.html

Mr. Jackson said that after "Lord of the Rings" the only FX picture he wants to do is "King Kong". Fox had their chance back in '92.

Kong, Apes, what's the difference?
Anyway, Apes isn't an FX picture.
It's a Makeup picture!  Am I right?<.html

.html

Was there an Aussie actor named Eric Bana in Black Hawk Down?

Yes, he was.  As was Scottish actor Ewan McGregor.
Both had excellent American accents without a trace of their native accents.
Though to be fair American is probably the easiest English speaking accent to do.
You just combine Cowboy drawl with Airline Pilot and Robot!  And there you have it.
Say it with me . . . Cheeseburger!  A Scots brogue or an Aussie accent are tougher.<.html

.html In a message dated 1/27/02 4:53:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

I would also try to inject something from the movie series - maybe have them dig up old tapes of Zira and Cornelius or visit the Forbidden Zone to find the mutants before they get too weird.......

Yeah, but that would have meant they'd have had to cross the continent.  How long would that take walking?

-- Rory
<.html

.html

  Michael Whitty <whitty@...> wrote:

Does he also play Ally McBeal's father?

 

Michael

 

Yes.  3 times so far.

kassidy

<.html

.html <.html

Yeah I bet only he understood that shit!

Terry Gilliam. I repeat, Terry Gilliam.

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: LordTZer0@... [LordTZer0@...]
> Sent: Monday, 28 January 2002 15:51
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Movies! Movies! Movies!
>
>
> I think Oliver Stone would be an even better choice. He seems to
> put so much
> time into his movies to make them as best as they can be.
>
> Whaddayakiddin'me?
> And I'm not speaking from spite because he pulled me and this gal from a
> crowd scene and then put her back. This is the man who had
> Charton Heston
> playing the head of the football league in Any Given Sunday, and
> then had the
> audacity to have a TV in the background of a scene with the
> chariot race from
> Ben Hur on it!
> What the hell is that?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html <.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/28/02 1:15:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

  Mr. Jackson said that after "Lord of the Rings" the only FX picture he wants to do is "King Kong". Fox had their chance back in '92.

                                                               - - - Jeff



How about "King Kong on the Planet of the Apes"?   Oh, wait a minute. . . I think that's the Mike Tyson story.

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/28/02 6:05:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

But most Americans seem to pick the Aussie accent lingering.....

Michael



G'day, mate!  Put another shrimp on the barbi for me!<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/28/02 6:48:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Hey, work with me Rory.  They found an old airplane or tank.......

Michael



Oh yeah, the old airplane trick.  They did that in that 'classic' BATTLEFIELD EARTH, and I think Serling proposed something like that for the first sequel.  Taylor finds an airplane and crashes it into ape city, blowing up everybody.  Who would like of such a thing?

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/27/02 7:54:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, apemonsterman@... writes:

Anyone know who the make up artist for the missing link had been?

The guy who did Bull Montana's missing link makeup in "The Lost World" was Cecil Holland.<.html

.html

But most Americans seem to pick the Aussie accent lingering.....

Yeah, and they all seem to be doing Crocodile Dundee.
I prefer to key off the Monty Python, University of Wallamaloo, Bruce speech.
<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/28/2002 5:11:18 AM Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Just let me do 7 of 9 and I'll back whatever you want to do Ken!!!

Make that 6 of 9...

Or 7 of 11.<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/28/2002 5:17:26 AM Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Terry Gilliam.  I repeat, Terry Gilliam

Someone agrees with me?
Mark the calendar!<.html

.html

How about "King Kong on the Planet of the Apes"?   Oh, wait a minute. . . I think that's the Mike Tyson story.

Opie and Anthony already did that joke.<.html

.html

G'day, mate!  Put another shrimp on the barbi for me!

See!<.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: LordTZer0@... [LordTZer0@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 4:48
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Movies! Movies! Movies!

But most Americans seem to pick the Aussie accent lingering.....

Yeah, and they all seem to be doing Crocodile Dundee.
I prefer to key off the Monty Python, University of Wallamaloo, Bruce speech.

<.html

.html In a message dated 1/28/02 6:05:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

But most Americans seem to pick the Aussie accent lingering.....

Michael



G'day, mate!  Put another shrimp on the barbi for me!

<.html

.html

but Paul Hogan had to call them "shrimp" on that ad so you guys would understand.

