Forbidden Planet (1956) Directed by Fred M. Wilcox (previously known for the Lassie movies). Starring Walter Pidgeon, Anne Francis, and Leslie Nielsen. Screenplay by Cyril Hume based on a story by Allen Adler and Irving Block.
It’s difficult to imagine what science fiction cinema would look like today without Forbidden Planet. It was released in 1956, in the middle of a decade overflowing with sci fi movies, but its impact is so widespread, its influence so lasting and profound, that there are elements of it everywhere you look: Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, the films of James Cameron and Ridley Scott, and so much more. Made for a huge-at-the-time budget of $2 million, filmed in a lavish production at the MGM studio, borrowing special effects creators from Disney, featuring a truly unprecedented musical score, and with a story based on William Shakespeare’s The Tempest, everything about Forbidden Planet seems to be saying that it’s time to stop playing about with B-movie monsters and start taking sci fi cinema seriously.
It wasn’t the first thematically and tonally serious sci fi film to come out of Hollywood in the 1950s; it was following in the footsteps of films like Destination Moon (1950), The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), and The War of the Worlds (1953). But it was the first to take place on a planet outside of our Solar System, reachable only by faster-than-light travel, in a version of humanity’s future where such travel is the expected next step in space exploration.
To put things in perspective: A voiceover at the beginning of Forbidden Planet charmingly predicts that humans will travel to the Moon by “the final decade of the 21st century.” Here in the real world, the Sputnik 1 satellite launched on October 4, 1957, initiating the space race between the United States and the Soviet Union. The first spacecraft landed on the Moon in 1959, and ten years later the first humans were walking on the surface. I guess the real question is now whether humans will go back to the moon by the final decade of the 21st century.
Forbidden Planet is influential and important in the genre, yes. It’s also great fun. This movie does take itself very seriously, and it is very much a product of its time. But it is still a thoroughly enjoyable movie. (It’s the embrace of wild Freudian psychology more than the sexism that dates it, to be honest. The sexism could come from any era, including right now.)
A quick overview: In the distant future, a spaceship led by Captain John Adams (a dashing young Leslie Nielsen) arrives at the planet Altair IV. The mission’s goal is to check up on explorers who went to the planet twenty years ago and have been out of contact ever since. They make contact with Dr. Morbius (Walter Pidgeon), who very sternly warns them away from landing—a warning they ignore, of course, because it’s awfully suspicious and they have a mission. They soon discover that Morbius and his daughter Alta (Anne Francis, very charming in the role) are the only survivors of the original group, as the others were violently killed—literally torn apart—by a mysterious force. Morbius has spent the past twenty years studying the remains of a highly advanced alien civilization that seems to have been destroyed by the same mysterious force. And, naturally, as soon as Captain Adams and his men start to interfere, the attacks start again.
Watching Forbidden Planet now, sixty-eight years after it was released, there is quite a lot about it that is familiar, because all the subsequent stories it inspired are now so familiar. The mission to an out-of-contact colony, the helpful talking robot, the brilliant scientist, the beautiful young woman, the artifacts of an alien civilization, the moral about the dangers of hyper-intelligence, the complete acceptance of the idea that humans have distinct rational and animalistic sides… these are the pieces from which countless Star Trek episodes are made—and that’s not a complaint! I have enjoyed and will happily continue to enjoy any number of stories about people traveling around in space to check out places where something strange and terrible has happened, forcing them to learn something about their own choices and nature. (Although I’m glad that sci fi these days has mostly left the outdated ego vs id, intellect vs instinct psychology behind.) Even though the premise is familiar to sci fi fans, the mystery and tension build very nicely, helped along by Walter Pidgeon’s portrayal of Dr. Morbius, which is never quite truly sinister, but is always stepping right up to that line.
Premise and plot aside, there are two things I want to talk about regarding the film’s production, both of which stood out to me when I was watching.
The first is apparent just few minutes into the film, in what is one of the film’s most iconic scenes: the view of the ship landing on the planet’s surface. It’s a gorgeous scene, slow and deliberate. The ship itself is a perfect flying saucer shape we now associate more with alien space travel than with humanity’s future. In the background, there are two moons visible in an eerie green sky, and the landscape is vast and jagged and dramatic.
