 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OF THE APES,
strike you as pretty cheesy with the them just running the footage back and forth as Milo is saying "Mama, Mama, Mama!"?
I remember it always bothered me. Reminded me of running my Super 8 movie projector in reverse to see dead guys rise up and run backwards.
ESCAPE FROM THE PLANET OF THE CHEESE.
Just that ending kind of ruined an almost perfect and entertaining movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEUWkI98kQw
I'd say it was "cheesy", but it creeped the SHIT out of me nevertheless!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The I remember it, I watched movies and TV a little differently back then. It was just understood that some things were difficult or impossible to get on film, so I was understanding when the seams would show.
In the future (twenty years? five years?), some of today's biggest "comic universe" crap-taculars will look cheesy because you can totally tell that the huge battle scenes are CGI. But right now, the faithful just understand that that's the best Hollywood can do.
All they had to do was show the baby chimp say "Mama" only once, let the shot go immediately to black, and then have "Mama" repeated over and over a few more times, receding and echoing into silence.
Simplicity in itself.
That would have been a LOT better. So I'd have to admit that in this case, the O.P. has a point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It makes me wonder if the film editor was high when he did that scene or was it really an editorial decision to do that?
I barely remember seeing it, but there's an Albert Brooks movie (Modern Romance, 1981) where he plays a film editor working on a sci-fi epic. And the director is with him in the editing suite, ordering Brooks to make terrible mistakes out of pure vanity, or what you might call "auteur blindness." Because if the director envisioned it just so, then just so must be brilliant.
Also, there's a youtube video out there somewhere that shows how bad Star Wars ('77) would have been if the film editor had not been so incredibly talented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aside from Conquest, they were all rated G, which is both fricking NUTS and shows how the wold has changed.
SPOILERS for 40-50 year old films ahead...
Planet of the Apes was an intense ride of cruelty to humans with very adult themes of violence and inhumanity.
This paled compared to BENEATH which ended with Brent being shot in the head (a nice close up of the wound and his eyes wide with shock) followed an instant later by his body being riddled with machine gun bullets, leaving a bloody streak on the wall as he slid lifelessly to the floor. Taylor, shot in the chest, lays his blood soaked hand on the doomsday switch as he kills EVERYONE. This film scarred me as a young un.
ESCAPE just made it worse, with the VERY likable apes being slaughtered. Cornelius' death was the most horrible to witness because he had become such a fun, lovable goof. His sputtering death cry and then his graphic fall moved me to tears and depression. And, no, they did not cut the scene on TV.
CONQUEST was INSANELY violent, and even at PG (or GP) is was blood soaked and uncompromising. The director's cut is even worse. It would be a hard R today, at the very least.
BATTLE felt like a TV movie, dumbed down for kids, but still very violent and with a child ape's death, it probably should have been higher than a G, but it still was a Children's Television Workshop school-day presentation compared to the prior films.
All of this just adds to my love of the series. Warts and all, it's fun and thought provoking sci-fi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONQUEST was INSANELY violent, and even at PG (or GP) is was blood soaked and uncompromising.
Edit: never mind, I looked it up. GP was the same as PG after all.
Good post, btw!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
