.html In a message dated 8/16/01 11:25:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
LordTZer0@... writes:

<< Hell, Burton called it a perfect film. >>

When did he say that!?!
I thought even he was unhappy with being pushed to deliver on time.

No, that's what he called the original '68 film, and of course he's right.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

.html

Well, goody, goody.   The new "Planet of the Apes" may be an embarassment
critically, but at least it's not at the boxoffice.  It is rather heartening
to know how many were interested in a new APES, just too bad the baboons at
Fox couldn't have delivered a better product.

And it's spelled sequel, not sequal.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

.html <.html

In a message dated 8/17/01 1:41:54 AM Central Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

<< And it is spelled "colour", not "color". :) >>

Depends what side of the pond you're on, Mike.

In a message dated 8/17/01 1:52:22 AM Central Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

<< has this person had a car accident that has retarded them in some way,
maybe this person is not too familiar with the English language?). >>

Hey, maybe they have a lame ISP with no spell check on their e-mail.
As I said before, if not for that you'd be deciphering my post for days!
Love that spell check! I just found out I can't spell decipher!

In a message dated 8/17/01 4:34:23 AM Central Daylight Time,
prophecysite@... writes:

<< It only means thier pissed off over how well the movie has done at the box
office.>>

Not that bad but not that great either. After 3 weeks still pulling in 1.2
mill per day. But to make the 200 mil domestic make it would have to keep
that up for another couple of months. Face it! It ain't gonna happen. I,
as much as anyone would like for it to, but I won't hold my breath for the
sequel. I think if they do make it won't get half the budget. And judging
the way Hollywood works lately, they'll take one look at the way Rush Hour 2
and American Pie 2 cut them down to size at the box-office and load it with
jokes! Hope that doesn't happen. I don't mind a few to break the tension,
but this should be a serious film, not a comedy or kids film like they keep
trying to make it. If I had my way it'd be rated R! If it took hot monkey
love and a gore fest to do it! NC-17 wouldn't bother me either. Talking
monkeys are hard enough to pull off on their own, without making a joke out
of it. That was their worry in the first place!

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 2:45:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

PERFECT?????

Not even Cougar would have the balls to claim that!

It is as perfect as Burton's is.

Michael



You tryin' to start a fight?!!!   Don't you be talkin' 'bout my POTA!

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 2:52:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

And by the way everyone, I am a school teacher (or at least I have a Uni
degree that says as such), and NONE of you spell all that well.  To go out
of your way to actually make a point of someone's poor spelling is just
unforgivable.  Especially when you do not know that person (has this person
had a car accident that has retarded them in some way, maybe this person is
not too familiar with the English language?).

It strikes me as a form of snobbery and ignorance.

Michael



Thank you, Mr. Know-it-all!

-- Rocket J. Squirrel<.html

.html
Thank you, Mr. Know-it-all!

-- Rocket J. Squirrel
<.html

.html In a message dated 8/17/01 2:45:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

PERFECT?????

Not even Cougar would have the balls to claim that!

It is as perfect as Burton's is.

Michael



You tryin' to start a fight?!!!   Don't you be talkin' 'bout my POTA!

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

Would you believe it is rated M in Australia?

What the hell?

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: LordTZer0@... [LordTZer0@...]
Sent: Friday, 17 August 2001 21:23
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [pota] Re: Spelling

In a message dated 8/17/01 4:34:23 AM Central Daylight Time,
prophecysite@... writes:

<< It only means thier pissed off over how well the movie has done at the
box
office.>>

Not that bad but not that great either. After 3 weeks still pulling in 1.2
mill per day. But to make the 200 mil domestic make it would have to keep
that up for another couple of months. Face it! It ain't gonna happen. I,
as much as anyone would like for it to, but I won't hold my breath for the
sequel. I think if they do make it won't get half the budget. And judging
the way Hollywood works lately, they'll take one look at the way Rush Hour 2
and American Pie 2 cut them down to size at the box-office and load it with
jokes! Hope that doesn't happen. I don't mind a few to break the tension,
but this should be a serious film, not a comedy or kids film like they keep
trying to make it. If I had my way it'd be rated R! If it took hot monkey
love and a gore fest to do it! NC-17 wouldn't bother me either. Talking
monkeys are hard enough to pull off on their own, without making a joke out
of it. That was their worry in the first place!

In a message dated 8/17/01 2:52:13 AM, whitty@... writes:

<< And by the way everyone, I am a school teacher (or at least I have a Uni

degree that says as such), and NONE of you spell all that well. To go out

of your way to actually make a point of someone's poor spelling is just

unforgivable. Especially when you do not know that person (has this person

had a car accident that has retarded them in some way, maybe this person is

not too familiar with the English language?).


It strikes me as a form of snobbery and ignorance. >>

Michael,

I know what you're saying, that's why I have never publicly criticized anyone
here for their spelling (I myself am guilty of the occasional typo). Still
some of the posts here are out of hand in the spelling department. I can
handle "alot" or "their" instead of "they're" once in a while, but some posts
contain so many errors that they are practically indecipherable. These are
usually from the same person or persons, so if I am not up for the extra
effort it would take to read one of these posts on a given day, I sometimes
skip them altogether. It's just not worth my time, which is sad because these
posts may actually contain a worthwhile thought that I would be missing out
on. Of course if there's some serious reason for these errors then there is
nothing that can be done, but if it is simply a lack of effort to use a
spell-check or proofread a post before sending it out, then that is just pure
laziness.

Just my 6 1/2 cents on the subject....

Matt

Attachments :

Well I guess you know that Planet of the Apes is hit when the press starts
hounding its stars. Poor Estella Warren can't even enjoy a short vacation
sunbathing topless on the French Riviera after the British Premiere without
some photographer snapping pics.

Well anyways I came across this pic and felt compelled to share it with the
group. I guess this is on-topic. I hope no one is offended by this.

Matt

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:06 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] 200 million mark is hit!

In a message dated 8/16/01 9:31:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 Alex - - -

 That's not what they're looking for. They want $200 million HERE, not
$152 million. "Pearl Harbor" has made $200 million overseas and is almost
$200 million HERE. That's $400 million worldwide and IT'S considered a
disappointment. Nice try, though.

                                                                           
 - - - - Jeff

I forget where it was that I read recently that a film's domestic gross is
only around 20% of what it does worldwide these days!

Something to ponder.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:19 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] APES get mooned!

In a message dated 8/16/01 9:38:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

What is it with you naysayers and turds, dumps? The correct terminology is
" that miracle of circumstance that is perhaps overcooked but nonetheless
is a valiant group effort". And yes, in this corporate world you have to
eat what's good for them if you want your dessert. Or desert, as in
Forbidden Zone.

                                                            - - - - K

Hey!!!   Are you so full of hugger-mugger you just got it coming out of your
ears these days?   A valiant group effort?!!!  Everybody's laughing all the
way to the bank with this, and the poor original film has yet another blemish
to it's reputation as a serious, adult science fiction film.  Well, it lived
down it's sequels to be recognized as a classic, so I guess it can survive
this.  Hell, Burton called it a perfect film.  I agree with him there.  He
sure as hell doesn't know how to make one, though!

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

Hi!

File this under 'Money talks, BS walks'!

===============================================
''Planet of the Apes'' director rules out sequel
Friday August 17 3:36 AM ET


LONDON (Reuters) - ``Planet of the Apes'' director Tim Burton is
adamant there will be no sequel to the blockbuster movie.

``The idea of doing a sequel -- I'd rather jump out of the window, I
swear to God,'' Burton told Britain's Independent newspaper in an
interview published Friday.

Hollywood's so-called ``King of the Weird,'' whose previous quirky
triumphs have ranged from ``Batman'' to ``Edward Scissorhands,'' took
a swipe at studio bosses.