The entire movie was filmed inside the MGM studios in Culver City; that striking view of Altair IV is a matte painting. The film’s matte paintings were done by Howard Fisher, Henri Hillinick, and Matthew Yuricich, and overseen by supervisor Warren Newcombe. Other paintings make an appearance in the view of Morbius and Alta’s home, in the scene where Morbius gazes across the landscape toward the graves of his fellow explorers, and when the characters descend into the remains of the vanished Krell civilization.
I love all of these paintings. They’re beautiful, interesting, and create a setting that is—as a couple of characters mention in conversation—very alien in appearance but still something that a person could get used to. The spires of rock are just a bit too sharp, the moons in the sky just a bit too large, but there is nothing unrecognizable, not until the characters visit the massive ancient facility beneath the planet’s surface. There, the scope of what the extinct Krell civilization built is described and shown on a scale that is difficult to grasp, and the contrast of the cool metallic underground with the rocky red surface is very effective.
I understand why more recent sci fi films use digital backgrounds or on-site Earth locations. I can even acknowledge it is not their fault that I spent too many years studying geology and often see not an unknown alien planet, but Death Valley or Wadi Rum or Iceland or, alas, many areas of the southern California chaparral within driving distance of Hollywood studios. But I still have a special fondness for old school matte paintings and love to spot them in movies. Knowing a background is a matte painting makes me want to study it in detail to appreciate and understand what it’s accomplishing in creating a scene. And I like that Altair IV, this truly alien planet, the first one to appear in cinema, was created in a few moody, atmospheric scenes, brushstroke by brushstroke, by a team of extremely skilled artists.
The second thing I want to talk about is one that Forbidden Planet is rightfully very famous for, and that’s its score. You might notice, if you are the type of person to read a film’s credits, that there is no credit for soundtrack or score, and nobody named as a composer. What there is instead is a credit for “electronic tonalities,” and the people credited are Bebe and Louis Barron.
The Barrons, a married couple, were a pair of beatnik musicians living in New York and creating electronic music by manipulating circuits and amplifying and recording the sounds on magnetic tape. In the 1950s electronic music was still in its early days; the theremin had been around since the 1920s, but analog synthesizers wouldn’t be invented until the 1960s. When an MGM producer hired the Barrons to create a score for Forbidden Planet, electronic sounds weren’t entirely new to film, but it was unprecedented for an entire score to be electronic—and not just electronic, but so distinctly electronic that it sits in a peculiar limbo between musical score and sound effects.
(Quick aside: Some sources—such as this NPR piece—state some version of the story that a dispute with the American Federation of Musicians is the reason the Barrons’ work on the film is not credited as a musical score and was not submitted for Oscar consideration, but others indicate that it was only concern about a possible dispute that led to the “electronic tonalities” credit. I mention this because I find it amusing that decisions about what credits to include on a film required the studio heads and lawyers to sit around contemplating the question, “What is music, anyway?”)
The “electronic tonalities” are strange, unsettling, unnatural, and otherworldly—in other words, perfect for the sounds of a distant alien world. The hums and vibrations, the whirs and whoops and squeals, sitting right on the line between soundtrack and ambience, with no easy distinction between what is diegetic and what is not—they are all essential elements of the film’s setting, tension, and tone. It’s very effective, far more so than a traditional orchestral score would be.
The Barrons never composed another film score; the rest of their work sat pretty firmly in the avant-garde rather than the mainstream. But audiences at the time loved the score of Forbidden Planet. Those audiences included a young Ben Burtt, who watched Forbidden Planet as a child and grew up to be the legendary sound designer behind the iconic sci fi soundscape of Star Wars (and many, many other films). You can watch Burtt recreate the Barrons’ method here: it’s pretty damn cool.
Discussion about what is influential and significant in art can sometimes feel a bit hard to grasp, especially in a field as self-mythologizing and impact-obsessed as filmmaking. But there are also times when it is really very simple: experiencing the right work of art at the right time, remembering it, reshaping the awe and fear and curiosity it made you feel into something new, that’s how art grows and evolves.
There is something very enjoyable, I think, about watching a movie like Forbidden Planet, which contains so much that is known and familiar in sci fi today, as the strange new experience it was upon release, with its distant planetary setting and its talking robot and its peculiar sights and sounds. I was not alive in 1956, but it’s so easy to understand how audiences would watch this movie and think, “Oh, yes, I want more of that.” And it’s just as easy to understand how a fairly large number of those people would go on to make more of what they loved in their own works of science fiction.