Yeah, I hear y'all rarely put the oxymoronically named "Jumbo Shrimp" or prawns on the barbecue anyway.  And that it's usually some sort of Mudbug.<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/28/02 3:36:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

OK, OK, but call it a PRAWN!!!!

They are NEVER referred to as shrimp over here (probably because they are not small), but Paul Hogan had to call them "shrimp" on that ad so you guys would understand.  Talk about cultural cringe!!

Michael



Give us some other Aussie slang.  Don't you call women Charly?  I wish I could remember the last Outback commercial I heard.

-- Rory<.html

In a message dated 1/27/02 8:24:30 PM Central Standard Time,
LordTZer0@... writes:

<< Not a bad choice. How about Peter Jackson? >>

Peter Jackson would be a nice choice. After coming of from the Lord of the
Rings, I'm sure he'll be hot and hard to get, no?

-Joe

In a message dated 1/27/02 9:23:23 PM Central Standard Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

<< After I saw Terminator the first time, I toyed with the idea of writing
a fanfic ( was there even a word for it back then? ) about Galen, Virdon
& Burke stumbling across an underground mutant society that had been
stock piling 2oth Century artefacts in some kind of huge underground
government silo. They would have had missiles and other weapons as well
as an operational Nasa ship like the one the astronauts used to get
there. Virdons disc would be used to work out and reverse the process
that got them there in the first place. The Mutants who are (
constantly) planning on destroying the apes offer Virdon & Burke the
opportunity to return to their own time and ask that, for the sake of
humanity ( and at the risk of the Mutants' current existence ) they
track down and kill the circus chimp Armando was harbouring to prevent
the Ape revolt and man's downfall. Virdon & Burke struggle with idea of
accepting the offer and sacrificing their friend Galen ( who the mutants
plan to kill either way) . it would have ended with Virdon & Burke
escaping with Galen, returning to their own time but a decade or two of
course and landing at the height of the ape revolt. Witnessing the
violence first hand as Virdon & Burke are both captured and killed and
being a pacifist, Galen must then decide whether to aid the ape revolt
or try to prevent it with a showdown with Caesar. Then the Borg would
come and assimilate all the Apes as drones...I only just added the last
bit when I realized how stupid it sounded. Well, it was a long time ago,
so shut up!
Best,
KEN >>

Hey, I think it sounds great, even without the Borg, which is the best part.
Heh. ;)

-Joe

In a message dated 1/28/02 2:28:17 AM Central Standard Time,
LordTZer0@... writes:

<< Anyway, Apes isn't an FX picture.
It's a Makeup picture! Am I right? >>

Yes, and hopefully it will stay that way.

-Joe

In a message dated 1/27/02 10:52:35 AM, Haristas@... writes:

<< As far as the APES TV series being Matt's second favorite project next to
the
original, well that tells you how much what you love as an adult is wrapped
up in the nostalgia of what you loved as a kid. >>

Actually that's not true with me. As I said in my previous email Rory, I have
very faint memories of the TV show as a kid. I was only 5 at the time it
started its run and 6 when it ended. I doubt very seriously that I caught
much of the show when it originally aired. I know I saw some of it when it
was repackaged as TV movies, but again my memories of that are not that
great. When I saw the Apes films as a kid, they were all a part of the same
thing. I liked them because of the Apes. I had no concept of which one had
the better story, acting, makeup, etc. All I cared about was that there were
people with Apes masks running around all over the place. My earliest
memories are those from the films. As time wore on, I was able to revisit
them whenever I wanted and that's when my serious appreciation for them grew.

In all fairness, when I saw the TV series at the end of 2000 it was basically
the first time I saw, so my enthusiasm for it is based more on my adult
feelings than childhood nostalgia.

Matt

.html

After coming of from the Lord of the
Rings, I'm sure he'll be hot and hard to get, no?

Here's an idea...instead of spending a bunch of money on flash bang effects, how about hiring a good director and writers?

<.html

Hey, I think it sounds great, even without the Borg, which is the best part.
Heh. ;)

-Joe

Thanks Joe,
Then you would have loved the ending when Urko joins Galen in the shower and the
audience discovers that the whole thing was just a dream.
Best,
KEN

.html In a message dated 1/28/02 3:36:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

OK, OK, but call it a PRAWN!!!!

They are NEVER referred to as shrimp over here (probably because they are not small), but Paul Hogan had to call them "shrimp" on that ad so you guys would understand.  Talk about cultural cringe!!

Michael



Give us some other Aussie slang.  Don't you call women Charly?  I wish I could remember the last Outback commercial I heard.

