Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)

Potential Kermode February 14, 2017

★ 10/10

**James Franciscus versus the mutant lunatics!** A great, dark sequel to the original classic that goes beyond the downbeat ending of the original and gives us an even more depressing one! No mean feat considering how bleak the ending to the first movie was. I love this movie. The legendary James Franciscus _(The Valley Of Gwangi_) is astronaut Brent - sent to find the missing Taylor. He finds him, of course, deep _beneath_ the ruins of a post apocalyptic city - imprisoned by _psychotic mutants_ with the power of telepathy. Meanwhile, those _pesky apes_ are marching on the city to find out just what the hell is going on and what all the kerfuffle is about regarding reports of _crucified apes and bleeding statues._ This all leads to a shocking climax _you wont forget in a long time._ It's all rather disturbing and that is precisely why it succeeds. - Potential Kermode

Wuchak October 11, 2018

★ 8/10

_**Classic Sci-Fi Adventure with a KILLER Ending**_ Of the five original "Planet of the Apes" films only the first one (1968) and this sequel, "Beneath" (1970), are truly great and worthwhile. The three prequels devolve in quality: "Escape from" (1971) has its points of interest and amusement, "Conquest of" (1972) is okay, but too one-dimensional, and "Battle for" (1973) is weak. "Beneath" is the only actual sequel, hence, both the original and "Beneath" should be digested as one long story. The plot revolves around astronaut, James Franciscus, landing on the ape planet in search of Taylor & his crew. He makes contact with a primitive babe who knew Taylor (Nova, played by jaw-dropping Linda Harrison) and then embarks upon a quest to find him, leading first to the ape city and then to the "forbidden zone," a holocaust-ruined wasteland with a cryptic underground refuge. Growing …

Nutshell August 3, 2019

★ 7/10

Enjoyable mostly due to returning cast members, this first sequel could have been so much more. Sadly, this has "money grab" written all over it. Heston was reluctant to return, and only agreed once promised his character Taylor would die. One can only wonder what might have been had he been more enthusiastic, perhaps a decent plot and script? Sigh...

r96sk February 26, 2022

★ 7/10

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 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 chun…

CinemaSerf June 8, 2023

★ 5/10

Charlton Heston's "Taylor" returns to top and tail this otherwise pretty poor sequel that features James Franciscus as "Brent". He, too, is an astronaut who is fleeing the wrath of the apes when he meets up with "Nova" (Linda Harrison). That's lucky because he's looking for "Taylor" and she was his gal for a while. Might she be able to lead him to him before the pursuing militia string them up? Well, she does lead him to an underground city that's populated with human religious zealots who have remarkable telepathic powers and worship a (golden) nuclear missile as their god. Yep, it's all a bit weak around the knees this. It's over scripted, there is nowhere near enough action to sustain it and I have never really understood Hollywood's flirtation with the Heston-esque Franciscus who looked ok with his shirt off, but really offered very little when it came to characterisation. I quite li…