Planet of the apes (1968)

Ideas have been influenced by a review on the ideology of the interaction of mankind with its environment in Planet of the apes.

‘Planet of the Apes’ is a 1968 American science fiction film directed by Franklin J. Schaffner, based on the 1963 French novel ‘La Planète des singes’ by Pierre Boulle. The film stars

Charlton Heston and Roddy McDowall. It was the first in a series of five films made between 1968 and 1973, all produced by Arthur P. Jacobs. The film tells the story of an astronaut crew headed by Taylor who crash-lands on a strange planet in the distant future. Although the planet appears desolate at first, the surviving crew members stumble upon a society in which apes have evolved into creatures with human-like intelligence and speech. The apes have assumed the role of the dominant species and humans are mute creatures wearing animal skins.

From the ideology in this review: http://appraisercentral.com/research/Planet%20of%20the%20Apes.htm, it is seen that the apes portray humans to send an indirect message about the nature of mankind. This review can be said to be  ideologically influenced because it indirectly shows a shared set of belief about the world. The author sees the world as being full of faults; a world that is entangled in lots of problems, one of which is religion. In the movie itself, from the beginning to the end, the viewer is shown a picture of a world ruled by a heavy handed government, and led by apes that represent the church and state alike. Planet of the Apes opposed one of the founding principles of the United States which is the stagnation in science, and close-mindedness in religion as exemplified by the Dr. Zaius, the main character as the “Chief Prosecutor and Defender of the Faith”. The author points out: "One of the founding principles of the United States of America is a division of church and state. To us, having one individual controlling both seems not only preposterous, but dangerous. The American mind immediately concludes that a system such as this will lead to stagnation in science, and close-mindedness in religion." and from this it is understood that the author agrees with it. He believes that the church and the states cannot go hand in hand.  There is another section where the author talks about the scientist Cornelius attacking the religious belief of mankind and the review later on states: “Charles Darwin challenged religions view on the origins of life in the 1800’s, and frighteningly similar things occurred to him.” The word 'frightening' here shows the ideology of the speech. Maybe what the author means here is that people are not allowed to voice out their opinions and they can be persecuted for free speech. Maybe in the western liberal ideology freedom of speech is permissible to a very high extent but in other countries, life can be at risk.


Also, from: “Planet of the Apes deals with a great number of issues that come up in everyday society. If one looks closely at the story it is very easy to realize that Planet of the Apes is not at all about apes, but a story about the human condition, and the way humans interact with their natural environment, about the dangers of religion, and even more powerfully a warning about the dangers of a politically active church.” It is seen that Planet of the Apes is a political allegory and that is the way the world functions.  With slight evidence of tact, the movie still tackles issues like racism, class divisions, and the dangers of close-mindedness whereby the apes treat the humans as assets. Within ape society, there is flagrant social structure, based on species. The  chimpanzees are the scientists and thinkers, the orangutans are the politicians, and the gorillas are the warriors. Of the three, the chimpanzees are considered of being of the lowest class. Just like the societal hierarchy; working class, middle class and upper class. In this culture, free thinking is not allowed, and, when Zira and Cornelius try to encourage new ways of regarding human beings, Dr. Zaius intervenes and he proves Zira and Cornelius wrong in the Kangaroo court. Some of Planet of the Apes' social criticisms aimed at the racist mentality that still infiltrated a large section of the United States at that particular time.

Yet there are two ways of interpreting the lessons the film teaches. On one level, Planet of the Apes deliberately cautions individuals not to repeat the past. While on another level, the director could be giving views by screening that we did not acquire from our preceding and are therefore doomed to replicate it. These are interpretations that wholly depend on the individual seeing the film.

Serling who created “Twilight Zone” (still the best television series ever), wanted to write about social and political issues but knew that these were (and still are) hot topics. So he made a simple reversal in evolutionary roles to express his views, which also belittled with the ideas of the turbulent 1960s. Though targeted at youth, Planet of the Apes was made to make all people who had not endorsed into the sixties ideology think twice about the world they lived in, and turmoil all their ideologies and make them vision the world differently. The discussion between Taylor and Dr. Zaius is one meant to encourage individuals to question the government, and the information it gives them. It can also be seen that Planet of the Apes hopes to show people that religion is merely an apparatus meant to keep society in line so that people can be dominated by a power hungry government. Though written for the sixties, thirty years later Planet of the Apes still carries a message, and one that is still valid in today’s political climate.

References: http://appraisercentral.com/research/Planet%20of%20the%20Apes.htm