-- Rory

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

.html Who do you categorize as 'we'? Not me I hope you stereotypical Aussie, you.

Michael Whitty wrote:

 No, we call them Sheilas.Michael 

-----Original Message-----
From: Haristas@... [mailto:Haristas@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 10:00
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Movies! Movies! Movies!
 

In a message dated 1/28/02 3:36:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:
 
 

OK, OK, but call it a PRAWN!!!!

They are NEVER referred to as shrimp over here (probably because they are not small), but Paul Hogan had to call them "shrimp" on that ad so you guys would understand.  Talk about cultural cringe!!

Michael
 

Give us some other Aussie slang.  Don't you call women Charly?  I wish I could remember the last Outback commercial I heard.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

<.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken & Heather Taylor [kentaylor@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 20:47
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Movies! Movies! Movies!

Who do you categorize as 'we'? Not me I hope you stereotypical Aussie, you.

Michael Whitty wrote:

 No, we call them Sheilas.Michael 

-----Original Message-----
From: Haristas@... [mailto:Haristas@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 10:00

<.html

Do they soap each other?

Thanks to T, I now have a really cool soaper sponge you can use!!!

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken & Heather Taylor [kentaylor@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 15:44

>
> Thanks Joe,
> Then you would have loved the ending when Urko joins Galen in the
> shower and the
> audience discovers that the whole thing was just a dream.
> Best,
> KEN

In a message dated 1/28/02 10:32:03 PM Central Standard Time,
kentaylor@... writes:

<< Thanks Joe,
Then you would have loved the ending when Urko joins Galen in the shower and
the
audience discovers that the whole thing was just a dream.
Best,
KEN >>

That reminds me of the alternative ending to Apes 2001 shown on Conan Obrien.

"..Oh! So it was all a dream."
"Wow, suddenly the special effects seemed to get a whole lot crappier."

-Joe

.html

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

From: Michael Whitty

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 12:23 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Movies! Movies! Movies!

No, me neither, I thnk it is a 70s thing!

 

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken & Heather Taylor [kentaylor@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 20:47
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Movies! Movies! Movies!

Who do you categorize as 'we'? Not me I hope you stereotypical Aussie, you.

Michael Whitty wrote:

 No, we call them Sheilas.Michael 

-----Original Message-----
From: Haristas@... [mailto:Haristas@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 10:00

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

Attachments :

In case anyone is interested in connections between "POTA and "Star Wars,"
there's a character named Jango in the 1977 hardcover annual story "Flight
From Terror." Jango, as many of you may know, is one of the major
characters who will appear in "Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones."

Is that an "Apes" soaper? Where do you get this stuff, T? If I had that I
might take a bath once in a while.
- - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Whitty" <whitty@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 12:31 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Fantastic fanfics


> Do they soap each other?
>
> Thanks to T, I now have a really cool soaper sponge you can use!!!
>
> Michael
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ken & Heather Taylor [kentaylor@...]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 15:44
>
> >
> > Thanks Joe,
> > Then you would have loved the ending when Urko joins Galen in the
> > shower and the
> > audience discovers that the whole thing was just a dream.
> > Best,
> > KEN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

"Apes" received 2 nominations for the BAFTA awards (the so-called British
Oscars). Makeup and costume design. That suggests it might get the same nods
for the real Oscars. I hear Fox is pushing for Elfman's music, too.

- - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <MTotsky@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] TV Series: My Thoughts


>
> In a message dated 1/27/02 10:52:35 AM, Haristas@... writes:
>
> << As far as the APES TV series being Matt's second favorite project next
to
> the
> original, well that tells you how much what you love as an adult is
wrapped
> up in the nostalgia of what you loved as a kid. >>
>
> Actually that's not true with me. As I said in my previous email Rory, I
have
> very faint memories of the TV show as a kid. I was only 5 at the time it
> started its run and 6 when it ended. I doubt very seriously that I caught
> much of the show when it originally aired. I know I saw some of it when it
> was repackaged as TV movies, but again my memories of that are not that
> great. When I saw the Apes films as a kid, they were all a part of the
same
> thing. I liked them because of the Apes. I had no concept of which one had
> the better story, acting, makeup, etc. All I cared about was that there
were
> people with Apes masks running around all over the place. My earliest
> memories are those from the films. As time wore on, I was able to revisit
> them whenever I wanted and that's when my serious appreciation for them
grew.
>
> In all fairness, when I saw the TV series at the end of 2000 it was
basically
> the first time I saw, so my enthusiasm for it is based more on my adult
> feelings than childhood nostalgia.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Boy, they let Linda have it with both guns during the chat. But she was a
good sport. The transcript (such as it is) can be accessed at her site. She
definitely knows there's disappointment in the sequel, if she didn't
already. She blamed the time element. Too bad she's not still married to
Zanuck! She'd say, "Dick, you better hire some damn writers this time!"
every night before he goes to bed.

- - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <veetus@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 10:55 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Phe-noms


> "Apes" received 2 nominations for the BAFTA awards (the so-called
British
> Oscars). Makeup and costume design. That suggests it might get the same
nods
> for the real Oscars. I hear Fox is pushing for Elfman's music, too.
>
> - - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <MTotsky@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 7:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] TV Series: My Thoughts
>
>
> >
> > In a message dated 1/27/02 10:52:35 AM, Haristas@... writes:
> >
> > << As far as the APES TV series being Matt's second favorite project
next
> to
> > the
> > original, well that tells you how much what you love as an adult is
> wrapped
> > up in the nostalgia of what you loved as a kid. >>
> >
> > Actually that's not true with me. As I said in my previous email Rory, I
> have
> > very faint memories of the TV show as a kid. I was only 5 at the time it
> > started its run and 6 when it ended. I doubt very seriously that I
caught
> > much of the show when it originally aired. I know I saw some of it when
it
> > was repackaged as TV movies, but again my memories of that are not that
> > great. When I saw the Apes films as a kid, they were all a part of the
> same
> > thing. I liked them because of the Apes. I had no concept of which one
had
> > the better story, acting, makeup, etc. All I cared about was that there
> were
> > people with Apes masks running around all over the place. My earliest
> > memories are those from the films. As time wore on, I was able to
revisit
> > them whenever I wanted and that's when my serious appreciation for them
> grew.
> >
> > In all fairness, when I saw the TV series at the end of 2000 it was
> basically
> > the first time I saw, so my enthusiasm for it is based more on my adult
> > feelings than childhood nostalgia.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html 

Is that an "Apes" soaper? Where do you get this stuff, T? If I had that I
might take a bath once in a while.

Hmmm... I thought I hipped everyone tho that, but here it is again just in case.

Scivolutions.com Online Store: Planet Of the Apes Soaper

http://scivolutions.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SOS&Product_Code=POTAS

<.html

.html
I was going to go easy on her.  But it was kinda getting boring what with all the sycophantic ass kissing.  But, being pretty hot and all, you have to expect that.  I wanted her to say . . . "Yeah, Dick beat me unmerciful when I started sleeping with my yoga guru."  or "Yeah, my beef jerky bikini had a Lycra lining with a nice cotton panel." But it never happened.  Oh well, you get what you pay for.  She's a good sport.  But you have to admit...after paying three writers, you'd think they could have had a more interesting story with a bit of kick to it.  It seemed pretty formula to me, or as Roger Eggbert would say . . . POTA Light!  You can blame the time element all you want, but Hollywood's been kicking the idea around for nearly ten years, so, like my Dad, or every boss I've ever had says . . . You should have gotten an earlier start!

Boy, they let Linda have it with both guns during the chat. But she was a
good sport. The transcript (such as it is) can be accessed at her site. She
definitely knows there's disappointment in the sequel, if she didn't
already. She blamed the time element. Too bad she's not still married to
Zanuck! She'd say, "Dick, you better hire some damn writers this time!"
every night before he goes to bed.

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/30/02 2:18:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

  Boy, they let Linda have it with both guns during the chat. But she was a
good sport. The transcript (such as it is) can be accessed at her site. She
definitely knows there's disappointment in the sequel, if she didn't
already. She blamed the time element. Too bad she's not still married to
Zanuck! She'd say, "Dick, you better hire some damn writers this time!"
every night before he goes to bed.

                                                               - - - Jeff

What a waste of time that chat was, but it does show just how beloved the new movie is -- and Richard Zanuck.

-- Rory<.html

Hey Gang,

Been away from the group for a while. Busy Halloween and Holiday
season.

How's everyone doing?

Brian Penikas
Keeper of the Glue and Faith for APEMANIA.com

Hi Brian

We've all been asking about you - glad you are back.

What is new at Apemania?

I recently saw your Christmas Ape on eBay.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian [apeman@...]
Sent: Thursday, 31 January 2002 7:43
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Checking in...

Hey Gang,

Been away from the group for a while. Busy Halloween and Holiday season.

How's everyone doing?

Brian Penikas
Keeper of the Glue and Faith for APEMANIA.com

.html

but Paul Hogan had to call them "shrimp" on that ad so you guys would understand.

Yeah, I hear y'all rarely put the oxymoronically named "Jumbo Shrimp" or prawns on the barbecue anyway.  And that it's usually some sort of Mudbug.
<.html

In a message dated 1/30/02 1:21:56 PM Central Standard Time, Haristas@...
writes:

<< What a waste of time that chat was, but it does show just how beloved the
new
movie is -- and Richard Zanuck.

-- Rory >>

Hmm, glad I missed it then. I got confused with the timezones. :(

-Joe

.html

How's everyone doing?

Doing well.  Thanks for asking.
We need input.  What's new with you?




T

<.html

>From: "MARK" <ruletheplanet@...>
>Subject: Re: Movies! Movies! Movies!
>please dont send no more

Please don't send "no more" what?

.html

please dont send no more

Please don't send "no more" what?

It's a double negative.  He means send more...

<.html

Attachments :

.html Hey Lordzer,

Well, we had a busy halloween/holiday season, thanx to fans of the new film as well as the tried-and-true fans of the classic.

Lots of collectors have been letting their collections go, so we've been posting item on our APE CITY THRIFT pages <http://apemania.com/Thrift.htm> to help them get exposure.
Some neato bandido things too!

A few collectors have brought us original background masks to restore, those are always a challenge <http://apemania.com/RESTORATIONS.htm>

I hear, and this could be very OLD news by now, that DIAMOND COMICS has an exclusive with MEDICOM to release the ULTRA ape figure line here in the USA.  3 characters will be reworked as is all of the packaging.  The figures will retail around $10.  I do not know if the KUBRICKs will be part of that.  Anyone else have info on this?

The same folks who gave me that info are releasing their own line of (12) APES busts, approximately 7" tall.  (here's a pic of a prototype , they used one of our DELUXE busts as model)
You'll probably start seeing these at toy cons soon.  It looks to be a very cool line.

Let's see, what else:  oh yeah, Phil Broad's ICARUS webpage is back up <http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/ApesShip/PofA01.htmlintroduction>  THEEEEE COOLEST!!!

Other than that, the studio's been doing lotsa boring non-ape stuff as well.

Looks to be a busy year.

Hope all is well with everyone else.

Brian

LordTZer0@... wrote:

 

How's everyone doing?

Doing well.  Thanks for asking.
We need input.  What's new with you?

<.html

In a message dated 1/30/02 5:25:21 PM Central Standard Time,
handleyr@... writes:

<< Please don't send "no more" what? >>

Messages. These morons don't understand that we aren't sending these
messages. It's Yahoo that's sending them. You signed yourself up, so I'm
sure you can unsubscribe yourself. We can't do everything for you.

-Joe

In a message dated 1/30/02 3:47:26 PM, whitty@... writes:

<< I recently saw your Christmas Ape on eBay. >>

What's this? Can we see a pic?

Matt

In a message dated 1/30/02 7:10:10 PM, apeman@... writes:

<< I hear, and this could be very OLD news by now, that DIAMOND COMICS has
an exclusive with MEDICOM to release the ULTRA ape figure line here in
the USA. 3 characters will be reworked as is all of the packaging. The
figures will retail around $10. I do not know if the KUBRICKs will be
part of that. Anyone else have info on this? >>

Oh yeah? Which 3 characters will be reworked?

I know Diamond has the Kubricks out now as well. They are around $12 a set I
think.

Matt

.html Yeah, we saw it too.  The guy who bought it and other stuff from us off ebay deals had set up a website, even "lifted" images from our site to create his on-line catalog, and was trying to unload the items he bought from us.  So far we don't know if has duped anything, I think he's just cleaning out his closets.  He does give Apemania credit for the items, so at least he's being honest about where they came from.

I'll do some digging at the lab tomorrow see if I've got some fotos.

Brian

MTotsky@... wrote:

In a message dated 1/30/02 3:47:26 PM, whitty@... writes:

<< I recently saw your Christmas Ape on eBay. >>

What's this? Can we see a pic?

Matt

------------------------ ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
 
 

<.html

.html

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 12:25 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Chatty Cathy

I was going to go easy on her.  But it was kinda getting boring what with all the sycophantic ass kissing.  But, being pretty hot and all, you have to expect that.  I wanted her to say . . . "Yeah, Dick beat me unmerciful when I started sleeping with my yoga guru."  or "Yeah, my beef jerky bikini had a Lycra lining with a nice cotton panel." But it never happened.  Oh well, you get what you pay for.  She's a good sport.  But you have to admit...after paying three writers, you'd think they could have had a more interesting story with a bit of kick to it.  It seemed pretty formula to me, or as Roger Eggbert would say . . . POTA Light!  You can blame the time element all you want, but Hollywood's been kicking the idea around for nearly ten years, so, like my Dad, or every boss I've ever had says . . . You should have gotten an earlier start!

Boy, they let Linda have it with both guns during the chat. But she was a
good sport. The transcript (such as it is) can be accessed at her site. She
definitely knows there's disappointment in the sequel, if she didn't
already. She blamed the time element. Too bad she's not still married to
Zanuck! She'd say, "Dick, you better hire some damn writers this time!"
every night before he goes to bed.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 1/31/02 1:06:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

Movieheadlines.com says there's an article in "The Hollywood Reporter" that a lawyer is filing a lawsuit against Fox on behalf of the ape extras used in the dusty Oberon desert scenes. The suit says they were exposed to carcinogens in the dust. I remember reading in "Cinefex" that they specifically were careful of those scenes because they knew people would wind up breathing that stuff in. The siuit says they weren't provided protection but I would think the apes would be better protected than the humans because of their masks. We'll see.

                                                              - - - Jeff



You forgot to say "Toodles!"  Anyway, what a load of huggermugger this suit is.  High-priced Fox lawyers will get this thrown out, and those poor extras WILL NEVER DO ANOTHER MOVIE!  That's the way it works in Hollywood -- don't make waves.

Speaking of 'See you in court,' when is the trial for "The Thief of Beverly Hills," also known as Winona Ryder?   There's a messed up chick.  I think she should get a part in the next APES movie as a kleptomaniac monkey, like that one on "Captain Simian and the Space Monkeys."   Anybody here remember that show?  I liked it.

-- Rory<.html

.htmlHey, I've just read about this story on Cinescape.com.

It seems there is just one extra that's suing and for, get this, "fraud and deceit, bettery, conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress and unlawful business practice."   I think I can hear them laughing at Fox.

"Intentional infliction of emotional distress"?!!!!  I should be suing Fox myself over the new movie.  I was never so upset in a movie theatre in my life.

-- Rory<.html

.html In a message dated 1/31/02 1:06:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

Movieheadlines.com says there's an article in "The Hollywood Reporter" that a lawyer is filing a lawsuit against Fox on behalf of the ape extras used in the dusty Oberon desert scenes. The suit says they were exposed to carcinogens in the dust. I remember reading in "Cinefex" that they specifically were careful of those scenes because they knew people would wind up breathing that stuff in. The siuit says they weren't provided protection but I would think the apes would be better protected than the humans because of their masks. We'll see.

                                                              - - - Jeff



You forgot to say "Toodles!"  Anyway, what a load of huggermugger this suit is.  High-priced Fox lawyers will get this thrown out, and those poor extras WILL NEVER DO ANOTHER MOVIE!  That's the way it works in Hollywood -- don't make waves.

Speaking of 'See you in court,' when is the trial for "The Thief of Beverly Hills," also known as Winona Ryder?   There's a messed up chick.  I think she should get a part in the next APES movie as a kleptomaniac monkey, like that one on "Captain Simian and the Space Monkeys."   Anybody here remember that show?  I liked it.

-- Rory

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

>From: LordTZer0@...
>Subject: Re: Digest Number 887
>> please dont send no more
>> Please don't send "no more" what?
>It's a double negative. He means send more...

Oh, goody -- I've got lots of things I can send him.

>From: CheeseGOTAS@...
>Subject: Re: Digest Number 887
><< Please don't send "no more" what? >>
>Messages. These morons don't understand that we aren't sending these
>messages. It's Yahoo that's sending them.

Oh, I know -- I was just mocking him. :)

>You signed yourself up, so I'm sure you can unsubscribe yourself.
>We can't do everything for you.

Can you at least do my windows? They're getting pretty dirty.

Hey all you Nat Trudy fans!...

She's on Turner Classic right now in the Monte Carlo Story.

--- In pota@y..., <veetus@e...> wrote:

> Give him a break, Rory. Back then even going to the moon was Kennedy's =

crazy boast. Boulle's next book ("Garden on the Moon") was the last time a t=
rip to the moon could be treated as science fiction.

