Conquest of the Planet of the Apes

Well, we might as well continue what we've started. While I'd seen the first three Planet of the Apes movies growing up on multiple occasions, I can't say the same for the last two movies in the series, 1972's Conquest of the Planet of the Apes and 1973's Battle for the Planet of the Apes. I've seen bits and pieces of both but never all the way through in one sitting. And away we go!

It's 1991 in North America, some 20 years since the talking apes, Zira and Cornelius, were murdered along with their baby...but it wasn't their baby. Things have changed around the world, a mysterious virus killing every single cat and dog on Earth, humans turning to apes/monkeys to be their pets. That changed quickly though, their mental capacities showing they're not so worthwhile as pets, but as slaves. It's been eight years, apes and chimpanzees used as janitors, delivery men, waiters and so many other tasks and jobs. That baby though that was supposed to have died? He didn't, and now he's 20 years old, still with loving-life Armando (Ricardo Montalban), who is now bringing the 20-year old intelligent, talking Caesar (Roddy McDowall) to the big city for the first time. Caesar is stunned and disgusted at what he finds, and when he becomes separated from Armando he's forced to adjust or reveal his secret.

Watching the Apes series in fairly quick succession, I've came away impressed. This fourth entry, this one from director J. Lee Thompson who had been in talks to direct the first movie, certainly qualifies. Is it a classic film? No, but fans of the series and science fiction in general will no doubt enjoy it. This series has impressed me because the original 1968 Planet of the Apes is a classic stand-alone science fiction film. It doesn't need any sequels. There are some questions we'd like more answers about, more background, but we know the truth, what really happened. Following the first sequel, 'Beneath,' the series found a way to survive and evolve -- whether intentionally or just lucking into it -- by bringing all five movies full circle. It's a nice touch, and each movie is different from its predecessor. Similar themes, tones, even some actors make it from movie to movie, but in an age of repetitive sequels, it's cool to see original, different sequels like this.

For this third sequel, there's a time jump.....into the future of 1991!!! 'Conquest' was filmed on location in Los Angeles at Century City, an appropriate, sparse and ultra-modern look for the visual of what Earth would have looked like in 1991....from a 1972 audience. Basically the entire story takes place in this one complex, the human rulers trying to limit and control the problems among the ape slaves. The apes are getting smarter, showing more initiative, being more disobedient. Add the very intelligent and very disgusted/motivated Caesar to the mix, and we've officially got an issue. There are points where things feel rushed in an 88-minute movie, another 10 minutes maybe fleshing it out some, but continuing what the series has laid out, this is a particularly dark, brutal story. What we see is even a tamed version of the original ending. It's not graphic (these movies were still considered "family movies") but the violence can be disturbing at times.

As has been the case for the first three movies, the key is the characters, whether they be heroes, villains or somewhere in between. That's what I found interesting here. Do we want to root for the evil, despicable humans who abuse slaves? Or do we root for the revolting apes to....wipe out mankind? Hhhhmmm, well, that's a toughie. It can be an uncomfortable movie to watch at times because of that dynamic. McDowall returns to the series, playing Cornelius' son (so technically his own) Caesar. It's a very good part for McDowall, fiery and angry, the match that sets off the explosion that's been waiting to happen. Hidden away from what society has become by Montalban's Armando, Caesar hasn't seen the darkness the world has to offer, until now. The rage inside him begins to grow and when he gets the proper motivation for revenge, he begins to planning the revolution, assembling and building, waiting for his time. A very good part for McDowall, especially his monologue in the final scene.

Again stealing the show is Montalban as the likable, charming and idealistic Armando, more Caesar's surrogate father than owner. It's not a huge part, but it is definitely a memorable one, Montalban again stealing all his scenes. Don Murray is nicely cast as Breck, the sadistic governor of the city, convinced that a talking ape is out there and hellbent on finding and killing him. Hari Rhodes plays his assistant, McDonald, an intelligent, thoughtful man, who has a bond of sorts with Caesar after they meet, and Severn Darden plays Breck's enforcer on his other shoulder, Kolp. Natalie Trundy continues her participation in the series, playing Lisa, a female ape, after already playing a mutant and a doctor in previous movies. John Randolph appears briefly in an update of a monologue he had in 'Escape' as well.

