Customer Reviews

Conquest of the Planet of the Apes [VHS]

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Conquest of the Planet of the Apes is by no means "a very bad film" as the first reviewer here put it. It's actually a very well thought out film that does reflect some of the social upheaval in the United States during the late 60's and early 70's. Planet of the Apes films have always been a comment on the social climate during the period they were made.

Conquest is the darkest film of the Apes series, and the two different versions on the Blu-ray disc have varying levels of violence. The uncut version is very in your face and bloody and ends on a very violent note, which if you discount the fifth movie in the series Battle for the Planet of the Apes, makes a perfect transition to the first Apes film which is set after Conquest chronologically. In the first Apes film men are hunted for sport by apes, used for medical experiments and treated like animals. It was a pretty violent film for it's day as well.

The PG rated version of Conquest ends on a much more upbeat note that the timeline may have changed and that things might not end up so badly. There is still violence but not as much blood as the uncut version. It's really great to be able to see both versions of the film so that you can see where the film makers originally intended it to go and what the test audiences did not like about the movie before it was re-edited.

The film was directed by J. Lee Thompson who also directed The Guns of Navarone. And the look of the film is very deliberate. I suppose one could complain as the previous reviewer did that the artistic use of colors in the film is distracting, but I feel it shows that the creators of this film actually put some thought into how they wanted the audience to react to the characters and environments on the screen. One also has to remember that this movie was made several years before Star Wars came on the scene and changed the way we look at special effects in science fiction films. But for the period it was made in the costumes and effects are very well done. Personally I love the look of the city in the film but then I'm a bit of a apes fan to begin with.

Anyway in my opinion this is my favorite of the Apes sequels. If your an apes fan or you've seen the first three but never checked out the fourth, the Blu-ray version is the one to get. You get to see both versions of the film in very good video quality with great sound as well.

I just watched this last night after having not seen it for at least twenty years. Compared to all of the other "Apes" sequels, this one holds up the best for me.

"Beneath" feels like "Apes" lite: I kept thinking, "When are we getting back to Charlton Heston?"
"Escape" is probably the silliest to me (although it has one of my favorite soundtracks in the series.)
And "Battle" just comes off as cheap and shoddy. Most of the run time is spent in a grove of trees with treehouses.

In "Conquest", I like the colors of the apes' jumpsuits. I also like the sets, and the use of Century City was a great choice as the nameless "futuristic" city of 1991. The actors did a good job. Don Murray made a wonderful villain and Ricardo Montalban and Roddy McDowall were both excellent.

If you're hyper-critical and are going to be bothered by a reality check, you probably shouldn't watch movies like this one (or maybe ANY movies, because they're an escape from reality.) If you enjoy sci-fi with a fascist Orwellian setting (kind of like the present time we live in) this is fun.

This is the forth installment in the POTA's series and I'm aware that this film was severely cut before releasing it in theaters. Fortunately they have restored the edited scenes in an extended version available only on Blu Ray. This was done to "Battle for" on standard DVD a few years ago. The theatrical release of the film is pretty good, but a bigger budget would have helped it a great deal. The problem with most of the POTA sequels is that they were pushing for a G rating so kids could go see them. This is the studios idea, not the directors of the films. The sequels are too middle ground. Too violent for the kids, but too tame for adults! I don't mean to be harsh on these films as I am a big fan! I saw them all at the theaters growing up and have seen them many times now. This is a good film that could have been much better....hopefully the Blu Ray extended version retores the original vision of the story. The DVD transfer is very good and I will add more once I've watched the Blu Ray.

That one was supposed to come and we waited twenty years for it to come, but it came of age and here we have it at the tips of our fingers on the DVD console. This tale is so simple that it is in a way emotionally overwhelming. How can we accept to see some humans mistreating their servants and home pets that they have turned into slavery. Let's revisit America and the auction block and the electric shocks and the torture and the humiliation and the sex on command and the procreation for a profit. Dirty old town indeed, if it is Los Angeles, well the angels are having nightmares right now. It is amazing how romanticism may still inspire our rather weak minds. The point is that we feel sorry for these poor souls that are mistreated and victimized but at the same time we do not see and don't want to see what may and will and shall happen if that goes on too long. Sooner or later there will be a big bang somewhere in our social constellation. And the film tries to be factual about a revolution of unarmed apes taking over the city against machine guns with just a little bit of wit, massive participation and determination. The flaw of our romanticism confronted to that blunt violence and the words of it can only make us afraid. Let's fear what we cannot control and let us kill ahead of time all those who may possess the words of that revolution. How sad because this film could have been a lot more powerful in drama and tragedy. No death on any one side of a revolutionary battle is acceptable, even if it is the tyrant that has just been ousted, even if some kind of a trial has been organized in the urgency and emergency of the moment so that there will be no discussion when the steam has come down. My time be long, my time be short tomorrow or today unjust causes always come to an end, and all causes that do not respect everyone, including one's opponents, not to speak of one's enemies, is doomed to come to a sad and cruel end and the defeat is at the end of the road, even if you get out of it without any remorse. Without any remorse, my foot. This film is remorse building for you humans who are not even able to accept what god has decided to do. We are nothing, we are nothing, we are nothing, nothing but a smite of dust in the sunshine of the Lord.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 8 Saint Denis, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID

The fourth movie in the "Planet of the Apes" series is a decent albeit no-frills affair. Roddy McDowall once again stars, this time as Caesar, the son of Cornelius (who he played in earlier films) and Zira. Caesar is the only talking ape on Earth, although he's been hidden by circus owner Armando (Ricardo Montalban). When Armando takes Caesar into public for the first time, he relates to Caesar how apes came to become the #1 pet in the country, which also serves as narration for the audience. Apparently, a plague from space killed all the dogs and cats in the 1980s, and Americans turned to apes and other primates to replace them. By 1991 when the film is set, though, humans essentially have turned primates into slaves, forcing them run errands, clean their homes, and even work as waiters in restaurants. However, all of that will soon change once Caesar is discovered by the fascist Governor Breck.

"Conquest of the Planet of the Apes" is weaker than the prior three movies in the series. The final battle, in particular, is kind of ridiculous and suffers from the film's low budget; unfortunately, the weakness of this section undercuts the social message of the movie. Another debit is the lack of explanation regarding how the US had become an oppressive society so quickly since the last Apes movie. Incidentally, if you haven't seen the first three films, you probably will be totally lost, as "Conquest" is quite dependent on the Apes mythology. Despite these weaknesses, "Conquest" is a relatively enjoyable movie. What I found most interesting was how the makers of these movies managed to make each one different in plot and tone - "Conquest" wasn't just a rehash of the prior entries, preventing the series from falling into predictability. Although I found "Conquest" to be rather lackluster, it was good enough to make me want to see the fifth and final Apes film, "Battle for the Planet of the Apes."

Near future for the 1970s, that is. A good movie and one of the ones that rarely gets rebroadcast today. In this one Caesar, the son of two apes from the far future whi were sent back in time, has grown to adulthood and must hide his identity from the State, which is determined to prevent the takeover of the world by intelligent apes. They are pretty ruthless in their methods, needless to say.

This movie got back to the true tradition of PLANET OF THE APES. It wasn't all lovey-dovey, it was repressive dominance, that leads to revolt. The portrayal of poor simian conditions was excellent, it really makes you sympathize for them... eventhough you know they're gonna start ruling over us...

The shock value is excellent and most of the reviewers nail that factor. However, too many plot holes exist in this movie. The government sends in its troops in small batches and fights them man to ape. No gas. No tanks. No air power. Why fight a mob like that hand to hand when you have helicopter gunships? They also didn't use even standard infantry tactics, just marched them in there straight up. Guess they never heard of setting up an ambush. I know the point they were trying to make but I laugh every time I see the battles as there is no way any military commander would fight as these troops did.

This installment was excellent!! It got back to the original in the sense that it exploits ape behavior that we would otherwise exhibit. This is ape filming at it's top: almost as good as Escape, without the emotional ties that kept us rivetted. Still, this is as good as any film on the social revolution in the sixties. We have been presented with revolution based on freedom on a larger scale than we could produce. "This is the planet of the apes!!"

The year was 1972. The Vietnam War was slowly coming to an end, the civil rights moment had been a success, and black power was taking over the U.S.A.

"Conquest of the Planet of the Apes" was directed by J. Lee Thompson, and stars Roddy McDowall, Ricardo Montalban, Don Murray, Natalie Trundy, Hari Rhodes, Severn Darden, Lou Wagner, John Randolph, Asa Maynor, H.M. Wynant, and David Chow.

It is part IV of the Ape Series. This is a sequel that I think requires the viewer to at least see part III to fully understand what's going on in part IV. You won't be completely confused if you're a first time Ape viewer since part of the history of the Apes films is covered in dialogue however.

