The Planet of the Apes: Holes in the Plot

[Tom Terrific]

From 1968 and through almost 50 years later, there was an iconic sci-fi franchise created under the auspices of 20th Century Fox. I have not read the Pierre Boulle's novel, La Planète des singes, which this whole Apes film/TV thing is about. Is this a good book to read to make sense of the entire Apes franchise that followed for a half a century later or more?

My favorite actor in the whole franchise is Roddy McDowall. I have not seen any Apes media material following The Return of the Planet of the Apes animations by DePatie–Freleng/20th Century Fox originally aired on NBC Saturday mornings 1975-1976.

I, in my 57 years as a humanoid on Earth, have seen all five original Apes films from 1968-1973, five of 13 episodes of the short-lived 1974 television series and five of 13 episodes of the 1975 animated series.

In the original 1968 Charlton Heston film, there seems to be many questions in my mind regarding the whole Apes saga. The plot is complicated indeed.

1. Why did Dr. Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (Roddy McDowall) proclaim that manned flight was not possible when Taylor (Charlton Heston) demonstrated a paper airplane? Why did they, far off in Earth's future, have no knowledge of aircraft? When the apes took over the world, did they dispose of the records of most human knowledge, history and technology that preexisted the ape takeover about 1,500 years earlier on? Interestingly, the apes lived in Ape City which looked like a medieval setting with horses, crude buildings, no electric lights, no automobiles and certainly no aircraft or spaceships. Telephones, TV sets and computers seem to have gone the way of cavemen. By contrast, the 1975 animation shows the future apes with military vehicles, howitzers, modern buildings, radios and even an airplane they somehow managed to acquire. How technologically advanced were the future intelligent apes in Pierre's book? Did the apes acquire this technology from humans when they took the planet over?

2. How did humans get to be a dumb, and for the most part, speechless species in the ape world of the future? Nova could be barely be trained to utter a few words.

3. What is the true story behind the Underground People?


All APES fans, please chime in on your take on the whole Apes affair.

 

[Dave]

I think I did read an English adaptation of the original book. It's a very long time ago and the memory goes. The planet in the book was not Earth, or at least, it was not identified as Earth. They made the planet into Earth in the first film. The Statue of Liberty scene was thought up quite late into the film's development, but you would know that as a fan. Interviews about it are available on the internet anyway. It might be an all-time great film scene, but all of the plot problems that you identify follow on from that decision. You say that you have never seen the more modern films. Really! They are on TV quite frequently. Anyhow, they are mostly a rehash of parts of the earlier films and the plot problems become even more unlikely within those.

I agree that Roddy McDowell makes the films. He was great playing those kind of roles in films, much like Andy Serkis is today.

 

[farntfar]

Forgive me if I'm talking rubbish. I'm quite accomplished at that.

I have only ever seen the original film, and possibly one of the later ones on the TV, of which I don't really remember the details.

However the idea of denying the possibility of flight, and the absence of telephones etc. seems to me to conform to a fairly common post apocalyptical trope, where technology is shunned; being considered to be the reason, or at least the mechanism by which the apocalypse came about.

I remember a short story, by John Wyndham I think, where a boy rolls a round object across the farm yard until his grandfather screams and stops him, taking the object away before others see him. The grandfather is executed (I think) for committing the worst sin imaginable in their society; inventing a wheel..

 

[Tom Terrific]

In the 5th original film, The Battle for the Planet of the Apes, 1973, Ceasar (McDowell) becomes the new leader of the simians once the humans are subdued in the last man-ape battle for world control. He wisely understands that weapons, guns and ammunition, are to be retained for the future progeny of the intelligent ape civilization in the making. He did not want to carry other human inventions into the ape future as cars, telephones, computers, jet planes and such. He no doubt thought any technology derived from man should be limited and the history of the world before the ape takeover should be forgotten by future generations of simians and remaining humans alike. The intelligent apes created a new religion of the Sacred Scrolls based upon an ape god creator to construct their origins on the basis of religion. They fabricated this biblical account of their existence to hopefully forever suppress the knowledge of the world's past under human dominion. Ceasar may have gotten this notion from the man-made religion he had experienced while fostered since babyhood by the human circus owner (Ricardo Montalbán). Simply, Ceasar did not want his newly-created ape civilization to ever know about the past human civilization that was actually the forerunner of the apes' intelligent earthly civilization. Too much technology had been the ruin of man. A lesson Caesar wisely had learned at the time of the apocalypse. The Apes franchise seems to me to have some Orwellian undertones. Ape government was quite totalitarian. The peaceful chimpanzees were the most kind and understanding of the simians, however.

