tonorator Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 AWESOME FLICK. loved it. now here's the movie of the summer. absolutely loved it. great job developing the story and the characters so when the action kicked in, it was cool and tense and gripping. words cannot describe the quality of the cgi. nuts. be sure to stay past the initial credits to see how the human race would eventually be doomed ... 5 references to the original (don't read if you want to wait and see it). can you spot any others? paging down to prevent spoilers they called caesar "bright eyes" which is what the apes called heston. caesar playing with the statue of liberty. nice call out to the final scene of the original. when the helper at the ape facility was watching the tube, heston was the actor on the screen. the one female ape was named cornelia, a shout out to cornelius. of course, malfoy's "get your hands off me you damn dirty ape!!!!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 I have mixed feelings about this movie. I'll start by saying I believe the original movie was by far, the greatest FX,makeup and costume movie of all time. Seeing it being remade in a CGI format bothers me. I will watch it, but won't give my money to the theaters to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 I have mixed feelings about this movie. I'll start by saying I believe the original movie was by far, the greatest FX,makeup and costume movie of all time. Seeing it being remade in a CGI format bothers me. I will watch it, but won't give my money to the theaters to do so. I really hope you aren't implying a torrent, but rather a rental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneymakers Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 I really hope you aren't implying a torrent, but rather a rental. Skins? Is that U? me thinks he was planning on sneakin in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 8, 2011 Author Share Posted August 8, 2011 I have mixed feelings about this movie. I'll start by saying I believe the original movie was by far, the greatest FX,makeup and costume movie of all time. Seeing it being remade in a CGI format bothers me. I will watch it, but won't give my money to the theaters to do so. original is one of my favs of all time. given that, no problem watching and enjoying the hell out of this one. amazingly well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 I really hope you aren't implying a torrent, but rather a rental. Absolutely correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Skins?Is that U? me thinks he was planning on sneakin in. Funny how you sigline the Bible, but forget "Thou Shalt not Steal" and in fact mock those who abide by it. How surprising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 awww, shucks, I thought this was a post about evil_gop_liars and Yukon. Never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Saw it last night and dug it as well. One thing that didn't make sense however, and I had to look up the story line of the 2001 Apes flick to confirm it, but the story lines are not consistent. They each basically give two reasons for how the Apes came to rule the world that are not only not the same but not compatible with one another. I mean, that's fine and all but sort of undermines any attempt to make this a series. Assuming that's the intent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddahj Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Until a few days ago, I was unaware that the actor who played Gollum is the same guy who plays Caesar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Saw it last night and dug it as well. One thing that didn't make sense however, and I had to look up the story line of the 2001 Apes flick to confirm it, but the story lines are not consistent. They each basically give two reasons for how the Apes came to rule the world that are not only not the same but not compatible with one another. I mean, that's fine and all but sort of undermines any attempt to make this a series. Assuming that's the intent. Aren't they two different planets or two different dimensions or something? I haven't seen the second (probably a renter) but that was my impression. Please edjumacate me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I haven't seen either, but I kind of got the idea that the Tim Burton version was the Highlander 2 of the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Aren't they two different planets or two different dimensions or something? I haven't seen the second (probably a renter) but that was my impression. Please edjumacate me... At the risk of posting spoilers, this new movie is about how we let apes take over the planet. By the end of the first movie, you realize that, while the main character thought he was on another planet, in actuality, he'd been caught in a time warp and had landed back on earth in the future, long after we messed things up and let the apes take over. My issue is that they discuss how this happened in the 2001 version (I haven't seen the original in far too long to know what the story is there). However that doesn't fit how it goes down in this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I'm pretty sure the Burton film is intended to be a scratch, and that this is the direct prequel to the original, answering the question of how the Planet of the Apes came to be. If you're familiar at all with the original 5, you know that in "escape" they essentially set an alternate timeline in motion that you see in 'Conquest' and 'Battle.' Those films show how earth became Planet of the Apes by way of seeding that version of Caeser onto earth by way of a time paradox. This new film kind of settles all of that. This is a great film and will surely sweep all effects Oscars, much as the 1968 version did - it is a worthy successor. What I found most intriguing and original was how the narrative slid into Caeser's perspective and then kept us there. By the time you realize it, you're already sucked in and you find yourself asking just how smart he's getting as he's doing his stuff. And there's a great "oh CHIT!" moment leading into the final half hour that puckered everyone in my theater up, and it was barely 1/3 full - and the best part about that moment is that you should see it coming a mile away and you forget all about it, then BAM there it is. Great stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Two questions: Does someone need to see any of the earlier movies to understand this one? Is it okay for a 9-year old boy (who has watched pg-13 movies like Dark Night and Captain America)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Two questions: Does someone need to see any of the earlier movies to understand this one? Is it okay for a 9-year old boy (who has watched pg-13 movies like Dark Night and Captain America)? Answer 1, absolutely not Answer 2, it'll probably freak him out a bit but there's not a lot of graphic violence. I can't see why this would be any more intense than Dark Night Edited August 13, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Answer 1, absolutely notAnswer 2, it'll probably freak him out a bit but there's not a lot of graphic violence. I can't see why this would be any more intense than Dark Night Figured as much. Once I let him see Dark Knight I guess most other pg-13 movies won't be worse than that. Parent of the year candidate right here. Maybe I'll take him to see it at the theater that sells beer as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Figured as much. Once I let him see Dark Knight I guess most other pg-13 movies won't be worse than that. Parent of the year candidate right here. Maybe I'll take him to see it at the theater that sells beer as well. Meh, my nine and 11 year-olds LOVE the newest Batman movies. But they're homeschooled, so they're smarter than average... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 14, 2011 Author Share Posted August 14, 2011 will be emotionally intense for a 9 year old. nothing too graphic or sexual ... another call out to the original was that the mars launch they showed on the tv was actually the same launch heston went on. i believe they even named the ship in the clip, which was icarus i think. this suggests that there is canon in this one and it is connected to the original series, but in fact it doesn't gel with the earlier series because, as pointed out, caesar in the original was the offspring of cornelius and vera, i believe, after they travel back in time. so with the original canon, it's circular, like with the terminator. smart apes go back to give birth to a smart ape that starts the revolution. like in the terminator, a terminator goes back and his spare parts end up creating the terminators ... but where did they come from in the first place? this one indeed could have started it all in its own timeline, leading into the original timeline, but once the apes then go back in time, it creates an alternative timeline ... and, as with most time travel movies, the mind then blows up. but in that sense, this is kind of a prequel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 will be emotionally intense for a 9 year old. nothing too graphic or sexual ... another call out to the original was that the mars launch they showed on the tv was actually the same launch heston went on. i believe they even named the ship in the clip, which was icarus i think. this suggests that there is canon in this one and it is connected to the original series, but in fact it doesn't gel with the earlier series because, as pointed out, caesar in the original was the offspring of cornelius and vera, i believe, after they travel back in time. so with the original canon, it's circular, like with the terminator. smart apes go back to give birth to a smart ape that starts the revolution. like in the terminator, a terminator goes back and his spare parts end up creating the terminators ... but where did they come from in the first place? this one indeed could have started it all in its own timeline, leading into the original timeline, but once the apes then go back in time, it creates an alternative timeline ... and, as with most time travel movies, the mind then blows up. but in that sense, this is kind of a prequel. That's the beauty of this film: it IS the explanation for the statue of liberty at the end of the original. But it was the time travelling astronauts who cause a paradox that still leads to a planet of the apes, that we only see in Conquest and Battle. Past those two are what we haven't actually been shown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 That's the beauty of this film: it IS the explanation for the statue of liberty at the end of the original. Ok NOW I'm interested. Damnit...ya had to rope me in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 14, 2011 Author Share Posted August 14, 2011 That's the beauty of this film: it IS the explanation for the statue of liberty at the end of the original. But it was the time travelling astronauts who cause a paradox that still leads to a planet of the apes, that we only see in Conquest and Battle. Past those two are what we haven't actually been shown. so check me - in the original series of movies, i believe at the start of the 3rd one, cornelius and zira (not vera) go back in time and avoid the destruction of the earth. they eventually give birth to a baby ape named caesar, who is taken in secret by mr. roarke/khan who raises him in the circus. then, caesar eventually heads up the ape rebellion. so this caesar is different than one that is created from the new old-timers drug, which creates the dilemma. in either timeline, caesar leads a rebellion, but how caesar came to be differs. i chalk this up to wanting to reboot the series and taking some creative liberties. this is exactly what burton's film tried to do, but it sucked ass. so it, therefore, never really happened ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 (edited) so check me - in the original series of movies, i believe at the start of the 3rd one, cornelius and zira (not vera) go back in time and avoid the destruction of the earth. they eventually give birth to a baby ape named caesar, who is taken in secret by mr. roarke/khan who raises him in the circus. then, caesar eventually heads up the ape rebellion. so this caesar is different than one that is created from the new old-timers drug, which creates the dilemma. in either timeline, caesar leads a rebellion, but how caesar came to be differs. i chalk this up to wanting to reboot the series and taking some creative liberties. this is exactly what burton's film tried to do, but it sucked ass. so it, therefore, never really happened ... You got everything right except the timeline: the Conquest Caeser only comes to be because his parents return to our time in the original ship. There are allusions to events of the past in the first two films that get contradicted in the final 3. So what essentially happens is the timeline diverges from the real one just seen in Rise to the events of Escape, Conquest and Battle. Clear now? Don't forget that Rod Serling is responsible for the original's ending! ETA - poking around a little, it's not quite as clear cut. Recall that in the 1st film the apes only had a bare knowledge of the lost human civilization. In 'Escape' the time travelling apes are offering all types of info as to the specifics of the fall of man, something neither of those characters had any inkling of in the first film. Those 'details' get incorporated into 'Conquest' but even then they move those supposed events around for that film. Finally, the civilization in 'Battle' that holds off the militant humans (who become the Alpha/Omega worshippers in 'Beneath') is a more or less integrated one, not resembling the militant planet of the apes in the first film, which has always sort of implied that the Conquest Caeser put humans in a more equal footing. [Then again, if you've ever seen the Director's Cut of Conquest, you'd know it was the exact opposite - and I recommend seeing that version. It's basically, 'get ready human trash, your days are done' and didn't do well with 1972 test audiences.] So it's all pretty loosy goosey, but showing the launch of the Icarus tells me they intend Rise to be the lead in to the first film, after which events diverge from time travel at the beginning of Escape. Edited August 14, 2011 by Pope Flick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 So, the question that must be asked: With my wife heading out of town for a week, is the quality of the original series of movies good enough to warrant a geek-out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 So, the question that must be asked: With my wife heading out of town for a week, is the quality of the original series of movies good enough to warrant a geek-out? Tough call. If you're in the mood, sure. But keep in mind the production quality slides beginning with the sequel, and by the time you get to Battle it looks like a TV movie. But if you like sci-fi and can get into the stories I say go for it, especially if you haven't seen the later ones like Escape and Conquest which are strong in the story department and make for interesting early 70s films to watch. None of the sequels match the original though, that much is sure. (And if you're going to watch them be sure to view the DC of 'Conquest') Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.