Thank you for joining me for the first week of the Sci Fi Film Club (you can find the introduction to the series here, along with a list of the movies we’ll be watching this month). What do you think about the sights and sounds and psychology of Forbidden Planet? What about its lasting impact on the genre nearly seventy years later? Share your thoughts below!
Next Week in the Science Fiction Film Club: We’re heading to a different extrasolar planet to explore a different set of psychological problems with Andrei Tarkovsky’s 1972 film Solaris. Watch it on Max, Criterion, Amazon, Apple, and more.
I rewatched Forbidden Planet last night, and I generally agree with most of your points. When they bring the Freudian psychology aspect into the mix, it essentially ruined the plot for me. Yet still, I really enjoyed this film on the second watch. The special effects, while a bit dated for today’s standards, seems like they would be quite revolutionary for a film of this time period. Also agreed that the “electronic tonalities” score was a great addition. This definitely feels like “Tomorrowland”-esque sci-fi, and I am here for it. And yes, Robby the Robot is the undisputed greatest character in this film. “Would 60 gallons be sufficient?”
The funny thing about the Freudian reference is that Morbius himself refers to the concept of the Id as an “obsolete term,” but the film commits to it anyway. “Id Monster” is certainly catchier than “Jungian Shadow Figure…”
I was genuinely surprised by how many articles and reviews I read that described Robby as “humorless,” because I think he’s freakin’ hilarious in a very sly, deadpan way!
He’s definitely got that deadpan humor.
“Star sapphires take a week to crystalize properly. Would emeralds or diamonds do?”
The opening monologue (presumably inadvertently) gave itself wiggle room thanks to specific wording:
Presumably, before the final decade of the 21st century, Lunar expeditions were always either all male or all female.
I keep going back and forth about just how naive Altaira really is. Does she really not understand what the space Lothario is after or is she amusing himself at his expense?
Well, it appears she has only her father to emulate for most of her life, and he seems as naive as she is supposed to be in certain areas.
But, yeah; it was amusing for a younger me. And the ambiguity is definitely there.
I wonder about Altaira too, as I suspect there is a difference between the character as written and the way Anne Francis played her. There is a bit of playfulness in her manner that I quite like.
I think she’s just written as a one-dimensional kind of character alas.
Interesting that you list this as one of the movies that shifted the scifi genre towards the more serious when “Anne Francis stars in Forbidden Planet” is a line in RHPS’s opening song Science Fiction/Double Feature, a recounting of B movies.
I guess it can be both more serious and still heavily influenced by & included with what came before
Forbidden Planet is alleged to be the first feature film set entirely on an extrasolar planet, but it’s not the first time one was seen in cinema at all. At the very least, you’ve got Krypton in the opening chapter of the 1948 Superman serial.
I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the reason FP got made by the “A pictures” unit instead of the “B” unit had more to do with the vagaries of budgeting and scheduling than any kind of decision to take science fiction more seriously. I think it was written with the expectation of being a B-movie but ended up lucking into an A-level budget. And it wasn’t as if B-movies never took science fiction seriously — see It Came from Outer Space from 1953, with its thoughtful Ray Bradbury storyline. The A/B difference was more about budget and studio logistics than anything else, as I understand it.
Indeed, it’s worth noting that the writer, producer, and FX team of FP followed it up in 1957 with an indirect B-movie “sequel,” The Invisible Boy, which was specifically designed as Robbie the Robot’s second starring vehicle. The film is set in the near future relative to 1957, but the title character finds Robby disassembled in the laboratory of the late Professor Greenhill, who claimed to have built a time machine and who has a photo of Robby disembarking from a starship at Chicago Spaceport in 2309 — which is consistent with the evidence that Forbidden Planet took place sometime in the 23rd century, though the novelization of that film puts it in 2371. So implicitly, that starship was the C57-D bringing Robby back to Earth (which would put FP in 2299, since it’s a 10-year trip), and the time-traveling Professor Greenhill found Robby there and brought him back to the latter 20th century. But the title character has a line about how a time traveler bringing knowledge back from the future would change the present, so I suppose that implies that TIB is an alternate timeline that branched off of the Forbidden Planet universe.