``They give you a script, and you do a budget based on that, and
say 'This movie would cost $300 million to make', and then they treat
you like a crazy, overspending, crazy-person. It's like, 'Well, you
gave me the script','' Burton said.

``I'm fascinated by the studio technique that sort of leaves you
bloodied, beaten and left for dead right before you're supposed to go
out and make a great movie for them.''

Burton said the only time anyone listened in Hollywood was when ``you
go ballistic and psychotic.''

``Planet of the Apes'' has grossed more than $200 million worldwide.
Burton has billed it as a ``re-imagination'' of the 1968 sci-fi
classic, which spawned four sequels.

Reuters/Variety
===============================

BTW, wasn't 'Rule the Planet' from a tag line for BATTLE?

Best Wishes!
J.

She gave a plastic performance so I'm not surprised.

----- Original Message -----
From: <MTotsky@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 7:41 AM
Subject: [pota] Estella Warren Paparazzi Photo


> Well I guess you know that Planet of the Apes is hit when the press starts
> hounding its stars. Poor Estella Warren can't even enjoy a short vacation
> sunbathing topless on the French Riviera after the British Premiere
without
> some photographer snapping pics.
>
> Well anyways I came across this pic and felt compelled to share it with
the
> group. I guess this is on-topic. I hope no one is offended by this.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>

Burton is just exhausted. He'll come around. And if not, maybe a new
director would be better. What's Franklin Schaffner Jr. doing these days?

- - -
- Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <happyfortune@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:37 AM
Subject: [pota] director rules out sequel


> Hi!
>
> File this under 'Money talks, BS walks'!
>
> ===============================================
> ''Planet of the Apes'' director rules out sequel
> Friday August 17 3:36 AM ET
>
>
> LONDON (Reuters) - ``Planet of the Apes'' director Tim Burton is
> adamant there will be no sequel to the blockbuster movie.
>
> ``The idea of doing a sequel -- I'd rather jump out of the window, I
> swear to God,'' Burton told Britain's Independent newspaper in an
> interview published Friday.
>
> Hollywood's so-called ``King of the Weird,'' whose previous quirky
> triumphs have ranged from ``Batman'' to ``Edward Scissorhands,'' took
> a swipe at studio bosses.
>
>
> ``They give you a script, and you do a budget based on that, and
> say 'This movie would cost $300 million to make', and then they treat
> you like a crazy, overspending, crazy-person. It's like, 'Well, you
> gave me the script','' Burton said.
>
> ``I'm fascinated by the studio technique that sort of leaves you
> bloodied, beaten and left for dead right before you're supposed to go
> out and make a great movie for them.''
>
> Burton said the only time anyone listened in Hollywood was when ``you
> go ballistic and psychotic.''
>
> ``Planet of the Apes'' has grossed more than $200 million worldwide.
> Burton has billed it as a ``re-imagination'' of the 1968 sci-fi
> classic, which spawned four sequels.
>
> Reuters/Variety
> ===============================
>
> BTW, wasn't 'Rule the Planet' from a tag line for BATTLE?
>
> Best Wishes!
> J.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Burton also nixed doing a "Batman" sequel until a script arrived that
intrigued him. I bet they've got a writer on it right now. But I admire
Burton for speaking out on the myopia (I spelled it right!) of the studio
system.

Movieheadlines.net says Warner Bros. is sweating over who's going to write
"Harry Potter 3". Number 3!! They haven't even released 1 yet. "Apes" did
well enough, there will be another one.

Sad sequel news: "Halloween 8" has been delayed until next summer. I know,
I know, I'm taking it hard too.

- - -
Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Krueger" <williejoe@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: [pota] director rules out sequel


> Burton is just exhausted. He'll come around. And if not, maybe a new
> director would be better. What's Franklin Schaffner Jr. doing these days?
>
> - -
-
> - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <happyfortune@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:37 AM
> Subject: [pota] director rules out sequel
>
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > File this under 'Money talks, BS walks'!
> >
> > ===============================================
> > ''Planet of the Apes'' director rules out sequel
> > Friday August 17 3:36 AM ET
> >
> >
> > LONDON (Reuters) - ``Planet of the Apes'' director Tim Burton is
> > adamant there will be no sequel to the blockbuster movie.
> >
> > ``The idea of doing a sequel -- I'd rather jump out of the window, I
> > swear to God,'' Burton told Britain's Independent newspaper in an
> > interview published Friday.
> >
> > Hollywood's so-called ``King of the Weird,'' whose previous quirky
> > triumphs have ranged from ``Batman'' to ``Edward Scissorhands,'' took
> > a swipe at studio bosses.
> >
> >
> > ``They give you a script, and you do a budget based on that, and
> > say 'This movie would cost $300 million to make', and then they treat
> > you like a crazy, overspending, crazy-person. It's like, 'Well, you
> > gave me the script','' Burton said.
> >
> > ``I'm fascinated by the studio technique that sort of leaves you
> > bloodied, beaten and left for dead right before you're supposed to go
> > out and make a great movie for them.''
> >
> > Burton said the only time anyone listened in Hollywood was when ``you
> > go ballistic and psychotic.''
> >
> > ``Planet of the Apes'' has grossed more than $200 million worldwide.
> > Burton has billed it as a ``re-imagination'' of the 1968 sci-fi
> > classic, which spawned four sequels.
> >
> > Reuters/Variety
> > ===============================
> >
> > BTW, wasn't 'Rule the Planet' from a tag line for BATTLE?
> >
> > Best Wishes!
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi!

--- In pota@y..., "Jack Krueger" <williejoe@e...> wrote:
> She gave a plastic performance so I'm not surprised.

He-he. She does have a great mouth, doesn't she? ;-)

Best Wishes!
J.

I'm still hoping for a sequal , and there probaly will be one .
Burton just needs a break .And there are all ways other directors out
there.

--- In pota@y..., "Jack Krueger" <williejoe@e...> wrote:
> Burton is just exhausted. He'll come around. And if not, maybe a
new
> director would be better. What's Franklin Schaffner Jr. doing these
days?
>
>
- - -
> - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <happyfortune@y...>
> To: <pota@y...>
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:37 AM
> Subject: [pota] director rules out sequel
>
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > File this under 'Money talks, BS walks'!
> >
> > ===============================================
> > ''Planet of the Apes'' director rules out sequel
> > Friday August 17 3:36 AM ET
> >
> >
> > LONDON (Reuters) - ``Planet of the Apes'' director Tim Burton is
> > adamant there will be no sequel to the blockbuster movie.
> >
> > ``The idea of doing a sequel -- I'd rather jump out of the
window, I
> > swear to God,'' Burton told Britain's Independent newspaper in an
> > interview published Friday.
> >
> > Hollywood's so-called ``King of the Weird,'' whose previous quirky
> > triumphs have ranged from ``Batman'' to ``Edward Scissorhands,''
took
> > a swipe at studio bosses.
> >
> >
> > ``They give you a script, and you do a budget based on that, and
> > say 'This movie would cost $300 million to make', and then they
treat
> > you like a crazy, overspending, crazy-person. It's like, 'Well,
you
> > gave me the script','' Burton said.
> >
> > ``I'm fascinated by the studio technique that sort of leaves you
> > bloodied, beaten and left for dead right before you're supposed
to go
> > out and make a great movie for them.''
> >
> > Burton said the only time anyone listened in Hollywood was when
``you
> > go ballistic and psychotic.''
> >
> > ``Planet of the Apes'' has grossed more than $200 million
worldwide.
> > Burton has billed it as a ``re-imagination'' of the 1968 sci-fi
> > classic, which spawned four sequels.
> >
> > Reuters/Variety
> > ===============================
> >
> > BTW, wasn't 'Rule the Planet' from a tag line for BATTLE?
> >
> > Best Wishes!
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >

The POTA films are out on DVD again next week. My paper has the original
listing for $24.95. What's up with that? That's the same price as the 2-disc
"Behind". Is there more on it than we know?