> - - - Je=

ff

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Haristas@a...
> To: pota@y...
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 8:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Check out Table of Contents
>
>
> In a message dated 1/27/02 9:17:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmic=

haeltilton@y... writes:

>
>
>
> One of the things he thinks is "fact" is that the Taylor mission was =

> sent out to Alpha Centauri... which it clearly was NOT. Taylor tells =

> Landon that they are "three hundred twenty lightyears away from Earth=

> on an unnamed planet in orbit around a star in the constellation of
> Orion"--but 'Ansanaut' (as that website owner calls himself)
> interprets this line of dialogue as nothing more than a "line of
> bullshit" directed at Landon.
>
>
>
> Yeah, in the Boulle novel they went to Betelgeuse, and in the movie the=

y seem to have been heading for some star in Orion, probably NOT Betelgeuse =
since Boulle kind of goofs there himself -- a red giant isn't very likly to =
have an earth-like planet around it. Bellatrix is probably a much better be=
t, though I think you'd want to make damn sure you're going to find an earth=
-like planet before you travel all the way to another star.

>
> By the way, Patrick, what do you think of Boulle's "minus epsilon" expl=

anation of near fast-as-light space travel in chapter two? I'd really like =
to know how you get to a star that's three hundred light years away in only =
two years -- and not even be travelling the speed of light! Boulle sure had=
a strange understanding of things.

>
> -- Rory

Au contraire, mon frere Rory!
Boulle actually did a fair job of describing Einsteinian relativistic
Time Dilation. Assuming it were possible to accelerate a spaceship to
a velocity that was within "a thousand millionth" the speed of light,
it WOULD only take about 2 years of SHIP-TIME to travel to ANYWHERE in
the universe.
The first year would be spent ACCELERATING at a rate of about 1 gee
(9.8 meters per second squared); just divide 299,792,458 meters per
second by the number of seconds per day (86,400) and then by the
number 9.8 and you get the approximate number of days it would take to
accelerate to "near lightspeed": 354.0632771...
Once you get to that top velocity (which, in Einsteinian relativity,
could NEVER actually equal--let alone EXCEED--the speed of light), the
Time Dilation effects would kick in, and if you were going only to
Alpha Centauri you might "coast" between the acceleration phase and
the deceleration phase for only a short time... but if you wanted to
travel further out (say, to Betelgeuse, approximately 300 lightyears
away) you would "coast" for a longer period of time.
The only real hitch is that you can only travel in a straight-line
trajectory: you would have to have aimed your ship precisely at the
spot your destination star will occupy when you expect to arrive
there. You couldn't do any "u-turns" or radical course changes; and
you'd also have to worry about getting smucked out by tiny hydrogen
atoms in the interstellar 'void' (which isn't--strictly speaking--
actually a pure vacuum), which would act on the swiftly moving vessel
like a deadly source of radiation.
Boulle got his Einsteinian relativity right: there WOULD only be about
two years of travel time for the voyagers: one year of acceleration
(at 1 gee), one year for deceleration (also at 1 gee), and the in-
between time of "coasting" when Time Dilation causes the EARTH-TIME
clocks to tick at a faster rate than the SHIP-TIME clocks. The
astronauts would experience only about 2 years of SHIP-TIME, during
which those who had stayed behind on Earth would age more than 2
years--centuries for a trip out to Betelgeuse.
The important thing to remember is that the rate of the passage of
Time CHANGES for those on an ACCELERATING rocket: relative to the rate
of Time passage non-accelerating people back on Earth continue to
experience, the rocketing-away astronauts experience a SLOWING DOWN of
Time. If you're interested in the equation, here it is:

ET = ST ÷ *(1 - (v/c)^2)

ET = EARTH-TIME (i.e. the rate of the passage of Time back on Earth)
ST = SHIP-TIME (i.e. the rate of the passage of Time on the Ship)
* = square root
v = velocity of the ship (always LESS THAN lightspeed)
c = lightspeed (i.e. "celeritas"; equal to 299,792,458 meters/second
^2 = "squared"

As "v" approaches "c" you have a number (v/c) which is less than one
APPROACHING one (i.e. "c/c"); since "one squared" equals one, then you
would have a denominator of *(1 - 1) or, *(0), and there IS NO SQUARE
ROOT OF ZERO. So, "v" can NEVER exceed "c"; but, as it APPROACHES "c",
"v" causes ST to diverge from ET at a higher and higher rate.
Boulle's "minus epsilon" refers to a number that could be re-written
as "c - v"; if it is "one thousand millionth" (as Prof. Antelle
remarks), then it could be referred to also as "one billionth" and
one-billionth of 299,792,458 meters/second = 0.299792458. This would
make "v" equal to 299,792,457.700207542, which is 0.999999999... times
"c" (which is ALMOST equal to 1.000000... but NOT QUITE).