 

[Venusian Broon]

From 1968 and through almost 50 years later, there was an iconic sci-fi franchise created under the auspices of 20th Century Fox. I have not read the Pierre Boulle's novel, La Planète des singes, which this whole Apes film/TV thing is about. Is this a good book to read to make sense of the entire Apes franchise that followed for a half a century later or more?

Having read the book, I would answer your question with a probable no. As Dave says the film was based on the book and did not follow it. Although, elements of the book that the original planet of the apes did not use, were used in the Burton remake, so you may want to read the book to find these.

The book is very much political satire or allegory in a way that the original movie does not really take you. There are many similarities, with regards to the plot, but I'll not make major spoilers in case you do want to read it.

1. Why did Dr. Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (Roddy McDowall) proclaim that manned flight was not possible when Taylor (Charlton Heston) demonstrated a paper airplane?

There's a big difference between a paper airplane and manned flight. They would have easily observed birds flying about, no? But then see ans, below:

Why did they, far off in Earth's future, have no knowledge of aircraft? When the apes took over the world, did they dispose of the records of most human knowledge, history and technology that preexisted the ape takeover about 1,500 years earlier on? Interestingly, the apes lived in Ape City which looked like a medieval setting with horses, crude buildings, no electric lights, no automobiles and certainly no aircraft or spaceships. Telephones, TV sets and computers seem to have gone the way of cavemen. By contrast, the 1975 animation shows the future apes with military vehicles, howitzers, modern buildings, radios and even an airplane they somehow managed to acquire. How technologically advanced were the future intelligent apes in Pierre's book? Did the apes acquire this technology from humans when they took the planet over?

This is just from memory but my understanding of the films is that those in charge of ape civilisation were so horrified by the aggression of humans that after they 'won' they decided to not go down the path that humans went because that led to utter destruction. Therefore they avoided anything human, like their technology.

The society had castes based on species, as I am sure you know! - which kinda used some very old stereotypes i.e. gorillas being aggressive violent apes (chimpanzees have been observed being much more aggressive, I believe, not counting the lovely bonobos!).

Gorillas were the military caste, brutish and strong, orangutans were conservative religious and political caste, and chimpanzees were 'liberal scientists'. Society was effectively controlled by the orangutans and gorillas, both who kept the smaller chimpanzees in check.

I believe the lead orangutan tells Taylor that he is fully aware of the dig site and all that it entails about the previous human civilisation, but he and rest of the leadership of the society deliberately suppresses the findings and knowledge because of the above.

I think in the book, the apes did take over all stuff from the humans and carry on from there - they, in fact, have a space program where they send up humans to test their rockets (in a role-reversal of some of the US experiments in the early 1960s.)

2. How did humans get to be a dumb, and for the most part, speechless species in the ape world of the future? Nova could be barely be trained to utter a few words.

Again I think the film hints that its some sort of psychological impact of the intense destruction wrought be humans on themselves/apes that has scarred humanity forever. In the book it is 'cerebral laziness' (whatever that means.)

I personally don't buy any of those ideas, but both need some sort of mechanism for making the apes talk and 'civilised' and the humans dumb and 'animal' to make their plots/themes work.

