The first time I've watched this was likely on the SciFi channel sometime in the late 90s or early 2000s. I had heard of it, of course, even knew the ending through pop culture osmosis.
So watching it was one of those odd experiences of knowing all the edges of the culture jigsaw pieces but not the center.
Let's watch!
Now, this is a late 60s film, although you'd swear it was a 70s film given Heston and the greasy Technicolor we later find in the likes of Omega Man or Soylent Green.
Surprisingly, this film was written by the same scriptwriter for Bridge Over the River Kwai, and co written by Rod Serling.
That Rod Serling. Really.
In doing some research this morning, I also found out it's based on a French novel. It would have been the Eiffel Tower and not the Statue of Liberty.
I do admit the cinematography of the opening scenes are great. The small, cheap, but somehow real enough feeling space ship, followed by the brown mesa hardness of the "alien" planet.
All these deliciously widescreen shots are some real eye candy.
The film really seems to be going out of it's way to make Taylor (Heston) into a colossal jerk. He's mean to his shipmates, bitter about being stranded some 2000 years into the future.
Is this his arc? Are we supposed to empathize with this toothy jackass?
"If this is the best they've got in six months, we'll be running this planet."
After that line, it's hard not to read this film as a racist metaphor. I had been hoping that my recollection was wrong, but as the second act kicks off it's hard to avoid it. Given racist depictions of black people and the fact nearly every human character in the film is white...you see what I mean.
Taylor is *awful* at non-verbal communication. I've done better myself when I lost my voice.
The nice bit of this film is how Zaius is quietly positioned as the antagonist. First just a look, then wiping away the sand Taylor had written in. Finally, crumbling away the toy plane. Interspersed with conversation between Cornelius and Zira, we're cleverly let in on the political nature of the world in which Taylor finds himself with no exposition.
It's some solid writing, as expected for Serling.
And there's the misogyny. Ewww...
The sets are delicious in this one. It's easy for them to come off as crude, yet, instead they feel naturally inspired rather than unsophisticated.
I also forgot just how much of this film, indeed the entirety of the third act, is a trial. There's some good acting in here from the characters in heavy makeup.
What's most surprising is Zaius. While he puts on a good act during the trial, in his office it approaches Taylor like an intelligent being. He converses as if it's perfectly normal. In so doing, he hints at even further worldbuilding. He knows something, as hinted by his choice of words: "...and deservedly so."
Good, good stuff.
The music continues to be enjoyable in this. It's surprisingly minimalist for Jerry Goldsmith, but it fits the mood so well.
Of course, we're all waiting for it. The Serling-esque twist. It's not unsurprising how much of the mystery has been kept tantalizingly just out of reach.
In the cave, that mystery is right in front of us. The obvious conclusion is there, but the film is still holding out, letting our assumptions be brittle but not yet shattered. Propping this up is the secrets held out by Zaius.
No, Zira, you're right about him.
"You may not like what you find."
I love this bit. I've long suspected that as part of becoming the Defender of the Faith, Zaius went into the forbidden zone, and saw very much what Taylor finds. It was a rite of passage, to understand the real burden that was upon simian society.
@socketwench - One of the things I like about Serlings writing is that there is rarely someone who is a despicable antagonist. There's a reason for their ass-holery. And you ALMOST...just ALMOST...feel for Zaius when you realize his assholery comes from trying to protect the present from a harsh past, and that harsh past from returning.
The end doesn't justify his means, though.
