Planet of the Apes

Each new movie is linked with the previous one. Each new movie is worse than the previous.

The first film begins with a good fiction and amazing adventures.

The second film tries to follow the example of the first.

The third starts a new story and slightly changes the subject.

The fourth film in the genre Thriller.

The fifth film continues to develop the Thriller.

I would be divided two category. The first and the second film is more in line with fantasy and adventure, others hold a different theme and different story. For a General overview is enough to see the first film and finish this.

For movies 70-ies of — great quality. Special attention should be paid to monkeys. Person alive, now, with facial expressions and all related. To see them is a pleasure.

Further details on each of five films.

1. Planet of the apes — Planet of the Apes (1968)

8,5

Interesting. Look like read the book. Almost two hours flew by.

I love this kind of fiction when described a new culture, customs, laws. I like it very much. I have only read Burroughs, and can compare the film with his novels. It was very similar and good.

The film is based on the book. The book I have not read, but think the book is better.

There's only one story — for the modern movie is a little.

Relations with the New is not shown. Absolutely! And I were hoping. I'm sure in the book about them was described in detail.

As a single of the film — too small. But as a lot of films, I expect the further adventures.

The idea is that the ending is the bomb. Yes, unexpected, but me why not impressed.

2. Under the planet of the apes — Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)

7,6

Already as gripping as the first part.

Looks fast.

It seems to be again bomb ending, but again, not impressed.

3. Escape from the planet of the apes — fight the Planet of the Apes (1971)

7,5

A completely different subject.

Not a bad ending. If you topantispyware, the bomb. But again, not impressed.

Between to talk about the story of the origins of monkeys, how they came to power. At than tell those who in the first part told a very different story. I not like it. If have there's this one, then you need to adhere to.

4. Conquest of the planet of the apes — Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972)

6,9

The continuation of the third part. Genre flowed into action. To watch becomes not interested.

But the game monkey becomes more remarkable. Gait, behaviour, attitudes. It seems that they really real.



5. The battle for the planet of the apes — Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973)

6,5

The action takes place 27 years after the fourth part. Although it would take 300 years. The authors contradict themselves. To keep familiar characters, was replaced with a period of 300 years;over the short term.

All stupid and illogical. Monkey, who yesterday fought for a banana, now philosophize about moves with the speed of light. Ugh! All zapaganili.

For a pentalogy planet of the apes:

7,4 from 10

When he finally decided to have a look at one become familiar "Planet of the apes", and that is, the last ("War" in 2017), I, for starters, appealed to the information franchise found that the film is 9-m series.

There's I was desperate and decided to get acquainted with all, beginning, of course, with first.

Seeing the year of film production (1968), very disappointed, but decided impartiality for the sake to look old.

And stood in front of the screen already in the first 15 minutes.

Embarrassed at first by the ancient special effects, but the main character presented by wise thoughts made not looking up, continue browsing to the end.

The movie's great for spiritual content.

I can say that recently, I didn't look so pleasant intellectual cinema under a kind of entertainment.

Discuss ideas, without doubt, are fundamental for civilization.

Thoughts transmitted in the dialogues, undermine the very essence of this age-old philosophical question of how the meaning of life of intelligent beings.

Yes, not I met among modern cinema, flashing before my eyes the motley band of special effects, but does not affect the brain, such depth of research of essence of the person.

Along with the open ending of the film is not closes the most important practical question — you do mankind the fratricidal slaughter of the animal or of the same mind small moral part of mankind is still able to maintain a faint spark of intelligent life in the Universe? The only — the humanity of the planet Earth.

Assessment? Surprizingly I really puts

10 of 10

Sometimes it happens that the film fails in all respects. Planet of the apes — is one of the most successful examples.

Visual solutions is impressive. Even in our days, masks, monkeys seem quite plausible. The scenery, of course, it would be possible to make a more stylish — but the proposed version is quite normal.

Directing Franklin J. Sheffner — accurate and professional. The Director combines an interesting narrative style, philosophical parable and sad story. At this, Seffner no never allows for bias in one or other side. It the film is kept as an elite cognac — just but however, after viewing the remains the a good impression.

This is best to estimate the end. Emotionally intense scene, the is not enters the excessive pathos. I am sure that it these points is determined by the talent of the Director. Yeah and the statue of Liberty proved very useful.

Think about the plot, nothing specific to speak not worth it. I just recall that talking about the travel of three astronauts who crash on unknown the planet. On this planet, extremely similar to the Earth, instead of people ruled by apes. People are considered to be wild animals — they can speak and neither that does not expect.

The subtext of the plot is simply brilliant. With the one hand, we are talking about anti — the viewer is without will be able to perform alternative forms of human development and social structure. And, with the other hand, we see elegantly retouched criticism of contemporary social order — the most absurd forms which, without difficult to notice in the world monkeys.

Special words deserve and actors. It is known that Edward J. Robinson and James Brolin was supposed to play the main role in this picture, but because of different reasons, so it not starred. Despite the star status of actors — no lost. I saw them samples. Robinson, of course, was good, but was not worse.

What as for the lead actor — Charlton Heston, so it's just a class. Heston immensely lucky: its texture is superimposed on the playing the way. However, the most important thing is that actor and played. In largely because of the perfect acting job of the Heston — the film was a success.

By the way, is not by chance that Heston then do another in three dystopias: the sequel to "planet of the apes", "the omega Man" and"Green soylent".

In summary: a masterpiece that you can still talk. Can only recommend, immediately to see the second movie — "Beneath the planet of the apes", in fully revealing the theme of

10 of 10