The story takes place in 1991. We the audience learn that eight years earlier in the year 1983, a disease killed all the cats and dogs, leaving human beings with no pets. To replace them, people took in Apes as their pets. Because the Apes have so much intelligence, humans train them to perform chores and run errands. By 1991, the very foundation of the United States of America is based on the backbone of Ape slave labor, proving that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

However, in the minds of most of the humans, this is different. Yes, the U.S. Constitution says "All Men are Created Equal", but it says no such things about Apes. Clearly the majority of Americans in this film just cannot let go of the concept of slavery. Since they lost their human slaves over a hundred years earlier, things can now get back to "normal" for American society by coercing Apes to replace their human slaves. While Apes are smart, they are still just animals, and are not entitled to the same rights as humans. At least this is how many of the humans in the film think. The state is run with a strict hand by a man named Governor Breck who has no mercy on the Apes.

Circus owner Armando and a young circus chimpanzee named Caesar go to a local city to promote Armando's circus. Caesar is highly intelligent, and knows how to talk. He has spent his entire life sheltered, and living in safety with Armando. When he goes to the city, and see's how Apes are treated, he finds this to be highly upsetting. Armando warns Caesar not to speak, or otherwise, Caesar could be enslaved. Can Caesar hold in his anger?

MY THOUGHTS -

The film presents a clear case against animal cruelty, and it has so many parables that I could ramble for hours discussing them, and dissecting them, so I'll only discuss the White/Black issue that is clearly present in "Conquest".

I've had the displeasure of having conversations with White Supremacists and Black Supremacists before. It's interesting how both groups have two things in common - They are both racist, and plenty of them are fans of the Planet of the Apes films. For the Black Supremacists, the films serve as a Black Man's fantasy of getting revenge against White men. For the White Supremacists, the films serve as a warning to White people that if they do not control Black people, they could rise up against them.

I mentioned "The Birth of a Nation" in my title - For the unaware, "The Birth of a Nation" was a black and white silent film from 1915. The second half of that film is about White men forming the KKK and rising up against the former slaves who had taken over the South.

I believe this film is in a sense a response to it - It shows the audience exactly why any group of slaves would be angry, and would have no mercy on their former masters, but also presents the question - Is it still morally right to react with so much violence and hate?

"Conquest" completely mirrors the original Planet of the Apes, only the roles between Apes and humans are reversed. "Conquest" is by far the most darkest and most disturbing of the Apes films. Some may argue that this film is anti-white, and stereotypes white men as all being dominating, heartless, power-hungry monsters. On that note, one of the reasons I think that "Conquest" is so much emotionally darker then the other Ape films is because we the audience are so use to seeing White men in charge, in both films, and in real life, that perhaps it's less-disturbing seeing them in a slave role like we saw in the first two Apes films, but in "Conquest", we are treated to a subconscious *disturbing* reminder of how the U.S.A. use to be when it had human slaves. I also could not help but think of Nazi Germany when watching this film.

The truth is, White men will never face the hell others have faced. The Roman Empire, The British Empire, The French Empire, The United States of America, Nazi-Germany, and The Soviet Union were all formed by White men, and were (and in the case of the U.S.A., is still) very powerful nations.

Jokes about White men, or films that make some White men look bad are nothing compared to what we White men have actually done. We all subconsciously know who has ruled this planet for the most part. I think that's why films like "Conquest" get away with so much, and why you'll never hear too much protesting if a black comedian makes jokes about White men. Those are all just words, and do not damage the White race or what it's done, and still does.

I am not trying to be racist against my own race, since it was White men who helped Black people, and plenty of others get the rights they finally were given. I am just addressing the issue of if this film places White men in a bad light, and why even if it does, why we White men should not be offended. That's another thing about "Conquest" - It's not dated, and can still easily spark controversial discussions about human rights.

There are no heroes or villains in "Conquest". Just people doing what they think is right. If you're familiar with the first two Apes films, then I think we the viewers should understand Governor Breck's fears and his anger. Governor Breck clearly knows what will happen to the human race if the Apes rise against them, so it makes sense that Governor Breck would be so strict on Apes.

I think a very clear message with the Ape films to the public is that any corrupt system is wrong. I also think while the films support civil rights, it is saying to the black audience that while they were entitled to be angry for what happened to them, that they should be better then their oppressors. That they should not stoop themselves to the level of the KKK and behave as they do, and that is with violence and hatred.