- -
- - - K

----- Original Message -----
From: <CrystalRoses16@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:20 AM
Subject: [pota] Re: director rules out sequel


> I'm still hoping for a sequal , and there probaly will be one .
> Burton just needs a break .And there are all ways other directors out
> there.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In pota@y..., "Jack Krueger" <williejoe@e...> wrote:
> > Burton is just exhausted. He'll come around. And if not, maybe a
> new
> > director would be better. What's Franklin Schaffner Jr. doing these
> days?
> >
> >
> - - -
> > - Jeff
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <happyfortune@y...>
> > To: <pota@y...>
> > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:37 AM
> > Subject: [pota] director rules out sequel
> >
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > File this under 'Money talks, BS walks'!
> > >
> > > ===============================================
> > > ''Planet of the Apes'' director rules out sequel
> > > Friday August 17 3:36 AM ET
> > >
> > >
> > > LONDON (Reuters) - ``Planet of the Apes'' director Tim Burton is
> > > adamant there will be no sequel to the blockbuster movie.
> > >
> > > ``The idea of doing a sequel -- I'd rather jump out of the
> window, I
> > > swear to God,'' Burton told Britain's Independent newspaper in an
> > > interview published Friday.
> > >
> > > Hollywood's so-called ``King of the Weird,'' whose previous quirky
> > > triumphs have ranged from ``Batman'' to ``Edward Scissorhands,''
> took
> > > a swipe at studio bosses.
> > >
> > >
> > > ``They give you a script, and you do a budget based on that, and
> > > say 'This movie would cost $300 million to make', and then they
> treat
> > > you like a crazy, overspending, crazy-person. It's like, 'Well,
> you
> > > gave me the script','' Burton said.
> > >
> > > ``I'm fascinated by the studio technique that sort of leaves you
> > > bloodied, beaten and left for dead right before you're supposed
> to go
> > > out and make a great movie for them.''
> > >
> > > Burton said the only time anyone listened in Hollywood was when
> ``you
> > > go ballistic and psychotic.''
> > >
> > > ``Planet of the Apes'' has grossed more than $200 million
> worldwide.
> > > Burton has billed it as a ``re-imagination'' of the 1968 sci-fi
> > > classic, which spawned four sequels.
> > >
> > > Reuters/Variety
> > > ===============================
> > >
> > > BTW, wasn't 'Rule the Planet' from a tag line for BATTLE?
> > >
> > > Best Wishes!
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 11:30:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 Deep down, Burton is an "Apes" fan, and subconsciously he sabotaged his
own film so it wouldn't be competition in our hearts for the original. He
sacrificed himself to secure the original's place in history! I think we
all owe him a debt.

                                                                - - - -
Jeff



You know, I think your VERY right there.  Burton knew Fox was up to no good
wanting to make a 're-imagined' APES.   Tim Burton is my hero!!

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 12:31:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 The POTA films are out on DVD again next week. My paper has the original
listing for $24.95. What's up with that? That's the same price as the 2-disc
"Behind". Is there more on it than we know?

                                                                       - -
- - - K

Yesterday I read at thedigitalbits.com that the APES DVDs coming out next
week are just re-issues of the previous ones.  Nothing new, just Fox trying
to make a few bucks.

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 11:38:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
happyfortune@... writes:

LONDON (Reuters) - ``Planet of the Apes'' director Tim Burton is
adamant there will be no sequel to the blockbuster movie.

``The idea of doing a sequel -- I'd rather jump out of the window, I
swear to God,'' Burton told Britain's Independent newspaper in an
interview published Friday.

See, I told you all he's say no to doing a sequel!!!   Burton knows, I tell
you, he knows!!!!

-- Rory<.html

.htmlWhat about 2003 that we read for sequal?why would the get everyones hopes
up?I am not buying it,people say all kinds things.hes just needs a rest.Bryan<.html

.htmlWhat about Jason 10?was supposed to start aug 17 today.Bryan<.html

.html

hehehehe!!!!

 

Best,

Al

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

She should get a refund on that facelift. Looks more like Estelle Getty.

MTotsky@... wrote:

> Well I guess you know that Planet of the Apes is hit when the press starts
> hounding its stars. Poor Estella Warren can't even enjoy a short vacation
> sunbathing topless on the French Riviera after the British Premiere without
> some photographer snapping pics.
>
> Well anyways I came across this pic and felt compelled to share it with the
> group. I guess this is on-topic. I hope no one is offended by this.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> [Image]

.html I'm sure there will be a sequel. X-Men only made $155M domestically and they're making a sequel to that. Maybe Fox will alternate between Star wars, Apes and X-Men sequels over the next few years? What ever happened to the X-File movie franchise? Failing that, it could be time for a new Hot Shots or Revenge of the Nerds movie. Urgh.
Best
KT

Jack Krueger wrote:

  "Pearl Harbor" did well worldwide, especially Japan (sold as a love story, not that troublesome history stuff). Saved it's ass. From what I understand, "Apes" is opening well and then dropping. But it's doing about as well as "Jurassic Park".                                                                        - - - -Jeff K.

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:06 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] 200 million mark is hit!

 In a message dated 8/16/01 9:31:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:
 
 

 Alex - - -

 That's not what they're looking for. They want $200 million HERE, not
$152 million. "Pearl Harbor" has made $200 million overseas and is almost
$200 million HERE. That's $400 million worldwide and IT'S considered a
disappointment. Nice try, though.
 

 - - - - Jeff
 

I forget where it was that I read recently that a film's domestic gross is
only around 20% of what it does worldwide these days!

Something to ponder.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

<.html

Great analogy!
Do you want fries with that?

Shelby Rhodes wrote:
I liken it to McDonald's. I don't care how many millions have been
served, it doesn't make it gourmet food. That's a pretty
accurate comparison actually . . . it's the film equivalent of fast
food.

In a message dated 8/17/01 10:43:14 AM Central Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

<< Burton is just exhausted. He'll come around. And if not, maybe a new
director would be better. What's Franklin Schaffner Jr. doing these days? >>

Terry Gilliam...T E R R Y Gilliam!

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 4:12:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, slave1@...
writes:

I think the same is true of the new Apes film.  They could have put anything
on screen (actually that's what they did) and people would flock to see it,
out of curiousity if nothing else.  The title is selling the movie, not the
story this time around.  This version seemed to have been handled more as a
commercial commodity rather than a heart-felt attempt at making a piece of
art.

I liken it to McDonald's.  I don't care how many millions have been served,
it doesn't make it gourmet food.  That's a pretty accurate comparison
actually . . . it's the film equivalent of fast food.



That's very true.  This new movie is really a different type of film from the
original.  The '68 film was and still is a serious science fiction film, but
the new movie isn't serious about anything except making money, mostly by
suckering people in to see it.   It's a real shame.

-- Rory<.html

.html <.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 5:14:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

I'm sure there will be a sequel. X-Men only made $155M domestically and
they're making a sequel to that. Maybe Fox will alternate between Star
wars, Apes and X-Men sequels over the next few years? What ever happened to
the X-File movie franchise? Failing that, it could be time for a new Hot
Shots or Revenge of the Nerds movie. Urgh.
Best
KT

How much did "X-Men" cost to make?  I don't think it was $100 Million.  

Okay, I'm now going to make another prediction.  Everyone mark this down.

In the next two or three months executives at Fox will start to let leak how
'disappointed' they were with the returns on APES.  It'll come out they were
hoping APES would do around $300 million domestically, and given the
overwhelmingly negative critical reaction to Burton's 'vision' (They'll blame
it on Burton.), plus the cost of mounting the film, they're not thinking
sequel at this time, though they'll keep their minds (?) open for another
APES film sometime in the future.  Which means, "Don't hold your breath!"

I'll bet anything this is what happens.  Remember my words.

-- Rory<.html

T,

That would be too easy and Gilliam would not put up with any shit from Prick
Zanuck, so don't count on it.

Gilliam would probably make the lobotomised teenagers think - and more
think, less popcorn!!!!

But I agree there would be none better than Gilliam to make Boulle's book.
Let Bruce Willis take the lead role (as in 12 Monkeys).

And don't believe everything you read in the British Press - Tim probably
never said ANY of that. And If he did, who was it who said Heston "will
DEFINITELY not be in the remake". A ploy to make the public think "how
could that be true?" when they know all along.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: LordTZer0@... [LordTZer0@...]
Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 7:40
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [pota] director rules out sequel

In a message dated 8/17/01 10:43:14 AM Central Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

<< Burton is just exhausted. He'll come around. And if not, maybe a new
director would be better. What's Franklin Schaffner Jr. doing these days?

>>

Terry Gilliam...T E R R Y Gilliam!

.html In a message dated 8/17/01 4:12:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, slave1@...
writes:

I think the same is true of the new Apes film.  They could have put anything
on screen (actually that's what they did) and people would flock to see it,
out of curiousity if nothing else.  The title is selling the movie, not the
story this time around.  This version seemed to have been handled more as a
commercial commodity rather than a heart-felt attempt at making a piece of
art.

I liken it to McDonald's.  I don't care how many millions have been served,
it doesn't make it gourmet food.  That's a pretty accurate comparison
actually . . . it's the film equivalent of fast food.



That's very true.  This new movie is really a different type of film from the
original.  The '68 film was and still is a serious science fiction film, but
the new movie isn't serious about anything except making money, mostly by
suckering people in to see it.   It's a real shame.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 6:36:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

But I agree there would be none better than Gilliam to make Boulle's book.
Let Bruce Willis take the lead role (as in 12 Monkeys).

They'll never make Boulle's book now, the new movies has ruined it.  Maybe
after we're all dead someone will do it, in 2068, and then on their
computer!!!

Michael, you'd want to see Bruce Willis naked in a literal version of
Boulle's book?  No wonder you keep talking about my ass.

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 6:44:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

We need a genuine fan to write the script and another to direct.  And a big
guy like Arnie to send Zanuck and his advice to hell where it belongs.

I do not see this happening in our lifetime (but I hope I'm wrong).

Michael



Oh, Michael, you know as well as I do that this is just so much mental
masturbation.  Who was it that said 90% of everything is crap?  I guess the
only way to get through life is just learn to love crap.  We're all just
going to die in the end anyway, so what does it matter?

-- Rory<.html

<< Deep down, Burton is an "Apes" fan, and subconsciously he sabotaged his

> own film so it wouldn't be competition in our hearts for the original. He
> sacrificed himself to secure the original's place in history! I think we
> all owe him a debt. >>

You know, I think you're on to something there. I'm sure he could feel the
studio breathing down his neck on this summer release thing, and he said,
"Oh, you want Apes? I'll give ya Apes! There ya go! All done." And just
wiped his hands of the whole thing. It'll cost a fortune to get him and the
cast back. Don't believe me? It's not just H B-C that's asking for a raise.
Check out the POTA interviews at Cinescape.com. Roth wants more money as
well. Only Paul is raring to go for at least a couple more.

<< What about 2003 that we read for sequal?why would the get everyones hopes

>>

Many movies were made for sequels and are still waiting Remo Williams, The
Adventure Begins, and failed to continue...And what about Buckaroo Banzai
Against The World Crime League? These films were made over 15 years ago.
They didn't do Ape sized business but this one didn't meet expectations
either. My prediction on Domestic Box-office Gross . . . $185 million. Very
respectable, but well short of the $200 mill. mark. That means a sequel is
not a sure thing.

.htmlClick here: Empire Online | The Film Website | Reviews

Well, here's how the British are viewing the new POTA.  Not much different
than the reaction here. <.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:25 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] 200 million mark is hit!

In a message dated 8/17/01 5:14:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

I'm sure there will be a sequel. X-Men only made $155M domestically and
they're making a sequel to that. Maybe Fox will alternate between Star
wars, Apes and X-Men sequels over the next few years? What ever happened to
the X-File movie franchise? Failing that, it could be time for a new Hot
Shots or Revenge of the Nerds movie. Urgh.
Best
KT

How much did "X-Men" cost to make?  I don't think it was $100 Million.  

Okay, I'm now going to make another prediction.  Everyone mark this down.

In the next two or three months executives at Fox will start to let leak how
'disappointed' they were with the returns on APES.  It'll come out they were
hoping APES would do around $300 million domestically, and given the
overwhelmingly negative critical reaction to Burton's 'vision' (They'll blame
it on Burton.), plus the cost of mounting the film, they're not thinking
sequel at this time, though they'll keep their minds (?) open for another
APES film sometime in the future.  Which means, "Don't hold your breath!"

I'll bet anything this is what happens.  Remember my words.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

I can't open the stupid MIME file.
Can someone repost it as a jpg or a bit map or something!
So I can get the jokes.

In a message dated 8/17/01 4:14:08 PM Central Daylight Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

<< I'm sure there will be a sequel. X-Men only made $155M domestically and
they're making a sequel to that. >>

But did X-Men cost $100 M to begin with?
It may have only cost $77.2 M, allowing share holders to double their
investment on Domestic receipts alone.

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael Whitty

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:36 PM

Subject: [pota] Sequel?

But Rory,

 

In all seriousness, the original was made with the same intention (to rake in the $$$$), not for art's sake.  But the executives in those days actually gave a crap about the mental age of the public.

 

Now the formula is sadly different and the only people making cerebrally challenging movies are starving or so rich and well established that they can express themselves (even Gilliam has a reputation for expensive movies that flop like the Fisher King and a lot of Hollywood execsa are very cautios to back him because of this).

 

But even this does not always work - look what Kubrick bowed out on!!!  You can't tell me he didn't just decide he wanted to see Nicole (or Tom.....hmmmm....???) naked one day and that was his only motivation to make that sub-par porno movie "Eyes Wide Shut".  Imagine what Stanley could have done with apes - or would he have screwed up too?

 

We need a genuine fan to write the script and another to direct.  And a big guy like Arnie to send Zanuck and his advice to hell where it belongs.

 

I do not see this happening in our lifetime (but I hope I'm wrong).

 

Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Haristas@... [Haristas@...]
Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 8:10
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [pota] Re: Spelling

In a message dated 8/17/01 4:12:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, slave1@...
writes:

I think the same is true of the new Apes film.  They could have put anything
on screen (actually that's what they did) and people would flock to see it,
out of curiousity if nothing else.  The title is selling the movie, not the
story this time around.  This version seemed to have been handled more as a
commercial commodity rather than a heart-felt attempt at making a piece of
art.

I liken it to McDonald's.  I don't care how many millions have been served,
it doesn't make it gourmet food.  That's a pretty accurate comparison
actually . . . it's the film equivalent of fast food.

That's very true.  This new movie is really a different type of film from the
original.  The '68 film was and still is a serious science fiction film, but
the new movie isn't serious about anything except making money, mostly by
suckering people in to see it.   It's a real shame.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:52 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] Sequel?

In a message dated 8/17/01 6:44:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
whitty@... writes:

We need a genuine fan to write the script and another to direct.  And a big
guy like Arnie to send Zanuck and his advice to hell where it belongs.

I do not see this happening in our lifetime (but I hope I'm wrong).

Michael

Oh, Michael, you know as well as I do that this is just so much mental
masturbation.  Who was it that said 90% of everything is crap?  I guess the
only way to get through life is just learn to love crap.  We're all just
going to die in the end anyway, so what does it matter?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

In a message dated 8/17/01 4:21:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

<< That's a pretty accurate comparison actually . . . it's the film
equivalent of fast
food. >>

I agree. You don't rush art! The suits only think of it as a business. If
they had really wanted a top film they should have taken a year of
pre-production, and year of production, and a year of post-production. And
spent the $300 million that Burton had budgeted the film for. We all know
that didn't happen. But given the script that was actually shot, it wouldn't
have been worth it. I sure would like to read a copy of the script they had
before the rewrites!

What about "Scary Movie", which advertised there would never be a sequel.
Guess what, there was. And it flopped.

- - -
- - K.

----- Original Message -----
From: <LordTZer0@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: [pota] director rules out sequel


>
> << What about 2003 that we read for sequal?why would the get everyones
hopes
> >>
>
> Many movies were made for sequels and are still waiting Remo Williams,
The
> Adventure Begins, and failed to continue...And what about Buckaroo Banzai
> Against The World Crime League? These films were made over 15 years ago.
> They didn't do Ape sized business but this one didn't meet expectations
> either. My prediction on Domestic Box-office Gross . . . $185 million.
Very
> respectable, but well short of the $200 mill. mark. That means a sequel
is
> not a sure thing.
>
>
>
>
>
>

It was brought up all the movies that were supposed to have sequels but
didn't. How about this? They're doing a sequel to "Tron". how's that for
rising from the grave?

-
- - - jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Lawless" <lawford42@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:32 PM
Subject: [pota] later


> Hi all,
>
> Just a quick note to say goodbye for now. Too much else going on (none of
> it good) and there's just way too many posts to deal with.
>
> If things get better I'll join again. Hopefully by then all the movie
> talk will have petered out and the list will be a little more manageable.
>
> It's been fun everyone.
>
>
>
> Chris L.
> ____

<< We need a genuine fan to write the script and another to direct. And a big
guy like Arnie to send Zanuck and his advice to hell where it belongs. >>

If I say this sequel can be made, This Sequel Can be Made! I'LL MAKE THIS
SEQUEL! I'M NOT AFRAID TO MAKE THIS FUC*ING SEQUEL!!!


T (ala Robert Duvall's Lt. Col. Wild Bill Kilgore, from Apocalypse Now)

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 7:34:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

It was brought up all the movies that were supposed to have sequels but
didn't. How about this? They're doing a sequel to "Tron". how's that for
rising from the grave?

                                                                          -
- - - jeff

Oh that's Disney for 'ya!  That rat fink mouse will do anything for a buck.<.html

Somebody told me they heard Burton's "I'd rather jump out a window" quote
about the sequel on the radio. Man, that's getting around! He must be saying
that in every interview. It'll be hard for Fox to miss that.

- -
- - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Lawless" <lawford42@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:32 PM
Subject: [pota] later


> Hi all,
>
> Just a quick note to say goodbye for now. Too much else going on (none of
> it good) and there's just way too many posts to deal with.
>
> If things get better I'll join again. Hopefully by then all the movie
> talk will have petered out and the list will be a little more manageable.
>
> It's been fun everyone.
>
>
>
> Chris L.
> ____

.html Hey, as a movie goer, I was sucked into seeing the original when it came out. There were bad big budget movies back then too. About 60% of 'Return of the Jedi' comes to mind.
Best,
KEN

Haristas@... wrote:

In a message dated 8/17/01 7:34:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:
 
 

It was brought up all the movies that were supposed to have sequels but
didn't. How about this? They're doing a sequel to "Tron". how's that for
rising from the grave?

                                                                          -
- - - jeff
 
 

Oh that's Disney for 'ya!  That rat fink mouse will do anything for a buck.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 9:35:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

Hey, as a movie goer, I was sucked into seeing the original when it came
out. There were bad big budget movies back then too. About 60% of 'Return
of the Jedi' comes to mind.
Best,
KEN

I remember seeing "Return of the Jedi" for the first time, and about halfway
through I suddenly realized I was bored out of my bird!

I was sucked into seeing the '68 POTA, too, from seeing the TV commercials.  
I was nuts for the movie for about two months before I saw it.

I say I was 'sucked' in, NOT 'suckered' in, and I think that for a lot of
moviegoers today they are suckered into seeing movies because the $30 million
studio ad campaigns give the impression that the latest film is a 'major
event.'   Well, some are and some aren't.   Burton's APES certainly was an
'event' movie.  It's just too bad it wasn't better.   Imagine how much more
business this movie would be doing if it had gotten rave reviews and
fantastic word-of-mouth.  It's doing as well as it is because people love
APES, not because it's a great flick.

Oh, I feel I'm stuck in a rut here.   Isn't there anything else to talk about?

-- Rory<.html

.html

Oh, I feel I'm stuck in a rut here.   Isn't there anything else to talk about?

-- Rory

Well, on a positive note, I have to admit I really did like Danny Elfman's score :)

 

 

 

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/17/01 10:13:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, slave1@...
writes:

Well, on a positive note, I have to admit I really did like Danny Elfman's
score :)

Yeah, I listened to it probably four times befoe I saw the movie.  Did I
mention before that I thought the main titles in the new film were cool?

-- Rory<.html

Found some POTA reviews at Salon.com through the AOL movies & times section.

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael Whitty

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:36 PM

Subject: [pota] Sequel?

But Rory,

 

In all seriousness, the original was made with the same intention (to rake in the $$$$), not for art's sake.  But the executives in those days actually gave a crap about the mental age of the public.

 

Now the formula is sadly different and the only people making cerebrally challenging movies are starving or so rich and well established that they can express themselves (even Gilliam has a reputation for expensive movies that flop like the Fisher King and a lot of Hollywood execsa are very cautios to back him because of this).

 

But even this does not always work - look what Kubrick bowed out on!!!  You can't tell me he didn't just decide he wanted to see Nicole (or Tom.....hmmmm....???) naked one day and that was his only motivation to make that sub-par porno movie "Eyes Wide Shut".  Imagine what Stanley could have done with apes - or would he have screwed up too?

 

We need a genuine fan to write the script and another to direct.  And a big guy like Arnie to send Zanuck and his advice to hell where it belongs.

 

I do not see this happening in our lifetime (but I hope I'm wrong).

 

Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Haristas@... [Haristas@...]
Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 8:10
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [pota] Re: Spelling

In a message dated 8/17/01 4:12:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, slave1@...
writes:

I think the same is true of the new Apes film.  They could have put anything
on screen (actually that's what they did) and people would flock to see it,
out of curiousity if nothing else.  The title is selling the movie, not the
story this time around.  This version seemed to have been handled more as a
commercial commodity rather than a heart-felt attempt at making a piece of
art.

I liken it to McDonald's.  I don't care how many millions have been served,
it doesn't make it gourmet food.  That's a pretty accurate comparison
actually . . . it's the film equivalent of fast food.

That's very true.  This new movie is really a different type of film from the
original.  The '68 film was and still is a serious science fiction film, but
the new movie isn't serious about anything except making money, mostly by
suckering people in to see it.   It's a real shame.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

Hi!

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
[snip]
> > Well, on a positive note, I have to admit I really did like Danny
Elfman's
> > score :)
>
> Yeah, I listened to it probably four times befoe I saw the movie.
Did I
> mention before that I thought the main titles in the new film were
cool?

I thought the title sequence was very "Burton-esque" though I didn't
like 'the gorilla eyes close-up'. Oh, well.

As for the score, rather ordinary for Elfman, eh?

POTA 2001 aka Marky Mark and the Monkey Bunch ;-)
[Thank you all for the collective groan!]

Best Wishes!
J.

I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more of the
TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space and the kind of
slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this is a big screen version
of the TV show, not a remake of the original.

-
- - -Jeff K.

----- Original Message -----
From: <happyfortune@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 4:21 AM
Subject: [pota] score & title sequence of POTA 2001


> Hi!
>
> --- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> [snip]
> > > Well, on a positive note, I have to admit I really did like Danny
> Elfman's
> > > score :)
> >
> > Yeah, I listened to it probably four times befoe I saw the movie.
> Did I
> > mention before that I thought the main titles in the new film were
> cool?
>
> I thought the title sequence was very "Burton-esque" though I didn't
> like 'the gorilla eyes close-up'. Oh, well.
>
> As for the score, rather ordinary for Elfman, eh?
>
> POTA 2001 aka Marky Mark and the Monkey Bunch ;-)
> [Thank you all for the collective groan!]
>
> Best Wishes!
> J.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.htmlIn a message dated 8/18/01 11:35:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more of the
TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space and the kind of
slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this is a big screen version
of the TV show, not a remake of the original.

                                                                         -
- -  -Jeff K.

Why do you think they did a big screen version of the TV show?  What idiot at
Fox thought that's what everyone wanted to see?

-- Rory<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 7:08 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] Impossible sequels

In a message dated 8/17/01 9:35:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

Hey, as a movie goer, I was sucked into seeing the original when it came
out. There were bad big budget movies back then too. About 60% of 'Return
of the Jedi' comes to mind.
Best,
KEN

I remember seeing "Return of the Jedi" for the first time, and about halfway
through I suddenly realized I was bored out of my bird!

I was sucked into seeing the '68 POTA, too, from seeing the TV commercials.  
I was nuts for the movie for about two months before I saw it.

I say I was 'sucked' in, NOT 'suckered' in, and I think that for a lot of
moviegoers today they are suckered into seeing movies because the $30 million
studio ad campaigns give the impression that the latest film is a 'major
event.'   Well, some are and some aren't.   Burton's APES certainly was an
'event' movie.  It's just too bad it wasn't better.   Imagine how much more
business this movie would be doing if it had gotten rave reviews and
fantastic word-of-mouth.  It's doing as well as it is because people love
APES, not because it's a great flick.

Oh, I feel I'm stuck in a rut here.   Isn't there anything else to talk about?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/18/01 11:40:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 Well, we can talk about "Harry Potter" (that was more hyped this summer on
billboards and bus stops than "Apes") of "Lord of the Rings" , which has to
be good or New Line is history (they've already made 3 of them).

                                                                           
- - - - Jeff K.



I think our beloved PLANET OF THE APES (which obviously is different things
to different people) got made at Fox during a really bad time for the major
studios creatively.   They're addicted to the idea that every summer they
must have one or two 'blockbuster' movies and I think the strain is starting
to show.  It's plain that there just isn't the talent pool in L.A. to crank
these films out every year and have them be any good.  Not even the talent
wants to put up with the pressure, hence Burton's recent statements about the
studio.

What's odd is that the public seems to get suckered again and again by all
the hype, helping these studio movie-candy duds make their money back in one
weekend.   If only a sting of these 'blockbusters' would open with lousy
weekend boxoffice, then the studios might return to trying to make good
movies.

Ah, but then again maybe apes will take over the earth.

End of my weekend sermon.

-- Rory<.html

Hallooo, fellow Apes fans! Been trying to avoid this list till PotA
opened here in the UK -- my husband and I saw it last night and our
reaction was a somewhat postive 'eh'.

Camera work: A+
Makeup: A+
Score: Want/Need/Must-Have

Acting: Wahlberg-B, Warren-D, Roth-A+, Bonham Carter-A, Clarke Duncan-
B, Heston-D (Kristofferson was better)

Best performance/most engaging character: BC/Ari

Plot: Good promise, delivered a few worthwhile dramatic moments, but
overall it was ruined by the...

Script: FAIL. Ragged, rushed, inconsistent, and so loosely bound
together it was at best unsatisfying, at worst intensely frustrating.
Those responsible should have their cards pulled and be forced to
take screenwriting classes.

Ending: Wink-wink cute proposition but hey, throw a pack of cards in
the air and they'll land anywhere too.

Directing: Tim Burton's effort is apparent, but his script backfires
on him. In trying to detach from the original film he really could
have done without the campy backward references. Each felt like a
slap in the face.

Overall: We enjoyed it. We would have enjoyed it more if the script
hadn't let it down. Look forward to seeing it again...on TV.

/Mez

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 8:37 AM

Subject: Re: [pota] score & title sequence of POTA 2001

In a message dated 8/18/01 11:35:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more of the
TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space and the kind of
slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this is a big screen version
of the TV show, not a remake of the original.

                                                                         -
- -  -Jeff K.

Why do you think they did a big screen version of the TV show?  What idiot at
Fox thought that's what everyone wanted to see?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

Welcome back, Mez! It's like a high school reunion.

You're review is on the mark. - - - jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mez Downes" <mdownes@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 9:22 AM
Subject: [pota] Saw it!


> Hallooo, fellow Apes fans! Been trying to avoid this list till PotA
> opened here in the UK -- my husband and I saw it last night and our
> reaction was a somewhat postive 'eh'.
>
> Camera work: A+
> Makeup: A+
> Score: Want/Need/Must-Have
>
> Acting: Wahlberg-B, Warren-D, Roth-A+, Bonham Carter-A, Clarke Duncan-
> B, Heston-D (Kristofferson was better)
>
> Best performance/most engaging character: BC/Ari
>
> Plot: Good promise, delivered a few worthwhile dramatic moments, but
> overall it was ruined by the...
>
> Script: FAIL. Ragged, rushed, inconsistent, and so loosely bound
> together it was at best unsatisfying, at worst intensely frustrating.
> Those responsible should have their cards pulled and be forced to
> take screenwriting classes.
>
> Ending: Wink-wink cute proposition but hey, throw a pack of cards in
> the air and they'll land anywhere too.
>
> Directing: Tim Burton's effort is apparent, but his script backfires
> on him. In trying to detach from the original film he really could
> have done without the campy backward references. Each felt like a
> slap in the face.
>
> Overall: We enjoyed it. We would have enjoyed it more if the script
> hadn't let it down. Look forward to seeing it again...on TV.
>
> /Mez
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

True,

But the idiots and beneficiaries of nepotism are so firmly entrenched that
the new talent has to go independent where budgets suffer. Even the studios
will make forays into independent films, as long as they can control them
completely! \;-/

In a message dated 08/18/2001 12:32:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

<< Welcome back, Mez! It's like a high school reunion.

You're review is on the mark. - - - jeff >>


Yes, Mez, you're review is dead on. I envy you're ability not to let its
shortcomings depress you, as it did me, but then I take it all too seriously
I guess.

-- Rory

> I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more
> of the TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space
> and the kind of slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this
> is a big screen version of the TV show, not a remake of the
> original.
> - - - -Jeff K.

How funny that you should write this, Jeff. I wasn't expecting any
similarity with the TV show but agree, it's there! Ari's social
status and beliefs were drawn straight from Galen to start, although
I didn't twig till some downright Roddy-esque facial expressions came
from her. I couldn't believe it, but gosh darn if she wasn't using
her eyes the same way...and pulling it off. It could just be because
BC's eyes are very similar to Roddy's -- huge, dark, emotive -- but I
think the 'looks' were purposely borrowed.

The other thing that jumped out at me was the very Virdon-like
delivery of lines by Leo before the battle scene. I can't remember
what they were, but it was at the same moment (quite belatedly) that
he showed a spark of personality. And then lost it again. /Mez

I think it's exactly like the show, from the talking humans to the two
villians (maybe the marching is kinda like "Beneath"), to the human trying
to "save" the humans via knowhow. And certainly the story is lightweight.
That's probably Hollywood's main export, movies based on TV shows, so why
not "Apes"?

-
- - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mez Downes" <mdownes@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 12:23 PM
Subject: [pota] Re: score & title sequence of POTA 2001


> > I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more
> > of the TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space
> > and the kind of slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this
> > is a big screen version of the TV show, not a remake of the
> > original.
> > - - - -Jeff K.
>
> How funny that you should write this, Jeff. I wasn't expecting any
> similarity with the TV show but agree, it's there! Ari's social
> status and beliefs were drawn straight from Galen to start, although
> I didn't twig till some downright Roddy-esque facial expressions came
> from her. I couldn't believe it, but gosh darn if she wasn't using
> her eyes the same way...and pulling it off. It could just be because
> BC's eyes are very similar to Roddy's -- huge, dark, emotive -- but I
> think the 'looks' were purposely borrowed.
>
> The other thing that jumped out at me was the very Virdon-like
> delivery of lines by Leo before the battle scene. I can't remember
> what they were, but it was at the same moment (quite belatedly) that
> he showed a spark of personality. And then lost it again. /Mez
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 8:55 AM

Subject: Re: [pota] Impossible sequels

In a message dated 8/18/01 11:40:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 Well, we can talk about "Harry Potter" (that was more hyped this summer on
billboards and bus stops than "Apes") of "Lord of the Rings" , which has to
be good or New Line is history (they've already made 3 of them).

                                                                           
- - - - Jeff K.

I think our beloved PLANET OF THE APES (which obviously is different things
to different people) got made at Fox during a really bad time for the major
studios creatively.   They're addicted to the idea that every summer they
must have one or two 'blockbuster' movies and I think the strain is starting
to show.  It's plain that there just isn't the talent pool in L.A. to crank
these films out every year and have them be any good.  Not even the talent
wants to put up with the pressure, hence Burton's recent statements about the
studio.

What's odd is that the public seems to get suckered again and again by all
the hype, helping these studio movie-candy duds make their money back in one
weekend.   If only a sting of these 'blockbusters' would open with lousy
weekend boxoffice, then the studios might return to trying to make good
movies.

Ah, but then again maybe apes will take over the earth.

End of my weekend sermon.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

In a message dated 08/18/2001 3:49:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

<< And now supposedly the new movie will be out on DVD along with the TV
show DVDs, the perfect companion. I smell a plot.


- - - Jeff >>


I was surprised to find at my local Blockbuster today that the "Behind the
Planet of the Apes" Special Edition DVD was for rent, and then looking
further I discovered -- and it was never at Blockbuster before -- the DVD of
the original movie -- and it was checked out!!!

So, the new movie is truly doing some good in bringing interest back to the
original.

It made me feel good anyway.

-- Rory

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010817/en/film-apes_1.html"


I, for one, have no problems with this.


Chris L.
____

.html In a message dated 8/18/01 11:35:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more of the
TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space and the kind of
slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this is a big screen version
of the TV show, not a remake of the original.

                                                                         -
- -  -Jeff K.

Why do you think they did a big screen version of the TV show?  What idiot at
Fox thought that's what everyone wanted to see?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

.html In a message dated 8/18/01 11:35:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 I liked the credits too. Reminded me a little of "Beneath" but more of the
TV show (as did the rest of the movie). The shots in space and the kind of
slight reveals of an ape. As I've said before, this is a big screen version
of the TV show, not a remake of the original.

                                                                         -
- -  -Jeff K.

Why do you think they did a big screen version of the TV show?  What idiot at
Fox thought that's what everyone wanted to see?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .
<.html

> ...If only a sting of these 'blockbusters' would open with lousy
> weekend boxoffice, then the studios might return to trying to
> make good movies.
>
> Ah, but then again maybe apes will take over the earth.
>
> End of my weekend sermon.
>
> -- Rory

Rory, my sentiments are exactly the same as yours. It isn't that what
I saw last night didn't disappoint me; I just went in knowing what to
expect from a major Hollywood studio.

That I'd be disappointed.

If I might take up your soapbox, nothing exemplifies the mentality of
the viewing public Hollywood panders to better than 'Dumb and
Dumber'. It's a dangerous assumption they make, one that is slowly
driving the US film industry out of business and moving it to places
where quality and real talent are still the bread and butter of film-
making. As it should be.

Will the Hollywood High Mucky-Mucks wake up in time? Probably not.
They like their illusive box office too much.

But anyone lurking from FOX might take heed: in this town of 200,000,
in a country whose people love the Apes at least as much as in the US
if not more, the 8.30pm screening of PotA on the first Friday night
drew barely a trickle. At 8.29 we had our pick of choice seats. By
8.45, when the movie started, no one else had sat down in the rows in
front of us.

Maybe we aren't so gullible after all. /Mez

--- In pota@y..., Chris Lawless <lawford42@j...> wrote:

> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010817/en/film-apes_1.html"
>
>
> I, for one, have no problems with this.

In-freakin'-credible! Tell it like it is, Tim!! /Mez

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 8:55 AM

Subject: Re: [pota] Impossible sequels

In a message dated 8/18/01 11:40:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 Well, we can talk about "Harry Potter" (that was more hyped this summer on
billboards and bus stops than "Apes") of "Lord of the Rings" , which has to
be good or New Line is history (they've already made 3 of them).

                                                                           
- - - - Jeff K.

I think our beloved PLANET OF THE APES (which obviously is different things
to different people) got made at Fox during a really bad time for the major
studios creatively.   They're addicted to the idea that every summer they
must have one or two 'blockbuster' movies and I think the strain is starting
to show.  It's plain that there just isn't the talent pool in L.A. to crank
these films out every year and have them be any good.  Not even the talent
wants to put up with the pressure, hence Burton's recent statements about the
studio.

What's odd is that the public seems to get suckered again and again by all
the hype, helping these studio movie-candy duds make their money back in one
weekend.   If only a sting of these 'blockbusters' would open with lousy
weekend boxoffice, then the studios might return to trying to make good
movies.

Ah, but then again maybe apes will take over the earth.

End of my weekend sermon.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/18/01 8:11:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 The message is being sent - - if people liked these movies than one of
them would last more than a week at the top - - but they're not hearing.
Last week Peter Bart of "Variety" wrote a column that the studios are
taking the lesson from this summer that this will be the norm. Better load
your movie with FX and hype it to death 'cause you only get one weekend.  
What they should be thinking is, "Boy, people sure don't want to see a
movie more than once that's all FX". According to Bart, there's going to be
even more of a divide : quality movies over here in December, hyped
"blockbusters" over there in summer. Can't say they're wrong, people do
flock to the hype, but they don't come back.

                                                                       - -
- - Jeff



Man, why couldn't "Planet of the Apes" had been a December movie?   It could
have been a serious film and still made money.
DAMN!   Now look what we're stuck with, silly adventures among the monkeys.  
That's the very reason Heston didn't want to do a sequel 32 years ago!

-- Rory<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 7:42 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] Impossible sequels

In a message dated 8/18/01 8:11:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 The message is being sent - - if people liked these movies than one of
them would last more than a week at the top - - but they're not hearing.
Last week Peter Bart of "Variety" wrote a column that the studios are
taking the lesson from this summer that this will be the norm. Better load
your movie with FX and hype it to death 'cause you only get one weekend.  
What they should be thinking is, "Boy, people sure don't want to see a
movie more than once that's all FX". According to Bart, there's going to be
even more of a divide : quality movies over here in December, hyped
"blockbusters" over there in summer. Can't say they're wrong, people do
flock to the hype, but they don't come back.