The portrayal of the future can be uncomfortable to watch at times. Breck and his fellow officials wear black and dark clothing, his soldiers wearing completely black uniforms that make them look like Nazi stormtroopers. The apes on the other hand wear green and orange jumpsuits, the color jumping off the screen. As I mentioned, I was surprised by how this story developed. The actual conquest in the final act of the movie is intense to say the least. The ending is startling, even if it was edited to be a little more tame. Still, I liked this sequel a lot and can't wait to see where the series goes in its finale. As well, it's hard not to notice how much this sequel inspired the Apes reboot, 2011's Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Just saying.

Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972): ***/****

Escape from the Planet of the Apes

Sometimes a series is too successful to just let it end naturally. Following the success of Planet of the Apes and Beneath the Planet of the Apes, Fox Studios wanted another sequel, but there was a problem. Without giving too much away, the ending for 'Beneath' well....didn't really leave any opening for a follow-up. That's what screenwriters are for and ta-da! The series continued! A third movie in the series, 1971's Escape from the Planet of the Apes.

On a warm sunny day off the coast in southern California, a spaceship is discovered floating in the Pacific. The ship is brought ashore, the Army waiting to welcome the astronauts on-board but no one is sure where the spaceship came from or who is in fact on-board. Those waiting are stunned when the three astronauts remove their helmets, revealing themselves as apes. The three astronauts? Dr. Cornelius (Roddy McDowall), his wife, Dr. Zira (Kim Hunter) and Dr. Milo (Sal Mineo). The arrival of talking, intelligent apes stuns the world, forcing the government to decide what to do with the ape trio. Some are welcoming, Cornelius and Zira especially becoming instantly famous in pop culture. Others though aren't so welcoming, questioning where these apes came from and what is their intention in coming to Earth? Both sides need to find a happy medium, but some are sure the presence alone of these futuristic astronauts is a threat to the future of mankind.

So as we talked about, Beneath the Planet of the Apes didn't leave much of an opening for the series to continue, Charlton Heston insisting that be it for the series. Money is a powerful motivator though, isn't it? The series continues, but back on Earth in modern times. Director Don Taylor begins the second half of the series, catapulting the franchise in a different route for its final three films, composer Jerry Goldsmith returning as well with a great score. The premise linking 'Beneath' and 'Escape' is a tad contrived, a tad forced when you think about how 'Beneath' ended but for the sake of where the series is going, it's not so bad. Why does it stand out from the rest?

Two reasons. McDowall and Hunter. Playing Cornelius, McDowall returns to the series after being unable to to star in 'Beneath' because of a scheduling conflict. Less than pleased with her characterization in 'Beneath' (or maybe lack of), Hunter returned because she liked the script. The story is a departure from the first two movies, but this returning duo is perfect. Where we saw Heston's Taylor and James Franciscus' Brent struggling to adjust in a simian world, we now see Cornelius and Zira going through the same struggles in a human world. Where everything else has changed around them, having a spouse is a constant. Their chemistry is perfect, two intelligent individuals deciding what should be their next step, how best to survive in this human world. They have these perfect little moments, Cornelius trying on suits, Zira trying on stylish dresses, Cornelius standing up for his wife, Zira fighting for respect that carries the story surprisingly well on an emotional level.

It's cool to see Cornelius and Zira -- key supporting parts in the first two movies, still supporting parts -- step into the lead roles. That added dimension carries the movie. Who else to look for? Bradford Dillman and Natalie Trundy as Lewis Dixon and Stephanie Branton, two doctors and animal psychiatrists who become almost public relations representatives for Cornelius and Zira, but more importantly, they become trusted friends. Eric Braeden is Dr. Otto Hasslein, the scientific adviser to the President (William Windom), who questions that if these apes come from Earth's future...why did they leave?  It's Eric Braeden so yes, he's a villain. Mineo makes the most of his smallish part as Dr. Milo, the third ape to travel through time with Cornelius and Zira, while Ricardo Montalban is a scene-stealer as Armando, the charming, friendly owner of a circus who works with Lewis and Stephanie. Also look for Jason Evers and Albert Salmi as Braeden's two henchmen, while John Randolph is the head of the commission investigating what to do with the visiting simians.  

