Critics’ reviews

Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)

10 reviews from 10 publications. Critics’ score 43: 2 positive, 2 mixed, 6 negative.

Back to our review of Beneath the Planet of the Apes

43
Positive
2
Mixed
2
Negative
6

Most critics find this a lesser sequel to Planet of the Apes, and six of the ten reviews are negative. Where praise exists, it gathers in two places: the production design of the underground mutant city, with its ruined New York landmarks, and the ending, which even the harshest notices concede is bold and bleak.

Reservations centre on everything before that finale. Several critics see the first half as a clunky rehash of the original, reusing sets and plot beats on a reduced budget, with Charlton Heston barely present. The telepathic mutants and their bomb cult are called schlocky by some and heavy-handed by others; The New Yorker objects to the film lecturing on imperialism and the Bomb rather than satirising anything. The spread is wide. The contemporary notices from 1970 are the most hostile, while later writers at HeyUGuys and Film Stories rate it a brave, imaginative sequel, and Radio Times calls it the best of the follow-ups.

Radio Times
★★★ · Alan Jones
60

The first sequel to the enormously successful Planet of the Apes is also the best. Less subtle and profound than its predecessor, it's still an exciting and colourful action adventure with a startling finale.

Read the full review →
Empire
28 March 2006 · Ian Nathan
40*

The critic views it as a fair but lesser sequel to the original film, hampered by a reduced budget and Charlton Heston's minimal involvement. They praise the elaborate design of the Forbidden City while noting the shift to a more gothic, action-oriented tone replaces the original's sharp satire.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
13 June 1970 · Penelope Gilliatt
35*

This is the most left-wing ape picture yet, overloaded with thunderingly platitudinous opinions on every large subject from imperialism to the Bomb. It is frightening in the wrong way, by weight of attitudinizing rather than force of satire, and the story is not the right receptacle for such big notions.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
8 April 2024 · Gerardo Valero
30*

This is one of the lesser films in the series, rehashing sets and plot elements from the original while introducing implausible elements like telepathic mutants worshiping a bomb. The apocalyptic ending works reasonably well but the film loses impact without the original's surprise factor.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
29 May 1970 · A. H. Weiler
30*

The sequel is a derivative melodrama and pretty juvenile, proving that a follow-up to striking science fiction can fall short. It has a few amusing and creative scenes to its credit, such as chimps picketing for peace and views of ruined New York landmarks as the mutants' sanctuary.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1969 · Variety Staff
20*

This sequel is hokey and slapdash, with the story and direction falling far short of the original. Dialog, acting and direction are substandard, though the apocalyptic ending draws on the first film's closing sequence.

Read the full review →
HeyUGuys
12 July 2017 · Cai Ross
80*

The critic praises it as a brave and imaginative first sequel with effective telepathic mutants and imaginatively rendered sets, noting its subversive and extremely downbeat ending as continuing the original's subversive nature.

Read the full review →
Film Stories
15 May 2024 · A J Black
70*

The critic views the film as a brave and imaginative sequel that serves as a parable for the atomic age, ending on a striking down note by destroying Earth, reflecting Cold War anxieties. They single out the script's bold apocalyptic conclusion for praise in its daring.

Read the full review →
Collider
26 May 2020 · C- · Matt Goldberg
50

The film suffers from schizophrenia as it fails to reconcile its plotlines or match the original's cleverness and consistency in exploring the human condition. Director Ted Post creates a creepy and atmospheric underground setting, but the story is undermined by bland characters and muddled symbolism.

Read the full review →
Paste
10 May 2024 · Oktay Ege Kozak
30*

The sequel feels like a rushed, clunky remake of the original in its first half before descending into schlocky B-movie territory with telekinetic mutants and an atomic bomb cult. The ending is memorably bizarre, but the preceding 90 minutes are pretty dreadful.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate