes takes the magic out of it. Though Heston does appear in what could be called an extended cameo, new lead Franciscus is simply a bland carbon-copy of Taylor's character and does not share the acting chops and gravel-faced talents of Heston. Franciscus would spend the majority of his career starring in Italian giallo films, namely Argento's Cat O' Nine Tales.

When I was ready to completely write the film off, however, then came the completely depressing and quite shocking ending, which certainly bumped the film up a few notches for me. But apart from that, the film is rather bland, silly, and does nothing to extend or improve upon the original, which still remains a very solid sci-fi film.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Flawed, but worth watching

[Hudsconey · 7/10 · 11 January 2020]

As far as low-budget sequels go, Beneath the Planet of the Apes really isn't bad. They don't try to recycle all the same ideas the original had, but actually expand upon the Ape universe. You will have to suspend your level of disbelief a little (especially at the beginning which has several dumb moments), but as the movie goes on, tension starts building and the plot gets weirder and weirder until it all (literally) explodes with a very bold ending. In the end, I think Beneath is a worthy sequel to a classic sci fi film.

Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) ***

[JoeKarlosi · 8/10 · 16 February 2005]

I guess you could say that this first sequel to PLANET OF THE APES is a nostalgic pleasure for me; I got hooked on it as a child and while I still think it's an interesting followup to the original, as an adult I'm naturally more aware of its flaws. Yet it still works out as a good adventure film; less of a cerebral experience like PLANET OF THE APES, and more of a comic book story.

James Franciscus plays astronaut Brent, sent along the same trajectory as Taylor's (Charlton Heston's) old ship in an effort to rescue him. He crash-lands in the same vicinity as his friend, and goes through a similar nightmare when he comes to discover that the planet he's stranded on is dominated by intelligent, talking apes with a decidedly low opinion of mankind. General Ursus (James Gregory) is a war-hungry gorilla leader who's anxious to investigate strange unearthly occurrences in the Forbidden Zone with the aid of the ever-skeptical scientist Dr. Zaius (Maurice Evans in a reprisal of his role from Part One). Luckily, Brent runs into Taylor's mate, Nova (Linda Harrison looking prettier than she did in PLANET) and she is able to lead him to kindly chimpanzee couple, Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (David Watson this time; Roddy McDowall was busy directing a film). The pacifistic simians try to help their human friends along their journey to find Taylor, but Brent and Nova only succeed in getting themselves captured by gorillas anyway.

Up to this midway point in the film, all we're really seeing is a rehash of the first APES movie, which feels obligatory to set up the scenario. Where this chapter starts to develop its own identity and really take off is in its second half, as Brent and Nova escape and find themselves going underground (literally) in the Forbidden Zone and discovering the ruins of a ravaged city, along with a community of radiation-scarred mutations who have mastered mental telepathy and worship an atomic bomb as their god who has "created" them. And they know it won't be long before the Ape Army will invade their sanctuary.

Charlton Heston felt that sequels were not very challenging for an actor in those days, so at first he resisted appearing in this movie. He eventually agreed on what gradually evolved into a more extended "cameo" in BENEATH as a favor to Richard Zanuck, since the producer had taken a gamble on making the original film when Heston asked him to. The resulting sequel can be a downbeat and unusually pessimistic viewing experience, but in an odd way that actually helps to work in its favor. The next entry was ESCAPE FROM THE PLANET OF THE APES (1971). *** out of ****