In This Island Earth (1955), the planet Metaluna seems to be in another star system. I don’t recall if it’s made explicit though, and it’s only the setting for the last third of the film.
Oh, yes, definitely. Exeter says “Metaluna lies far beyond your solar system, in outer space.” So that absolutely predates Forbidden Planet, by just under 9 months. I keep forgetting which of the two came out first.
Was Krypton clearly established to be extrasolar in the serial? In the Golden Age comics they were vague about that for a while (IIRC at least one version had it as a counter-Earth), and Hollywood SF used to be as unclear on the difference between interplanetary and interstellar travel as it now is between solar systems and galaxies.
Eventually Krypton got its red sun. But for a long while Superman’s powers were because Kryptonians were more highly evolved and then because of Krypton’s stronger gravity, neither of which required a specific location.
(I think 1948 is also when Superman finally discovered his own origins in the comics by overtaking the light rays from Krypton pre-explosion, which pretty much requires an interstellar setting. But I don’t know if the movies got the word.)
The opening narration says “In the far reaches of space, like a pinpoint at infinity, there once was a tiny blue star. Spanning the billions of miles that separated this star from the Earth, we discover that it was in reality a planet like our own. This was the ill-fated planet Krypton, which revolved about the brilliant sun of its own solar system, while satellites like ringed moons in turn revolved about it.” It also said Jor-El had discovered that Krypton was being “inexorably drawn toward its sun.” So despite getting the numbers wrong (typically for older SF films), it’s quite unambiguous.
Although you’re right that it’s sometimes been ambiguous elsewhere; for instance, the ’40s radio series implied once or twice that Krypton had been another planet of the Sun.
Thanks! That’s pretty unambiguously interstellar. Even if “billions of miles” suggests they still had a scale problem.
It’s technically true since they don’t say how many billion, but the same would be true for “dozens of inches.”
)
And somehow Robbie managed to turn up on the planet with the Space Family Robinson in an episode of Lost In Space (best cameo EVER)
PS I have to verify that I am not a robot when posting here but if I were I would want to be Robbie…
Robbie appeared in two Lost in Space episodes opposite his kid brother B-9 (both robots were the offspring of designer Robert Kinoshita), but that was Robbie playing characters other than himself, as he did in numerous TV and film appearances. In The Invisible Boy, Robbie was playing himself, the same character he was in Forbidden Planet, brought back in time.
When interviewed, Robbie said he didn’t mind playing character parts, because it was steady work, but what he really wanted was to direct.
Surely, Robbie’s greatest cameo is when he’s on the phone in Gremlins with his cowboy hat on? Which also has the great visual gag.of the HG Wells Time Machine disappearing through time. I’ve always loved those scenes but they rarely get mentioned in the general Gremlins discourse.
I think the most unlikely place Robbie showed up was in a Columbo episode. (Although he didn’t play the killer-of-the-week.)
He was also in one episode of Mork and Mindy.
I love this entire comment thread sharing Robbie’s extensive resume. :D
I’m assuming Robby is currently enjoying his retirement in Boca, probably chatting via Zoom with Dr. Z, but I think it is high time we saw this wonderful fellow in something again.
I can see it now… Robby the Robot: The Robby the Robot Movie!
It’ll be bigger than Barbie, goshdarnit!
I love this movie. And this just makes me want to rewatch it now. heh
I always loved those big backdrop sets. Though now they have those digital backdrops that look really cool. The advantage being that you don’t have to lock off the camera for the shot like in the 50’s.
Watching Ben Burtt recreate those sounds was kind of amazing.
I love this movie (we named our Roomba Robbie the Robot). When discussing it I tell people that “monsters from the id” that destroyed a civilization sounds an awful lot like the toxic effects of social media.
Those would be the ever-present “monsters of the (overinflated) ego”!
Yes, it’s so interesting to me that the overall theme of “destroyed by our worst impulses” is still relevant, although the nature of how we talk about it and the framework that makes most sense to us has changed significantly.
This remains a great watch to this day. I first discovered it as a kid and got a huge kick out of seeing how much it influenced the sixties TV I grew up on. Visually the film heavily influenced the design of the “Lost in Space” pilot due in no small part in to the fact designer Bob Kinoshita worked on both projects. Structurally and thematically the movie HEAVILY influenced Gene Roddenberry who screened it constantly for everyone who worked on the “Star Trek” pilots. Yeah, it’s dated in places but it still looks fabulous, maybe more so that most contemporary sci-fi which all pretty much could have been poured from the same pot for the past 40 years. I also adore the score and actually have the soundtrack CD.
