| ||||||||||||||
Planet of the Apes
Essay Planet of the Humans? Brian Roizen March 9, 2006 “The
book was better than the movie!” – A claim almost every intelligent
reader makes. While films and movies often hold the same titles,
they are innately different. In other words, they are only the same
nominally. While the ideas in books and movies may often be similar,
the story is essentially different. The time difference between
Pierre Boulle’s 1963 Planet of the Apes, and Franklin J.
Schaffner’s 1968 film version of Planet of the Apes is not
very large, which might give reason to keep the ideology and story
exactly the same. However, the movie and book versions of Planet of
the Apes are dichotomous so that each can have a distinctive
ending.
The split in story actually takes place from the very
beginning. The reader is given the initial foreboding in the
chilling words: “I am confiding this manuscript to space, not with
the intention of saving myself, but to help, perhaps, the avert the
appalling scourge that is menacing the human race.” (Boulle 9).
After reading the title of the book, it is not very hard to guess
what this appalling scourge is. Nevertheless, the story begins with
a journey to a region of space that is powered by the brightest star
in the constellation of Orion, Betelgeuse. Boulle begins the journey
in the year 2500, and uses Einstein’s theory of relativity to
explain how a spaceship traveling at the speed of light minus
epsilon, can travel a really long distance in only two years, while
350 years pass on Earth. The astronauts come to a planet which bears
“a strong resemblance to Earth” (Boulle 19). However, this planet is
not Earth, and is thus Christened Soror. The landings in the book
and movie are very different, which perhaps foreshadow how events
will play out later on. The book landing articulates that the ship
“came down gently and landed without a jolt in the middle of the
plateau, on green grass reminiscent of [the] meadows in Normandy”
(Boulle 20). On the other hand, in the movie, something goes awry,
and the astronauts inadvertently make a crash landing in a large
body of water. In fact, they are awoken from deep sleep by the
tumultuous noise of water gushing through their spaceship. After the
landing in the book, the first living organism the space travelers
encounter is the beautiful golden haired woman Nova, perched above
on the apex of the waterfall. In the movie, on the other hand, the
space travelers are surrounded by a desolate wasteland, in which
they are overjoyed to discover a isolated plant. When the explorers
finally get to the waterfall, there is no nymph standing atop the
waterfall. In fact, Nova only makes an appearance much later.
Schaffner makes an interesting choice when he decides to downplay
the role of Nova. He accomplishes this feat by bolstering the role
of Taylor, played by Charlton Heston. Schaffner also chooses to give
all the humans on Soror disordered black hair, including Nova,
perhaps to further enhance the idea of the barbaric degeneration of
the human race. The
people on Sorror may be human, but they are almost alien due to the
emanation of the eyes, “a sort of void, an absence of expression”
(Boulle 30). The void in the eyes of the Soror humans can only be
attributed to a lack of curiosity, a quality prerequisite of any
rational being. Since the humans on Soror are incapable of speech
and thought, their condition is tantamount to that of animals.
Boulle takes the opportunity to truly show how the roles of humans
and animals have completely switched. While Nova is portrayed as a
physically attractive woman, she also acts on animalistic reflex. In
the film version, humans do not have this same animalistic aspect.
Part of the reason is due to the barbaric style of clothes humans
have in the movie. These clothes are probably the only option
Schaffner had, since complete nakedness in a film would not receive
much accolade. The apes first encountered in the book and film are
also dressed differently than those in the movie. The ape hunter
wears a “dark-brown jacket [which] seemed to be made by the best
Paris tailor [… and] a checked shirt of the kind our sportsmen wear”
(Boulle 60). Moreover, all the apes in the book seem to wear
clothing similar to modern standards; scientists and doctors wear
white coats while policemen wear the standard uniform. The movie
does not keep in line with the fashion clearly articulated in the
book, as gorillas wear black army uniforms, chimpanzees wear green
gowns, and the orangutans wear orange overcoats.