3. What is the true story behind the Underground People?

Isn't it explained in the film? (There are no underground people in the book, btw)

 

[BAYLOR]

From 1968 and through almost 50 years later, there was an iconic sci-fi franchise created under the auspices of 20th Century Fox. I have not read the Pierre Boulle's novel, La Planète des singes, which this whole Apes film/TV thing is about. Is this a good book to read to make sense of the entire Apes franchise that followed for a half a century later or more?

My favorite actor in the whole franchise is Roddy McDowall. I have not seen any Apes media material following The Return of the Planet of the Apes animations by DePatie–Freleng/20th Century Fox originally aired on NBC Saturday mornings 1975-1976.

I, in my 57 years as a humanoid on Earth, have seen all five original Apes films from 1968-1973, five of 13 episodes of the short-lived 1974 television series and five of 13 episodes of the 1975 animated series.

In the original 1968 Charlton Heston film, there seems to be many questions in my mind regarding the whole Apes saga. The plot is complicated indeed.

1. Why did Dr. Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (Roddy McDowall) proclaim that manned flight was not possible when Taylor (Charlton Heston) demonstrated a paper airplane? Why did they, far off in Earth's future, have no knowledge of aircraft? When the apes took over the world, did they dispose of the records of most human knowledge, history and technology that preexisted the ape takeover about 1,500 years earlier on? Interestingly, the apes lived in Ape City which looked like a medieval setting with horses, crude buildings, no electric lights, no automobiles and certainly no aircraft or spaceships. Telephones, TV sets and computers seem to have gone the way of cavemen. By contrast, the 1975 animation shows the future apes with military vehicles, howitzers, modern buildings, radios and even an airplane they somehow managed to acquire. How technologically advanced were the future intelligent apes in Pierre's book? Did the apes acquire this technology from humans when they took the planet over?

2. How did humans get to be a dumb, and for the most part, speechless species in the ape world of the future? Nova could be barely be trained to utter a few words.

3. What is the true story behind the Underground People?


All APES fans, please chime in on your take on the whole Apes affair.

You might want to check out the novels

The Conspiracy of the Planet of the Apes by Andrew Gaska

The Death of the Planet of the Apes by Andrew Gaska

The anthology Planet of the Apes Tales from the Forbidden

 

[Tom Terrific]

Having read the book, I would answer your question with a probable no. As Dave says the film was based on the book and did not follow it. Although, elements of the book that the original planet of the apes did not use, were used in the Burton remake, so you may want to read the book to find these.

The book is very much political satire or allegory in a way that the original movie does not really take you. There are many similarities, with regards to the plot, but I'll not make major spoilers in case you do want to read it.



There's a big difference between a paper airplane and manned flight. They would have easily observed birds flying about, no? But then see ans, below:




This is just from memory but my understanding of the films is that those in charge of ape civilisation were so horrified by the aggression of humans that after they 'won' they decided to not go down the path that humans went because that led to utter destruction. Therefore they avoided anything human, like their technology.

The society had castes based on species, as I am sure you know! - which kinda used some very old stereotypes i.e. gorillas being aggressive violent apes (chimpanzees have been observed being much more aggressive, I believe, not counting the lovely bonobos!).

Gorillas were the military caste, brutish and strong, orangutans were conservative religious and political caste, and chimpanzees were 'liberal scientists'. Society was effectively controlled by the orangutans and gorillas, both who kept the smaller chimpanzees in check.

I believe the lead orangutan tells Taylor that he is fully aware of the dig site and all that it entails about the previous human civilisation, but he and rest of the leadership of the society deliberately suppresses the findings and knowledge because of the above.

I think in the book, the apes did take over all stuff from the humans and carry on from there - they, in fact, have a space program where they send up humans to test their rockets (in a role-reversal of some of the US experiments in the early 1960s.)




Again I think the film hints that its some sort of psychological impact of the intense destruction wrought be humans on themselves/apes that has scarred humanity forever. In the book it is 'cerebral laziness' (whatever that means.)

I personally don't buy any of those ideas, but both need some sort of mechanism for making the apes talk and 'civilised' and the humans dumb and 'animal' to make their plots/themes work.




Isn't it explained in the film? (There are no underground people in the book, btw)

The second film, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, 1970, James Franciscus, reveals humanoids who occupied the apocalyptical ruins of New York City. I believe they were mutants from the fallout of the atomic weapon. How they got the power of physical control by thought and creating lifelike but false illusions with their minds, I don't know. Accounts of underground and/or city ruins-dwelling humanoids also carried over into the final 1973 film, 1974 TV series as well as the 1975 animation series.

 

[Venusian Broon]

The second film, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, 1970, James Franciscus, reveals humanoids who occupied the apocalyptical ruins of New York City. I believe they were mutants from the fallout of the atomic weapon. How they got the power of physical control by thought and creating lifelike but false illusions with their minds, I don't know. Accounts of underground and/or city ruins-dwelling humanoids also carried over into the final 1973 film, 1974 TV series as well as the 1975 animation series.

It was a common trope coming over from the golden age of Sci Fi (say the 1950s to late 1960s) that 'atomics' and increased radiation would cause mutations in humans that would lead to them developing psychic abilities, such as telepathy, psychokinesis, clairvoyance etc... thus why these underground humans have the powers that they do in the films.

(for example, 1967 - Spiderman first appears, is bitten by radioactive spider, gains powers. Similar-ish reasoning - Radioactivity gives you powers! )

 

[Tom Terrific]

a trope, atomic themes were perhaps a trend of sorts in the sci-fi biz during the height of the space craze and the Cold War era

 

[BAYLOR]

The second film, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, 1970, James Franciscus, reveals humanoids who occupied the apocalyptical ruins of New York City. I believe they were mutants from the fallout of the atomic weapon. How they got the power of physical control by thought and creating lifelike but false illusions with their minds, I don't know. Accounts of underground and/or city ruins-dwelling humanoids also carried over into the final 1973 film, 1974 TV series as well as the 1975 animation series.

The first film had a budget of 7 million dollars . Beneath the Planet go the Apes had smaller budget at 3 million dollars and it shows in some the scenes. In some of the crowd scene you see some of the extras wearing what is very obviously rubber ape masks.

a trope, atomic themes were perhaps a trend of sorts in the sci-fi biz during the height of the space craze and the Cold War era

I was a Teenage Caveman, The Day the World Ended , Godzilla , World without End , Terror From the Year 5000, The World the Flesh and the Devil , On the Beach, Dr Strangelove and Fail Safe.

The mutant church service where they were worshiping the Alpha and Omega Bomb . Hilarious and chilling at the same time.

 

[Venusian Broon]

a trope, atomic themes were perhaps a trend of sorts in the sci-fi biz during the height of the space craze and the Cold War era

No perhaps about it. I grew up in the 1970s and remember all the various strands about all these things, like: nuclear weapons, atomic power, radiation, psychic powers etc... at the time.

The 70s in SF was a transition period between bright progressive futures of the earlier Golden Era, to darker, more dystopian and pessimistic worlds. Of which Planet of the Apes certainly fits!

 

[BAYLOR]

No perhaps about it. I grew up in the 1970s and remember all the various strands about all these things, like: nuclear weapons, atomic power, radiation, psychic powers etc... at the time.

The 70s in SF was a transition period between bright progressive futures of the earlier Golden Era, to darker, more dystopian and pessimistic worlds. Of which Planet of the Apes certainly fits!

Along with such films like , The Forbin Project , Silent Running ,TXH 1138, Soylent Green ,The Omega Man, Zardoz , A Clockwork Orange , A Boy and His Dog and The Love War

 

[Dave]

Zardoz

No one knows what that that was all about

 

[BAYLOR]

No one knows what that that was all about

One among the Eternals helped bring about the development of Zed and his people as a means of destroying the Tabernacle which was machine that created the eternals wearingly unending eternal life. Deep down, the Eternal wanted die but ththoey figure out a way to destpyr the Tabernacle. When Zed accomplished his goal and fretted the Eternals , he found , that couldn't go back to his old life the experiences that he had among them and the truth that he leaned , had changed him .

That's my take on it. This is far better film then is given credit for.

 

[Venusian Broon]

No one knows what that that was all about

It was about a sexy Sean Connery in skimpy cloth speedos with bandoliers, obviously:

I jest, I actually quite like the movie, maybe not great but interesting!

EDIT: Great boots on the left hand side!

 

[Stuart Suffel]

Ouch! Rough Bond.

Re Humans and speech, if a human does not hear speech before 7 or so years old, he or she will NEVER learn speech language, according to the (once) widely accepted Language Acquisition Device Theory by Chomsky. So, once the parents are wiped out, and no one above 1 is left alive, the ability to speak language is also wiped out.
Scary, huh?

 

[Venusian Broon]

Ouch! Rough Bond.

Re Humans and speech, if a human does not hear speech before 7 or so years old, he or she will NEVER learn speech language, according to the widely accepted Language Acquisition Device Theory by Chomsky. So, once the parents are wiped out, and no one above 1 is left alive, the ability to speak language is also wiped out.
Scary, huh?

There is a theory that only one gene change led to the acquisition of language, a sort of massive beneficial mutation. (no idea if that is true, but the genetic evidence is interesting...) So one could contemplate a world where a virus 'edited' out this gene and rendered subsequent human descendants unable to communicate.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

There is a theory that only one gene change led to the acquisition of language, a sort of massive beneficial mutation. (no idea if that is true, but the genetic evidence is interesting...) So one could contemplate a world where a virus 'edited' out this gene and rendered subsequent human descendants unable to communicate.

Yup. Dumb Humans is the least difficult to believe part of Planet of the Apes...lol.

 

[Tom Terrific]

Ouch! Rough Bond.

Re Humans and speech, if a human does not hear speech before 7 or so years old, he or she will NEVER learn speech language, according to the (once) widely accepted Language Acquisition Device Theory by Chomsky. So, once the parents are wiped out, and no one above 1 is left alive, the ability to speak language is also wiped out.
Scary, huh?

The future intelligent apes, upon taking control of man, then must have just taken the human young from their speaking mothers at a very early age to keep them primitive dumb, and pretty much speechless. Of course, the subsequent generation of human mothers, once made dumb by ape captivity, would not be able to instill speech into their children. Human dumbness in ape captivity would just become a family tradition to be passed onward. Human masters once kept human slaves from books and other stuff of learning to keep them stupid and therefore submissive and servile. The black slaves in America still had a certain degree of speech. Knowledge is power and authority. The scientific chimps (Zira, Cornelius, Milo) thought it was NATURAL for humans to be speechless, and therefore dumb, however. What a surprise when (Charlton Heston) Taylor spoke, "Get your paws off me, you damned dirty ape!" Nova could be trained like a parrot to utter a word or two.

How the non-human apes themselves evolved, both vocally and cerebrally, to talk is another mystery to the plot.

Scientifically speaking, man is a GREAT APE himself, although a smooth-skinned one.

 

[BAYLOR]

The future intelligent apes, upon taking control of man, then must have just taken the human young from their speaking mothers at a very early age to keep them primitive dumb, and pretty much speechless. Of course, the subsequent generation of human mothers, once made dumb by ape captivity, would not be able to instill speech into their children. Human dumbness in ape captivity would just become a family tradition to be passed onward. Human masters once kept human slaves from books and other stuff of learning to keep them stupid and therefore submissive and servile. The black slaves in America still had a certain degree of speech. Knowledge is power and authority. The scientific chimps (Zira, Cornelius, Milo) thought it was NATURAL for humans to be speechless, and therefore dumb, however. What a surprise when (Charlton Heston) Taylor spoke, "Get your paws off me, you damned dirty ape!" Nova could be trained like a parrot to utter a word or two.

How the non-human apes themselves evolved, both vocally and cerebrally, to talk is another mystery to the plot.

Scientifically speaking, man is a GREAT APE himself, although a smooth-skinned one.

They might been better off to have ended the series with just the first two films.