There are portions of this movie that are really sweet, great emotional moments that work because of the chemistry between McDowall and Hunter. Following the trend of the first two movies though, things take a turn for the dark though near the halfway point of the 98-minute movie. The time travel aspect comes up, if someone from the future knows what's going to happen, can we change it by wiping them out? We discuss issues of nuclear war, experimentation on animals, prejudices against races and cultures, but it is all handled in subtle enough fashion that it works. The ending is pretty heartbreaking in itself, but as the series has set us up for, there's a great twist in the final scene. Definitely stick with it to the final credits.

Another worthy Planet of the Apes movie, throwing us for a loop but all for the interesting. Coming up next, the final two films in the series, Conquest of Planet of the Apes and Battle for the Planet of the Apes, neither of which I've seen in one sitting. Stay tuned!

Escape from the Planet of the Apes (1971): ***/****

Seconds

Can an ending to a movie save the whole movie? Today I watched 1966's Seconds after taping it last week off of TCM.  The first 80 minutes or so I absolutely hated, bored to tears and hoping the ending would salvage something out of this wreck.  Surprisingly enough, I was rewarded.  How often does that happen?  A movie you're not enjoying actually gets better?  No way.  But still, the build-up was excruciatingly dull at times in an effort to be different.  So did the ending save the movie?

Director John Frankenheimer is one of my favorite directors with his unique visual style and storytelling ability.  His critics use those things against him, saying that his movies often lacked heart.  True to a point but not as a broad, all-covering statement for a director that made his fair share of classics.  His 'Seconds' is a deeply flawed movie and one that certainly qualifies as heavy on style, short on heart (until the end at least).  It tries to be too different, too groundbreaking in delivering an interesting story that would have sufficed on its own.

A middle-aged loan officer at a bank with a wife and kids, Arthur Hamilton (John Randolph) is in a rut.  He's incredibly on edge after he receives several calls in the dead of night from an old friend, Charlie, who Arthur believed was dead.  Charlie delivers an ominous message for Arthur to go to a specified address.  He somewhat suspiciously goes along and discovers a company that offers people a second chance in life.  For a fee, their death is faked and through extensive plastic surgery they are reborn and given a new life.  Arthur agrees and in his new life is Tony Wilson (Rock Hudson), a young painter living in California with absolutely no responsibilities.  But Arthur/Tony quickly realizes maybe his life wasn't so bad in the first place.

The story itself is pretty trippy and appropriately came from a source novel.  Kudos to the author on originality.  But that unique-feeling of the story is slowed down to a snail's pace as it is revealed.  The premise is great, but Frankenheimer spends too long on the reveal.  I won't say he's showing off with the camera, but some shaky-cam and in-your-face shooting is evident in the early segments.  The reveal itself with Jeff Corey playing an executive of the 'Seconds' company is pretty good, if somewhat confusing, but post-surgery the slow pacing comes back.  One really bizarre sequence has Tony and his new girlfriend, Nora (Salome Jens), taking part in some weird hippie wine-making ritual.

It is in his new life that Tony realizes he still has all the same problems he used to have.  He even breaks down and goes and sees his "widow," posing as an old friend of her dead husband.  This is when the movie picks up in terms of storytelling, style and a twist so perfect I wouldn't even think of blowing it here.  The ending twist isn't one that is hinted at other than a throwaway line early in the movie so when it comes, it should hopefully catch you completely off guard.  Credit to Hudson in these final scenes for some of the most emotional, wordless acting I've ever seen.

Other than the obvious physical differences between Randolph and Hudson -- and a 10-year age difference -- that makes the transformation a little too remarkably well done, I have no problem with the acting.  Randolph is a depressed middle-aged man looking for a second chance but at the same time is wary of an offer that seems too good to be true.  Hudson delivers maybe his best performance as Tony, an older man trying to live again as a younger man.  At times a little over the top, his part is still dead-on.  Corey and Will Geer are frighteningly calm as two executives at 'the company' with Richard Anderson as the brilliant surgeon rounding out the unholy trilogy.

So all that said, it's hard to recommend this one.  The first 75 minutes was extremely difficult for me to watch, even with a very visual style that borders on showing off.  Great movie to look at, sure, but in terms of story I wasn't interested.  And that's with an incredibly innovative premise!  However, the ending is a perfect mix of paranoia, fear and realizing your mistakes too late.  Know that the first 3/4 of the movie can be difficult to get through, but the ending makes those struggles worthwhile.

