I’ve read “Bridge on the River Kwai,” and at least one other novel by Pierre Boulee, but not “Planet of the Apes.”
While I see “Bridge…” as a rather prescient description of what would later be known as the Stockholm Syndrome, I don’t think Boulle was creative enough to come up with “Planet of the Apes” out of his raw imagination. It seems to possible to have come from his wartime experience as a prisoner of the Japanese (one who escapes, just as did his novel’s hero). The shock to the Colonial Europeans at their defeat by Asians could easily find a metaphor in the Astronaut’s suprise on the new planet with ape masters (when we defeated the British at Yorktown the song they played was “The World Turned Upside-Down”). And the Japanese have been slurred as monkeys at least since their 1905 war with Russia.
I can’t begrudge Boulle his resentment toward his former captors - James Clavel suffered it as well and then wrote “King Rat,” and described in interviews his visceral hatred toward anyone Asian he felt for years afterwards. I can only hope each man eventually exorcised his demons through the creative process.
But every time someone like Rod Serling or Tim Burton takes POTA, or any film-maker appropriates any original work to suit a entirely laudable view (race relations, humanity towards other species, etc,) can it wash out the possible bad intentions of the original?