I watched this on tv in the 1980s and was blown away by how good an SF movie it was: it felt as though the production team were thinking a lot about how the universe would look in their future. As a nascent Trek fan I was also struck by just how influential the backstory of this film was for that show (although I recently read a story from the mid-50s that posits an idea similar to the Prime Directive so Roddenberry was, like most writers, a bit of a magpie).
‘watching it on a big tv with one of my kids a few years ago was a similar experience: after the Star Wars prequels, Harry Potter and LOTR, he was amazed by how good the effects were (he’d watched a lot of old movies with his dad so was predisposed to be cautious when I said how amazing something looked). The story is still ok, but very much of its time – the basic retelling of The Tempest (in Space!) still holds up but the Freudian overtones kind of spoil the timelessness of it.
Still a wonderful movie and an old favourite.
This post is exactly what I hoped for. Thank you.
“It’s the embrace of wild Freudian psychology … Although I’m glad that sci fi these days has mostly left the outdated ego vs id, intellect vs instinct psychology behind.” What I find almost comical is how “alien” the dialogue and plot about id and ego feels – it’s so outdated, so infrequently mentioned nowadays, that when you happenstance on a strong influence like this, after years and decades of not hearing it, it nearly feels foreign and fresh again.
“What there is instead is a credit for “electronic tonalities … I find it amusing that decisions about what credits to include on a film required the studio heads and lawyers to sit around contemplating the question, “What is music, anyway?” Ah, but it is music! ;) The most diegetic part of the soundtrack is when Morbius (no relation) plays Krell music to Adams and the Doc and it is shades of what we have been hearing the entire movie: “That recording was made by Krell musicians a half million years ago“, he says. I wonder if these discussions about “score or not?” made their way to the set and someone tongue-in-cheek decided to call it out as actual music, just… alien.
It really is! I know that the whole ego/id intellect/animal thing has been explored in lots of other sci fi (Star Trek TOS episodes, for example), but I still had a moment of, “Oh, is that where we’re going with this? OKAY THEN.” It’s comical in retrospect.
I love that theory about the score. :)
… This was my 1st time watching ‘Forbidden Planet’ and I found it quite amusing despite the obvious flaws. Fun to see where the various influences come from, specially being a trek fan. I loved the setting and atmosphere, but sadly none of the characters really intrigued me…
… Looking forward to Solaris for next week, want to hear about your thoughts on the fact that Stanislaw Lem always hated it…
I really enjoyed this one. The central idea is neat and rather timeless. What I did not expect when I saw tht we were going to watch a movie from the 1950s was that I really enjoyed the visual style of the movie. I loved the matte paintings and the animation of the perimeter fence and the id monster.
The casting though is very 1950s: Handsome white men in their 30s, no beard, all the same hairstyle. I had trouble keeping track of who is who until I managed to distinguish the guys by the shapes of their hairlines. Fortunately, Morbius has a beard (and he is older)!
Looking forward to Solaris next week.
Well it is a military expedition so of course they’re all wearing the same outfit and regulation haircuts.
Having re-watched Forbidden Planet a good handful of time over the years, I hadn’t planned on re-watching again this time around. My memory told me that, though historically significant, Forbidden Planet was plagued (to me) by cardboard characters, juvenile humor, and silly romance and sexism (although I do agree that Anne Francis brought a lot of playful subtlety to her role).
Am I glad I decided to give it another go! All those things are still true, but taken with a dose of historical perspective, I was able to appreciate it for the well-crafted film it is. My biggest take-away this time was the beautiful art direction. With the exceptional set designs and the wonderful color palette, each scene was designed to look just like moving cover art from many of the era’s SF magazines.
This is a wonderful movie.
I agree completely, it does require a bit of a conscious adjustment to watch these older films–many of which have obvious flaws! this one barely even scratches the surface of how flawed older sci fi movies can be!–with that perspective. In these film club pieces I am definitely trying to keep that in mind, in part because it’s so important when looking at media from several countries and across several decades, but also because (selfishly) for me it’s just more fun and easier to find things to talk about and research and share when I dig into why certain elements captivate me.
And yes, I’m right there with you about the art direction in this film being a really engaging part of the viewing experience. The colors, the scope, all of it is just so interesting and beautiful and, yes, evokes the era so well! I agree completely about it having the same feel as some of those glorious golden era covers and art pieces.
It has been many, many years since I last saw Forbidden Planet. Thanks for reintroducing it to me. I love the idea of the film club and am looking forward to many great films.
While I appreciated the soundtrack for it’s uniqueness, the high pitched noises were literally painful in many places. The robot was my favorite part. Least favorite was the “relationship” between Captain Adams and Altaira, Or really any part of the interactions of the male characters and Altaira. I know it’s a product of it’s time but I still get disgusted seeing it.
Lost count of how many times I’ve watched this movie. Absolute classic and yes it’s music not electronic tonality, I wonder if it influenced Kraftwerk?
Nothing really new to add to the discussion and all that has already been said, but wanted to mention how this movie has been forever on my watchlist and that I’m really glad to have finally watched thanks to your Sci Fi Film Club! I imagine this will happen with many movies you’ll cover.
What I most loved about the movie was the visual style. I was entranced by the planet’s surface shot as much as you and I loved the id monster perimeter fence scene.
I just realized most of us here are misspelling Robby the Robot’s name as “Robbie.” Maybe we’re thinking of the title character of Asimov’s first robot story. Or maybe we’re just used to seeing Margot Robbie’s name in the news.
Or maybe our robot overlords are “autocorrecting” the spelling and no one is noticing… ;)
I loved Forbidden Planet, but haven’t watched it in years. I had no idea how far ahead of its time the excellent soundtrack was, though; now I need to watch it again. :) As I side note, I’ve always thought it was cool that the Krell brand of amplifiers is named after the aliens in the movie.
I first saw Forbidden Planet as an adult who tuned into what I thought was going to be a Saturday afternoon B movie. I remember thinking when it was over “Wow! That was actually good!”
The animated effects still hold up today. The Id monster attack still looks amazing. When they’re shooting at the monster, all the beam angles perfectly align with where the weapons are pointed. I’d love to know what the mechanism inside the turrets was like, how it worked to move the four projectors at the corners.
What sets Forbidden Planet apart from other SF movies of the era is the sheer amount of detail everywhere, and not a bit of it looks like it was slapped together 10 minutes before filming. All of it had to be physically built or painted by hand.
Jack L. Chalker’s Well World book series rather blatantly lifts a lot from Forbidden Planet. He expanded the computer to occupy the entire planet and the description of the long gone aliens’ doorways matches what shown in the movie. The premise of the books is the universe is far, far older than we think it is. The universe we know is actually a physical overlay onto the real universe, and it’s controlled by the Well World computer. There are many gates that teleport to the Well World, located on some of the original planets in the real universe, former colonies of the aliens that built the Well World.
They built the Well World as a laboratory to test a wide range of new forms of intelligent life they’d designed, giving each one a habitat they’d designed to be suited to the species, though with a varying limit on what technology works, based on the resource limitations of the planet they designed for each species. Once they had 1560 successes, the aliens created the universe overlay then transferred their consciousnesses to the large numbers of new beings they sent out. But they didn’t depopulate the Well World, nor did they alter any of the tech limits. Just closed the door and walked away, leaving the last generations of the experiments to fend for themselves.
The Id Monster was the work of Joshua “Josh” Meador, a veteran Disney animator on loan to MGM. He had worked on “Fantasia,” and so presumably had experience in designing horrific characters. He also specialized in “effects animation,” and had worked on earlier Disney films integrating animation and live action.
“ his daughter Alta (Anne Francis, very charming in the role)”
I suspect that the most common role for women in old science fiction movies is “scientist’s daughter.”
Sometimes, or else “scientist’s wife.” But there were more female scientists in those movies than you’d expect. Though they tended to be aloof, serious women who denied their femininity to operate in a man’s world, then fell in love with the hero and quit their jobs at the end to become housewives. And there was hardly ever more than one of them per movie.
One interesting case was Mara Corday’s character in 1957’s The Giant Claw. She was a woman whose job was to do the number-crunching and calculations to support pilots, like the NASA “computers” in the movie Hidden Figures. So she was in a technical job that audiences of the time would have expected to be female, as opposed to the usual “woman in a man’s field” kind of lady-scientist character.
If memory serves, THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD (1951) had a husband-and-wife pair of scientists as part of the cast. That would make it a rare fictional cinematic example of a woman who found love and kept on doing science.
It’s weird how so many old movies were kind of progressive about including women in scientific fields and spaceship crews, but only for the very un-progressive reason that movie formula required a love interest for the hero, and they couldn’t always find room for a female character except in those contexts. Not every spaceship crew was lucky enough to go to a planet that had Anne Francis on it.
That’s actually what makes the Chapmans in THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD so interesting. Margaret Sheridan’s Nikki Nicholson is the film’s female romantic lead*, but Sally Creighton’s Mrs Chapman is just there as part of the station’s research team. She provides no romantic/sexual interest in the film. Her role is entirely professional, another scientist doing a job who happens to be married to another scientist.
*And she does a superb job in the role. Her scenes with Kenneth Tobey’s Captain Hendry have all the bite and wit that one expects from a Howard Hawks film.
The Thing From Another World was on my list, but I haven’t seen it yet so this discussion is really interesting to me. I’m also going to take a look at The Giant Claw. I love learning things like this, so thanks all around! :)
Be warned, The Giant Claw is infamous for its terrible special effects, which evoked laughter from theater audiences when the intent was to scare them.
Hmmm… Captain, doctor, science officer… I ‘ve always that grouping is one I’d seen before.
“It’s difficult to imagine what science fiction cinema would look like today without Forbidden Planet.” Yes, exactly. And exactly why “Forbidden Planet” has permanent place on my rewatch list.
The influence of this movie on Star Trek is immense– the deceleration chambers that look like transporters, the mini skirts, the utility belts with phasers and communicators, the political entity that the space crew serves (the United Planets), having a doctor as a main side character…
A fun thing to do during a re-watch is to see how many Trek like things you can see. On this reviewing, I noticed that at the start of the movie, the navigator estimates the time to reach DC point 1701– the registration number on the Enterprise.
There were some influences, true, but organizations with names like United Planets or Federation or the like were a dime a dozen in the prose science fiction of the era, so that influence shouldn’t be discounted. And TOS adopted miniskirts (technically more like mini-culottes or skorts) because they were seen as forward-looking and empowering in the days of the Sexual Revolution, not because they were looking backward at a movie from a decade before. (The pilots put women in trousers, but Grace Lee Whitney insisted on the miniskirts.)
There is a letter from Roddenberry that’s reprinted in David Alexander’s Roddenberry biography, where Roddenberry talks about using stills from the movie as inspiration. It is not unlikely that the miniskirts in that 1950s film were influential, and if the registration number of the Enterprise was an homage to Forbidden Planet, the naming of the United Federation of Planets may well have been too.
Here’s a letter from Roddenberry from the UCLA archives:
Except that the Federation wasn’t introduced until the middle of season 1, in “Arena” by Gene L. Coon, and it wasn’t called the United Federation of Planets until Coon’s “Errand of Mercy,” the second-last episode of season 1. In Roddenberry’s original conception, the Enterprise was strictly an Earth ship (note the “Earth-Romulan War” in “Balance of Terror”). A couple of D.C. Fontana episodes refer to its authority as UESPA, the United Earth Space Probe Agency. So it was probably Coon, not Roddenberry, who introduced the idea of a multi-world, multispecies Federation to the series. Roddenberry was not the exclusive auteur claimed by his latter-day mythology. Many of TOS’s core concepts were created by other people.
Sure, the movie is just a probable influence on that name, even if it was only because Roddenberry asked people to watch it. When you are talking about influences, without documentation, its speculation.
That’s exactly my point. It’s speculation, so the thing to do is to acknowledge every possibility, not to arbitarily favor one. Lack of evidence is a reason to avoid favoring a single answer.
“United Planets” is a generic name that’s obviously inspired by the United States or the United Nations, so it should come as no surprise that classic science fiction has many organizations called United Planets, United Worlds, Federated Planets, or other similar names. There’s a United Planets in DC Comics’ Legion of Super Heroes. The ’50s TV series Rocky Jones, Space Ranger had the United Worlds. All these names come from taking the names of real-world unions, federations, etc. and coining generic sci-fi equivalents. It’s far too commonplace a practice to assume a single unique inspiration.
