Planète interdite

A Starship has arrived at Altair IV, to ascertain the fate, of those that went before, but the visit has been spurned, Dr. Morbius has concerns, do not land, it is not safe, he so implores. Commander Adams disregards and duly lands, a year long journey has a mission, there's a plan, Robbie Robot then arrives, takes three crew out for a drive, to where the Doctor and his daughter, live and thrive. The other members of the mission are all dead, there is a force on the planet, that fills with dread, just the two of them remain, you must take to space again, but Adam's will not flee this strange homestead.

A perpetually engaging film that continues to deliver all these years later, as the powers hidden beneath a planet's surface by a long expired indigenous race cause unexpected trauma to those rediscovering the reasons for the aliens demise.

At a time when science fiction movies were invariably cheap rubber monsters attacking our cities and scaring our women, "Forbidden Planet" offered an usually thought-provoking plot that worked on a number of levels. Today, too many sci-fi movies are nothing but computer-generated special effects extravaganzas masking the lack of thoughtful plot and characterization. "Forbidden Planet" had awesome special effects for their time (many of which still hold up well today)--but these were used to effectively support the multifaceted plot and characterizations, not try to compensate for their lack.

The Shakespearean ("The Tempest") and Freudian ("Id-monster") elements have been noted by many critics. In the 1950's, with the atomic and hydrogen bombs so new and terrifying, other sci-fi movies had asked whether man had the wisdom to use all the new science for good rather than evil. But they usually dealt with that solely on a surface level, by just having some monster created with the new science that comes out and kills a bunch of people. Only "Forbidden Planet" dared to actually delve into the depths of human psychology to see what our baser instincts are capable of when given full rein. It directly refuted the notion that all that new science and technology was somehow civilizing humanity. The Krell, a far more advanced race than we, are never seen on screen (only their artifacts are shown, leaving you to imagine what they looked like). But their disappearance is a warning that even a far more advanced race like they, couldn't escape the baser instincts and subconscious drives deep within their own brains--so what of man?

One subplot that is less often discussed, but equally well thought out, is the scenes with Altaira and the tiger, an allusion to the myth of the virgin and the unicorn. Until Altaira meets the male crew of the C-57-D, she is virginal and the tiger is a tame beast in her presence. After she has her romantic interludes with Farman and the captain, the tiger attacks her. (Being the 1950's, the dialogue only subtly suggests what has happened.)

For "Star Trek" fans, it's worth seeing "Forbidden Planet" just to list all the parallels between "Forbidden Planet" and "Star Trek: The Original Series". The basic theme (a "United Planets" spaceship explores a strange new world), the characters and characterizations, the weapons, and even the special effects all seem to have unconsciously inspired Gene Roddenberry to create his own vision.

Well, of course, "Star Wars" defined the genre, and "Alien" and "Blade Runner" perfected it; but "Forbidden Planet" created it. Argue, if you must, that movies like "The Day the Earth Stood Still", "Them" and "Five Million Years to Earth" are the cerebral grand-fathers of the film genre (and I won't disagree with you), but for "science-fiction-as-plot-driven-action-epic," this is it. This is the one.

It's so unerringly on target, in fact, that it still plays very well even today. The modern audience has to overcome the "Leslie Nielsen Factor" (and it is difficult to watch him in a totally straight role), but once you do, the movie is pure enjoyment. Forget about dated plots and special effect. Robbie the Robot is a guy in a suit, yes, but he is thoroughly believable. He even adheres nicely to Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, a trick that the digital robots in this summer's "I, Robot" had a great deal of difficulty with.

And the monster! I defy anyone to avoid getting the willies when the monster first shorts the security fence. Great special effect, then and now!

Finally, the universal theme of man's (and Krell's) individual flaws inserting themselves into an otherwise perfect system and TOTALLY gumming up the works is as relevant today as it was then. More so.

While not re-treading the comments or plot summaries of other IMDB users, I thought I'd say that this particular film does get better as it gets older. While ground-breaking on it's release in 1956, the visual "look" of this film has grown over the 46 years since it first arrived.

True to the pulp sci-fi of its day, the art direction has mellowed into an archetype that has not been bettered to this date. MGM put a surprising amount of money into the production values (similar to, but better than Universal's "This Island Earth"). This is a living "cover art". The indelible images of the saucer passing through space, landing on Altair-4, Robby, and the disintegrating tiger linger long in collective memory.

This must be seen on the big screen if possible, and in the original Cinemascope format. I've been lucky enough to see it (it was re-released in the 70's on a double bill with George Pal's "The Time Machine"), and the power it carries in scenes such as the Krell machines and the attack of the Id Monster are truly impressive. Watching it on a television just doesn't come close, although the "letterboxed" version is better than nothing. I am a poster collector, and even the advertising material for this film is exceptional. I see the one-sheet for it every day in my living room, and have never grown tired of it. "AMAZING!" is what is says, and for once they got it right. A true classic of it's type.

If you like Star Wars/Trek, come see where they got all their ideas and cinematic devices. It's my top 2 favorite movies of all times, other-worldly-futuristic and psycho-thriller. The intensity of the root material (Shakespeare's "The Tempest") is not overshadowed by whizbang gimmickry (a la later Lucas). And just because it was made in 1956, don't assume you can 'see the strings' holding the flying saucer up. This was the first movie where you COULDN'T. Miracle it was made at "A-movie" scale, economics and tastes at the time were stacked heavily against it. And director Wilcox's previous 'hit' was "Lassie Come Home". Until I looked him up, I assumed 'Fred Wilcox' was a pseudonym for a director who was already or later became famous, but at the time didn't want to be associated with sci-fi, which was strictly a "B" genre back then. This was either a very VERY visionary production, or a very fortuitous 'mistake' on the part of the folks who bankroll Hollywood.

There are the massive-scale mattes with live action almost microscopically inserted that Lucas used extensively. There are intelligent machines that transcend the stereotypical 'user interface'; "computers", as they've come to be portrayed much less futuristically in later works. Star Trek's 'transporter' is there, visually, almost unaltered by Roddenberry 10 years later. And if the Trek/Wars technobabble turns you off, FP's scientific references are not overdone and are all accurate, even today. The "ship" set is comprehensive, sparklingly realistic, as good as anything you've seen since, and more convincing than anything 'Trek' has done, for TV or film. We didn't get to spend as much time there as I would have liked.

If you ever wondered how movies got into space so competently, watching FP will explain all that. It's definitely not 'Wagontrain to the Stars'.