                                                                       - -
- - Jeff

Man, why couldn't "Planet of the Apes" had been a December movie?   It could
have been a serious film and still made money.
DAMN!   Now look what we're stuck with, silly adventures among the monkeys.  
That's the very reason Heston didn't want to do a sequel 32 years ago!

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/18/01 10:58:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

Yeah? Then why'd he do THIS movie?                - - - Jeff

Well, I'll tell you, Jeff.   Our old pal "Dick" Zanuck must have photos of
Charlton Heston with Rock Hudson or something, 'cause I don't know how else
he talked him into these things.   Of course, Heston did do "Airport '75," so
who knows!

-- Rory<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 8:04 PM

Subject: Re: [pota] Impossible sequels

In a message dated 8/18/01 10:58:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

Yeah? Then why'd he do THIS movie?                - - - Jeff

Well, I'll tell you, Jeff.   Our old pal "Dick" Zanuck must have photos of
Charlton Heston with Rock Hudson or something, 'cause I don't know how else
he talked him into these things.   Of course, Heston did do "Airport '75," so
who knows!

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

oh puleeeze!
That's as bad as someone tripping over their own feet and then saying: "I
MEANT to do that."

>

\Deep down, Burton is an "Apes" fan, and subconsciously he sabotaged his

>own film so it wouldn't be competition in our hearts for the original. \

_____

Mez sez it all.

That's pretty much everyone's feelings on it to one degree or another.
I was interested to read a review on Salon.com that felt Leo and Ari's
relationship should have been taken farther. Even more surprised to read
that a woman wrote it.

<< I didn't twig till some downright Roddy-esque facial expressions came
from her. I couldn't believe it, but gosh darn if she wasn't using
her eyes the same way...and pulling it off. It could just be because
BC's eyes are very similar to Roddy's -- huge, dark, emotive -- but I
think the 'looks' were purposely borrowed. >>

Actually H B-C said she got all her ideas from Kim Hunter.
But eye's, being brown, did seem a bit Roddyesk.

<< It's a dangerous assumption they make, one that is slowly
driving the US film industry out of business and moving it to places
where quality and real talent are still the bread and butter of film-
making. >>

I wish the new film had been made in Britain, Mez.
Some of the best films I've seen have come from there.
Without any interference from the Hollywood bigwigs.

<< Our old pal "Dick" Zanuck must have photos of
Charlton Heston with Rock Hudson or something, 'cause I don't know how else
he talked him into these things. >>

It simple, Don't spend any nomey on better writers, and hand Heston a million
dollars for one days work!

Down here in the land of Aus, we have a cable station called 'Arena' that
generally plays a lot of lightweight entertainment shows and a fair bit of
programming from E!. To pad out an hour of programming they often show 5 minute
'Hollywood' stories usually cut from other Entertainment Tonight type shows.
Anyway, today they ran a segment on Apemania showing the guys getting ready to
hit the town ( Universal Studios City Walk, by the look of it) in full Ape
regalia. It was a fun piece and our Brian got much of the airtime talking while
making up Dr Zaius ( who the reporter kept referring to as Dr Zuess). I think it
was taken from an English show called "Entertainment Now".
Brian also states that he is not a 'Freak'.
Sure you're not Bri. Just back away slowly and put down that banana.
Best,
KEN

.html <.html

.html <.html

.html <.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/19/01 1:13:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
williejoe@... writes:

 I'm not complaining. It was interesting to see him as an ape. I just wish
the scene was better. I just kinda resented his old comment of "adventures
among the monkeys". I would say "Escape" and "Conquest" were more than
that. 'Course he never saw those.

                                                                           
  - - - Jeff



I would say that all the sequels were about more than just "adventures among
the monkeys," it's just that some were more successful than others.  Even
every episode of the TV show had a message, the stupidity of prejudice.  
Unfortunately, that all every episode was about and it got rather tired.  
It'll be fun to get the shows on DVD and check them out again.

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/19/01 1:58:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
boiledkelp@... writes:

oh puleeeze!
That's as bad as someone tripping over their own feet and then saying: "I
MEANT to do that."

>
\Deep down, Burton is an "Apes" fan, and subconsciously he sabotaged his
>own film so it wouldn't be competition in our hearts for the original. \

It's meant as a joke, pal.  A lot of the comments some of us make here are
meant to be ironic or sarcastic, even if we risk the ire of a certain Aussie.
  You know, the 'whitty' one!

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 8/19/01 2:46:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
LordTZer0@... writes:

Mez sez it all.

That's pretty much everyone's feelings on it to one degree or another.
I was interested to read a review on Salon.com that felt Leo and Ari's
relationship should have been taken farther.  Even more surprised to read
that a woman wrote it.

Oh, if only the movie had taken something, ANYTHING farther than perhaps it
wouldn't have come across as such a half-assed affair.<.html

In a message dated 8/19/01 1:13:19 AM, williejoe@... writes:

<< I'm not complaining. It was interesting to see him as an ape. I just wish
the scene was better. I just kinda resented his old comment of "adventures
among the monkeys". I would say "Escape" and "Conquest" were more than that.
'Course he never saw those. >>

Yeah, I wonder why he never had the time to just watch any of the sequels for
curiosity's sake. Same with Roddy. He said he never saw "Beneath." I find
that amazing. Didn't he have a spare 2 hours somewhere in the those last 30
years of his life to at least check it out?

Matt

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Alexander Ruiz

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:19 PM

Subject: [pota] 200 million GREEN LIGHT!

It IS still in the theaters here.  No need to count chickens before they
hatch.  Now let's have no more comparisons between eggs and turds despite
where they both come from.

 

READ AND UNDERSTAND MY FRIEND:

www.calima5021.com/calima.htm

 

Enjoy!

 

Al

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Alexander Ruiz

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:02 PM

Subject: [pota] No Tim Burton Sequel?

No Tim Burton sequel?

 

I don't see how that report can be true if Tim Roth had said (on televison) that he has had talks with Tim Burton for a sequel. This net rumor holds about the same weight as that monkey love rumor not too long ago.

 

Best,

Al

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2001 5:47 AM

Subject: Re: [pota] Saw it!

In a message dated 8/19/01 2:46:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
LordTZer0@... writes:

Mez sez it all.

That's pretty much everyone's feelings on it to one degree or another.
I was interested to read a review on Salon.com that felt Leo and Ari's
relationship should have been taken farther.  Even more surprised to read
that a woman wrote it.

Oh, if only the movie had taken something, ANYTHING farther than perhaps it
wouldn't have come across as such a half-assed affair.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

I do wan't a sequel . To see what hapends to the characters . Over
all I wouldn't mind a new director .

--- In pota@y..., "Jack Krueger" <williejoe@e...> wrote:
> All I know is it's going to be tough to pull a sequel together if
Burton doesn't do it. The cast said that's the only way they'd
return. There has to be SOME continuity because of that ending. But
they could do just by getting Wahlberg.
>
> Let's have a show of hands. Who wants a sequel? I do, because it's
good for the franchise overall. Plus the next one might be better. Do
you want this to be how today's kids know "Apes"?
>
- - - Jeff K.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alexander Ruiz
> To: pota@y...
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:02 PM
> Subject: [pota] No Tim Burton Sequel?
>
>
> No Tim Burton sequel?
>
> I don't see how that report can be true if Tim Roth had said (on
televison) that he has had talks with Tim Burton for a sequel. This
net rumor holds about the same weight as that monkey love rumor not
too long ago.
>
> Best,
> Al
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.