Seconds <----trailer (1966): **/****

Serpico

Starting off his Hollywood career, Al Pacino started off with an incredible run of performances beginning with 1972's The Godfather.  It continued with Serpico, The Godfather 2, and Dog Day Afternoon.  The common link?  He was nominated for an Oscar for each performance -- one supporting nod and three lead roles -- and somehow didn't win even one.  How he didn't win for Godfather 2 just confuses me, but that's for another time.

1973's Serpico is based on the real-life trials of Frank Serpico, a New York City cop who went against the grain in trying to be the best cop he can be.  There are two types of performances Pacino does when he's at his best.  One, think Scarface or Any Given Sunday, where he is over the top in almost every scene.  He's effective doing that because he commits so whole-heartedly to the part.  Two, there's Serpico, Heat, The Godfather trilogy, where he plays a highly intelligent, relatively calm character who has moments of huge, emotional outbursts.  I prefer him with the second option, and as much as I love Michael Corleone, Pacino's Frank Serpico might be his all-time best performance.

From as long as he can remember, Frank Serpico (Pacino) has wanted to be a police officer.  He graduates the academy and becomes a patrolman at an NYC precinct.  But right away, Serpico sees being a police officer isn't everything it's cracked up to be.  He wants to do his job as best he can without all the corruption that goes on behind the scenes.  Serpico refuses to take any pay-offs in any form and quickly draws the ire of superiors and co-workers.  He bounces from precinct to precinct with the hope of finally gaining detective status and the gold shield that comes with the position.  But after years of seeing this corruption, Serpico realizes he has nowhere else to turn and must take action against the rampant illegal activities crippling the police force.

Getting his nomination the second time around, Pacino lost to Jack Lemmon in 'Save the Tiger' which I haven't seen, but I assume it has to be pretty great.  Lemmon also beat out Jack Nicholson (The Last Detail), Marlon Brando (Last Tango), and Robert Redford (The Sting).  Playing a real person can be a daunting task so Pacino met the real-life Serpico and followed him around for several weeks, and it pays off.  By a certain point in the movie, it doesn't feel like Al Pacino playing a cop.  You're just watching Frank Serpico.  And as a character study of a man who just wants to do what he think is right, this movie is a classic.

Taking place over several years, the story follows Serpico's police career so other characters -- in his professional and personal life -- drift in and out.  The one constant is Pacino who is in just about every scene in this 129-minute flick.  He presents Serpico as a pretty even-keeled guy who is genuinely confused when a fellow officer hands him an envelope full of money.  He clearly never thought of this as a perk of the job and doesn't know what to do.  This situation builds and builds over the years because Serpico gains a reputation as being untrustworthy because he doesn't take the pay-offs.  As a cop, he works as a plainclothes officer, growing a thick beard and generally looking like a hippie with his clothes.  And that's usually a good sign for me in judging a role, Pacino becomes Serpico.  I'll have to check out 'Save the Tiger' but it has its work cut out because this was a great performance.

In bringing this story to the big screen, director Sidney Lumet wisely chose to film on the streets of New York.  We're not talking downtown Manhattan either with locations including Brooklyn, the Bronx, and Queens helping bring the gritty story to life.  Parts of New York City in the 1970s certainly had a rundown look so a plainclothes officer working the streets had to blend in.  As Serpico points out, 'our undercovers wear black shoes and white socks.'  Translated? They stick out like a sore thumb. Some of the better supporting parts here include Jack Kehoe as Keogh, a fellow officer trying to convince Serpico to go along with the others, Tony Roberts and Edward Grover as two police officers who side with the much-maligned Frank, and John Randolph as Chief Green, a higher-up in the police department.

The one flaw I can point out is that the last 30 minutes gets a little repetitive but not enough to derail the movie, not by a long shot.  Pacino's performance is too strong and doesn't allow the movie to derail in any form.  The ending is a bittersweet one that tells what Serpico ended up doing later in his life.  The real-life Frank Serpico is a fascinating individual with Pacino and Lumet painting a great picture and a great movie of his heroic actions.  Definitely check this one out.

Serpico <----trailer (1973): *** 1/2 /****