The differences and similarities in ape culture do not stop
there. It is not a coincidence that Planet of the Apes was
written by a Frenchman, and that the protagonist Ulysse Mérou speaks
only French. When Ulysse arrives to Soror, he is unable to establish
communication because of the obvious language difference. Ulysse’s
counterpart in the movie is Taylor, whose injury to the neck
disallows him from speaking. In the movie, the apes speak English,
which again is necessary, as continuous subtitles would be
perplexing to any viewer. The ape class structure in both the movie
and book is similar. While all apes are “equal”, some are more equal
than others. The gorillas are the militarists, who rely on their
great physical strength. While the orangutans are “official
science”, the Chimpanzees make most of the great scientific
discoveries. Furthermore, the orangutans are the academics, and
propagate traditionalist knowledge. Ulysse acknowledges that “we
too, have had our orangutans, our falsified education and ridiculous
curricula, and this period lasted a long time” (Boulle 200). Perhaps
the apes can be seen in the light of being a social parody of
humans. Not only are there three ape races, but ironically, there
are also three human races as well. Conceivably, Boulle may have
been trying to bring attention to racism, a vital issue in the
1960s. The power-seeking gorillas and the hackneyed orangutans seem
to have all the power, while those who are truly intelligent are
constantly exploited. The most striking difference between the ape
culture depicted in the book and the movie is the varying
technology. The book describes ape technology as rivaling our own.
Even the style of “the houses were similar to ours; the roads, which
were fairly dirty, looked like our roads” (Boulle 137). Boulle’s
description contrasts greatly with Schaffner’s depiction of ape
technology in the movie. Schaffner depicts the ape world as
completely backwards. The homes and buildings seem to be carved out
of stone, giving them an almost cave-like resemblance, which truly
juxtaposes the apes with ancient cavemen. While the book
acknowledges this backwardness, it is of a different kind, since the
apes have “electricity, industries, motor cars, and airplanes, but
as far as the conquest of space is concerned, they have reached only
the stage of artificial satellites” (Boulle 154).
The aforesaid divisions between the movie and book lead to
the stunning conclusion of Planet of the Apes. First, both the film and
book each present a theory on how the demise of humanity actually
occurred. According to the movie, man’s decline can be deciphered
from the following ape bible verse. “Beware the beast man, for he is the
Devil's pawn. Alone among God's primates, he kills for sport or lust
or greed. Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brother's
land. Let him not breed in great numbers, for he will make a desert
of his home and yours. Shun him, for he is the harbinger of death”
(Cornelius). Clearly, man’s decline was only due to man himself. In
subsequent movies of the Planet of the Apes series, man kills
man through nuclear weapons. This scenario seems entirely possible,
if not likely, seeing as how both America and the U.S.S.R. were in
an arms race in 1968. Both countries were instantaneously ready to
blow the entire world up. The weapons which man uses on his fellow
man literally create the desert wasteland that is called the
Forbidden Zone. After escaping the Apes, Taylor and Nova ride
along the beach in the Forbidden Zone. As the horse rides closer,
Taylor receives the most terrible shock of all. He finally realizes
the truth when he sees the statue of liberty buried under rock and
sand. Taylor had been on Earth the entire time! Earth was the planet
of the apes.
The book posits a different “truth”. Ulysse learns this truth
in the encephalic section of research, where he hears an electroded
woman recount the past: “What is happening could have been foreseen.
A cerebral laziness has taken hold of us. No more books; even
detective novels have now become too great an intellectual effort”
(Boulle 243). This germ of truth is at once apparent in our own
society, where laziness seems to be progressing at an alarmingly
fast rate. The only thing moving faster is Ulysse’s spaceship, back
en route to Earth. With the help of Zira and Cornelius, Ulysse is
able to escape with Nova and his newborn son. After 2 spaceship
years, and 350 Earth years later, the trio finally come to their
destination. As the ship descends to Paris, Ulysse is relieved to
see the Eiffel Tower still intact. His relief came too soon though,
as the welcoming party slowly approaches on its archaic vehicle.
Ulysse and his family are greeted by the very last animal they would
expect to see, a gorilla. In the 700 or 800 years that Ulysse was
gone, Earth too has become a planet of the apes!
What hope then, does humanity have? Pierre Boulle consented
that Planet of the Apes is a social fantasy. As much as we
want to disbelieve his vision, there is a large germ of truth in
this “fantasy”. Both Boulle and Schaffner would agree that we must
stop making war on our fellow humans, and that we must stop being
lazy! | ||||||||||||||
© 2006 Philosophy
Paradise |