Beneath the Planet of the Apes

Name: Beneath the Planet of the Apes
Genre: Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
Released: May 26, 1970
Duration: 95 min
Rating: 46
Cast: James Franciscus, Kim Hunter

1970

METASCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 9 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 44 Ratings

See All

5.2

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5.2	Your Score
5.2	User Score Mixed or average reviews based on 44 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes

Now Playing: Beneath The Planet Of The Apes

Movie Details & Credits

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: May 26, 1970 | G

Starring: James Franciscus, Kim Hunter

Summary: The sole survivor of an interplanetary rescue mission searches for the only survivor of the previous expedition. He discovers a planet ruled by apes and an underground city run by telepathic humans.

Director: Ted Post

Genre(s): Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi

Rating: G

Runtime: 95 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Noel Murray

The craziest installment of the Apes series starts out as an almost point-for-point remake of the 1968 original, somehow making it even darker and stranger. Read full review

Time Out London Staff (Not Credited)

This sequel to Planet of the Apes isn't bad, but degenerates the original conception into routine comic strip adventure. Read full review

Empire Ian Nathan

Those with the patience to sit through a slow first half will be rewarded with another gutsy ending. Read full review

Chris Tilly

A workmanlike sequel, it lacks the wit and intelligence of its predecessor. Read full review

IndieWire Staff (Not Credited)

The original Planet of the Apes is a hard act to follow, and Beneath the Planet of the Apes isn’t really up to the challenge. Read full review

Keith Phipps

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes is a joyless retread that at least has the distinction of ending with the nuclear annihilation of Earth. Read full review

Staff (Not Credited)

This sequel to the 1968 smash, Planet of the Apes, is hokey and slapdash. The story [by Paul Dehn and Mort Abrahams] and Ted Post’s direction fall far short of the original. Read full review

SEE ALL 9 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

gracjanski

Mar 11, 2020

It is true, that this sequel cant compete with the masterpiece of the 1968 movie. But still I enjoyed it and the conclusion in the end is serious. Yes, some of the things were a bit ridiculous. But still I liked, that this movie showed a bit more of the world, yet it could be more: theyIt is true, that this sequel cant compete with the masterpiece of the 1968 movie. But still I enjoyed it and the conclusion in the end is serious. Yes, some of the things were a bit ridiculous. But still I liked, that this movie showed a bit more of the world, yet it could be more: they could show a big kingdom, who is going to a war with another kingdom, but they showed a village and a abandoned underground station.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

r96sk

Feb 25, 2022

Quite a far way off its predecessor, even if 'Beneath the Planet of the Apes' is still a good film.

Charlton Heston reportedly wasn't initially interested in returning for a sequel, though, to his credit, did in the end return briefly to tie up his character's loose end - and apparentlyQuite a far way off its predecessor, even if 'Beneath the Planet of the Apes' is still a good film.

Charlton Heston reportedly wasn't initially interested in returning for a sequel, though, to his credit, did in the end return briefly to tie up his character's loose end - and apparently even gave his fee to charity. That's why we don't see much of him here, which is a shame but given the aforementioned it came out well enough.

James Franciscus takes over from Heston and does a fine job, the latter is definitely the better of the two but Franciscus is passable. Kim Hunter, Maurice Evans and Linda Harrison do return, though the first two basically play second fiddle to others - including newcomer James Gregory's bunch of characters; Gregory is solid, fwiw. As for the film's other parts, make-up etc., it's basically the same as the original. The plot even feels similar for a fair chunk of this production, though it eventually goes its own way.

I'm even more interested to check out the subsequent sequels, given the ending to this 1970 film was apparently intended - by those on the ground, so to speak - to be the final entry; the studio evidently wasn't in agreement.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

eva3si0n

Jul 28, 2022

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes cannot be perceived as a full-fledged sequel. It's just a direct sequel to the first film. I don't understand why the film has such low ratings. In Beneath The Planet Of The Apes, action takes place rapidly, a new faction appears and the franchise's loreBeneath The Planet Of The Apes cannot be perceived as a full-fledged sequel. It's just a direct sequel to the first film. I don't understand why the film has such low ratings. In Beneath The Planet Of The Apes, action takes place rapidly, a new faction appears and the franchise's lore expands significantly. And it seems that I now understand where Bethesda got its inspiration when creating the cult of the Atom)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

omnicritic

Sep 2, 2021

The original one was the masterpiece. But this one is a piece of something unpleasant.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

kman5473

Jul 25, 2017

I remember liking this movie as a kid, but after re-watching it recently it became apparent that this movie does not hold up. This sequel brings Planet of the Apes from an American classic sci-fi, to a d-list action movie. After doing some research it is obvious that the executive producersI remember liking this movie as a kid, but after re-watching it recently it became apparent that this movie does not hold up. This sequel brings Planet of the Apes from an American classic sci-fi, to a d-list action movie. After doing some research it is obvious that the executive producers in charge HAD NO IDEA WHAT THEY WERE DOING! Their first mistake: turn down Rod Serling's ideas. Mistake 2: turn down the original author's ideas. Mistake 3: require Charlton Heston to appear in the film, despite the fact that he is NOT the protagonist, and then hand off the terribly-written movie to an actor that looks nearly identical to Heston. There is a skeleton of great ideas and themes, but no delivery or substance. This movie is worse than the Tim Burton Planet of the Apes, and I mean that without any hyperbole.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

bluebeardtattoo

May 5, 2019

По сравнению с первой частью, этот фильм нудный и неинтересный. Введение нового героя было лишним...

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

imthenoob

Nov 4, 2018

The quality of the writing takes a nosedive after turning down ideas from the writer of the original film and the author of the book it was based off. And to replace your quality lead actor, Heston, with someone who looks exactly like him is laughable, Especially when his replacement lacksThe quality of the writing takes a nosedive after turning down ideas from the writer of the original film and the author of the book it was based off. And to replace your quality lead actor, Heston, with someone who looks exactly like him is laughable, Especially when his replacement lacks the obvious onscreen presence that Heston had in the first film. And just to highlight how bad this movie was written, I will leave you with just two words: Telepathic Humans.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

SEE ALL 7 REVIEWS