I reviewed Forbidden Planet some years ago on a now largely defunct website (link upon request) and something that struck me about the parallels to The Tempest was the characterization of Robby and the Id Monster. Most synopses of the film identify Robby as Ariel (Prospero’s gentle familiar) and the Monster as Caliban (the mean one). But isn’t that reversed?
Robby is the one who’s heavy and earthbound, educated in the ways of man and restricted by his laws but denied humanity. He’s also the one who goes on a drinking adventure with the comic relief. Totally Caliban.
Meanwhile, the Monster is a creature of fire and air that follows its master’s whim, but only for the promise of liberation. That scans pretty well for Ariel.
So how sympathetic IS Robby, really? His own programming prevents him from helping at the film’s climax. He’s inducted into the starship crew at the end, but is he really one of us?
When a friend and I were putting together a remote “film festival” of personally and culturally significant movies for our 50th birthdays a few years back, I saw this for the first time in its entirety. I was floored by how good it looks, how intelligent it is, and how much it clearly served as a template for Star Trek.
I was able to take Leslie Nielsen fairly seriously despite his role in Airplane! because of the film’s vintage. Robby was a hoot. I was not prepared for the Robert Knepper moment, as KRAD would put it, of seeing Richard Anderson two decades before he was The Six-Million-Dollar Man’s Oscar Goldman.
+1 on (among other insightful bits in the post):
— “the scope of what the extinct Krell civilization built is described and shown on a scale that is difficult to grasp, and the contrast of the cool metallic underground with the rocky red surface is very effective”
— “an entire score … [that’s] not just electronic, but so distinctly electronic that it sits in a peculiar limbo between musical score and sound effects”
The sets and effects remain astounding given the film’s vintage. I love the matte paintings, how well the composites with the animals work, the enormity of Krell’s technology underground, and how physically unlike humanity the alien race clearly was. The animated monster is excellent, and it all has an eerieness that at times reminds me of when I first saw the Martian Chronicles miniseries in 1980. I was very impressed by the at-first subtly growing dread of those gauges lighting up one by one at the climax.
Looking up where to stream certain films on Reelgood for the aforementioned project, by the way, I conflated the names of Forbidden Planet and Fantastic Voyage to come up with Fantastic Planet, which it turns out is an experimental French animated film that, upon realizing my error, I vaguely recalled seeing in part back in college. I fired it up at some point during lockdown and couldn’t get far into it but might give it another chance if it ends up getting reviewed here.
“I was able to take Leslie Nielsen fairly seriously despite his role in Airplane! because of the film’s vintage.”
I find it so ironic when people say that, because the whole reason Nielsen, Robert Stack, Lloyd Bridges, and Peter Graves were cast in Airplane! (and Shatner in the sequel) was because of their decades-long reputations as serious dramatic actors. The whole conceit of the film was that they played it utterly straight in the same hyper-serious, intense, dramatic style they were known for, so that the comedy came from the contrast between the ludicrous material and its deadpan delivery. Yet most of them gained new careers as comedy actors as a result of Airplane! It totally inverted their reputations in the public eye, even though its point was to play off their prior reputations.
Really, I think the perception of Nielsen as a goofy figure comes more from the later movies he did where he gave overtly comedic performances, like the Naked Gun movies (as opposed to the Police Squad! series they were based on, which used Airplane!-style deadpan comedy).
As far as “Knepper” moments go, for me it’s split between Richard Anderson from the bionic shows and Warren Stevens from Star Trek: “By Any Other Name.” Fitting that Stevens is playing the “McCoy” equivalent.
I’m pretty sure I grokked the gag of using Nielsen, Graves, et al. completely straight-faced despite not having consciously watched much with them in it at 9 years old. I know I’d seen at least one of the Airport movies on HBO by then, as well as the all-star ensemble (and borderline camp) disaster flicks Towering Inferno and Poseidon Adventure. I’ve definitely found that when actors trade on their stoic, dramatic personae for comedy I often find it hard to reset my expectations.
I came upon this article about Airplane! recently: https://getpocket.com/explore/item/airplane-is-considered-one-of-the-best-comedies-of-all-time-but-40-years-ago-no-one-saw-it-coming
According to it, the directors told the cast, “Pretend you don’t know you’re in a comedy.”