MovieChat Forums > Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) Discussion > G rated??? (spoilers)

G rated??? (spoilers)

posted 12 years ago by masked_loser
16 replies | jump to latest

According to IMDB's trivia section (which must always be taken with a grain of salt, if not a whole shaker):

"Originally, there was going to be a scene featuring a half-human/half-ape child. However, the producers were afraid that not only would the scene be too confusing, but that they would also lose their "G" rating."

So, in a movie that features fatal gunshot wounds, an impalement, and the end of the world by a doomsday device, the producers are worried about a child bumping it up to a PG rating? Does anyone have any idea what was supposed to happen in this scene that was just too much?

[–] savagebiscuits 12 years ago

The implication that an ape and a human had intercourse and created a child. Even though the ape would have intelligence and shouldn't be considered an animal, the question of bestiality would still be posed (justified or not) and considered too much in some eyes, so the idea was shelved. Despite the fact that Star Trek and the like had human-alien hybrids (Spock), I suppose the fact that Vulcans look very human tended to lessen similar implications. Mind you, the irony is that we don't know if the human in the ape/human relationship was either one of the animalistic ones or intelligent, which might well pose issues of bestiality but not in the expected way. ;)

[–] JamesA1102 12 years ago

The Human/Ape hybrid was considered for the film's original final scene. You can read the script treatment which includes a description of that scene: http://pota.goatley.com/scripts/pota_revisited_treatment.pdf

[–] wears-alan 12 years ago

This film (and Conquest) was given a AA certificate in UK which meant nobody under 14 years old could see it anyway.

You are entitled to my opinion, whether you want it or not!!

[–] Fletcherj119 11 years ago

There was an article in Starlog (I have it but I'm too lazy to look for it - I have quite a stack) with a picture of the child. They wanted all the movies G- rated, so they had to drop it. Similar with "Conquest" which had to have a couple of scenes deleted (which were restored on the blu-ray) or it would've received an R rating. As it was it was the only PG in the original series.

[–] joe_538 11 years ago

The G rating was thrown around more liberally in the early days. In the first Apes movie, you got rear male nudity, swearing, people being hunted for sport, a lobotomy, and Taylor's friend being stuffed and put in a museum.

Like a previous poster said, bestiality is a bit much. The offspring of man and animal is best left on the Island of Dr. Moreau.

Nowadays, it's an automatic PG if someone is shown smoking.

[–] spookyrat1 10 years ago

The G rating was thrown around more liberally in the early days.

It definitely was.

I think one of it's great curiosity values, besides noting the adult themes being expressed, is seeing all the blood and guts flung around in a 1970 general exhibition movie.

[–] manco82 8 years ago

Pretty hilarious. The original movie would definitely get an R-rating now.

[–] bobwoods 8 years ago

Yeah, 101 Dalmatians (Both the animated and live action one) would have been rated PG today. MPAA is much more strict these days. I mean Finding Dory is PG for crying out loud. That would have been G if it came out in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

[–] quinnum 11 years ago

Think about the images it would have conjured: "Was it a human male and female chimp? Or the Chimp male and human female?"

The questions it would conjure BEYOND that easily led to scrapping the idea, I'm sure.

[–] FinnurE 10 years ago

Actually, according to the website of the BBFC, the original rating in the UK was 'A' which was the equivalent of today's 'PG'. Granted, this version was edited for violence in places, and the uncut version did receive a '15' rating for VHS in 1987 (A bit harsh in my opinion) and has kept that rating since then.

[–] wears-alan 10 years ago

No, in the UK, this and Conquest were rated AA originally, so you had to be older than 14 to see it. Trust me, I know from personal experience of trying to watch this movie when it was a double bill (with Conquest)in the UK and I was turned away because I was 13.

It wasnt me, it was the other three. Hang them!

[–] FinnurE 10 years ago

I would think that this double bill you saw was rated AA just because "Conquest..." was rated AA.

Here's the UK quad poster for "Beneath..." (with a tiny white 'A' following the title):
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uNyF79jS0WE/Tjlo2q8mxVI/AAAAAAAAAGo/TU9dlzyS C3w/s1600/beneath-the-planet-of-the-apes-movie-poster-1020221553.jpg

and here's the one for "Conquest..." with the AA rating following the title:
http://www.containsmoderateperil.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/conque st-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-original-uk-quad-1972.jpg

I was a member of a forum that regularly contacted the BBFC for cuts some years back and they send us a cutlist for the A rated "Beneath...":

Double Reel 4 - Brent's attempted drowning of Nova was shortened.
Double Reel 5 - The fight between Brent and Taylor was considerably shortened, with the kicks, banging on head on wall and shot of man falling against a spike being removed.

The incident in which a black guard is attacked and killed was shortened.

The shot of his unmasked dead face was removed.

The death of Brent was shortened.

[–] jpowell180 10 years ago

Lol, "Humanzee"!

[–] askmonroville 9 years ago

Is this the ape you're looking for?:

http://planetoftheapes.wikia.com/wiki/Hybrid_Child

[–] millsey72 (10243) 3 years ago

The G rating is a plot hole because we see both Uraus and Dr Zaius nude in the sauna together in this film

[–] Adster (262) a year ago

Well I always thought the Gelding talk was strange to pass into a PG movie in 1968