I hope this makes sense! It IS what Einstein's theory of Relativity
proposes (and it has been proven true experimentally). The big wonder
is why the screenplay for (the original film) PLANET OF THE APES has
Taylor mentioning "Doctor HASSLEIN's theory of Time in a vehicle
traveling nearly the speed of light..." Isn't there an Albert Einstein
in the POTA universe? If so, why invent a "Dr. Hasslein"?
In the mega-bigass-POTA-novel I'm working on, there IS (or WAS) an
Albert Einstein in the POTA universe, and Dr. Hasslein's theory--
though ALSO about the dilation of Time at "near-light velocities"--is
NOT in regards to rockets accelerating through the spacetime
continuum, but, rather, is in regards to starships which use a
"Hassleinian hyperdrive" to warp space around their ship,
encapsulating it within a photon-like field that propagates just like
a ray (or a quantum) of light does--at "lightspeed"; however, since a
photon has ZERO mass, and the "bubble" of space within the warpfield
contains a spaceship which--being made of matter--HAS mass, then the
warpfield propagates at a "lightspeed" which is slower than an
ordinary ray of light traveling through a pure vacuum; instead, the
slower speed at which the warpfield propagates is like the "index of
refraction" property of matter through which photons are slowed down.
In other words, the speed of light is ONLY 299,792,458 m/s in a pure
vacuum (which has an Index of Refraction of "one"), but in any other
medium (having an Index of Refraction GREATER than 1), the
corresponding velocity of the warpfield is SLOWER than 299,792,458 m/
s. And THAT is why it takes Taylor's ship around 2006 EARTH-TIME years
(1972 to 3978) to travel 320 lightyears. In my novel's scenario,
Virdon's ship leaves Earth in August of 1971, and arrives at the Alpha
Centauri system in August of 1980, almost exactly 9 years later (i.e.
traveling 4.34 lightyears in 9 EARTH-TIME years, rather than in 4.34
ET years).
So, the Hassleinian equivalent equation to Einstein's above-given
equation, would be the SAME, with the exception being that "c" (in
Einstein's equation) would be replaced by "c/n" [where "n" is the
"index of refraction" effect, the "density" of the warped space, due
to the mass of the starship inside the "bubble"]. In Taylor's case,
the "n" number is equal to about 6.26875 (i.e. 2006 EARTH-TIME years ÷
320 LIGHT-YEARS); in Virdon's case, the "n" number is equal to about
2.073732719 (i.e. 9 EARTH-TIME years ÷ 4.34 LIGHT-YEARS); the reason
that Taylor's ship has a higher "n" factor than does Virdon is that
the Taylor mission involves a ship that has MORE MASS than does
Virdon's ship. In other words, if Virdon were to have flown his ship
out to the same star system that Taylor was headed to, it wouldn't
have taken 2006 EARTH-TIME years to get there--it would "only" have
taken 663.6 EARTH-TIME years: he would have arrived there about 18
EARTH-TIME years BEFORE Taylor makes his "final report" in 2673 A.D.!
Similarly, Taylor--had he been going to Alpha Centauri--would have
arrived there in about 27.2 EARTH-TIME years: in 1999 A.D.

Of course, this is just my scenario I concocted for the sake of
explaining away the odd chronometric data given in the POTA saga. I
don't expect any other POTA fan out there to consider it "gospel" or
"canonical"; it, however, DOES have the virtue of making sense of the
"mistakes" in such a way as to render them NOT mistakes, but "factual"
and correct details.
It works for me.
Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 1-31-2002

P.S. I sure do have a tendency to get verbose, don't I? Yikes.

Actually, it isn't "they" who suppose that the sun shining could be
Bellatrix--it's LANDON who suggests this as a possibility. Remember,
he doesn't know where they are--he has no idea where they were going;
evidently, not everyone along on the trip was informed of their actual
destination. The commander, Taylor, knows--which is why Landon asks
him: "Well, where are we? D'you have any notion, Skipper?"
Taylor, who DOES know where they are (or, actually, where he BELIEVES
they are, where they were headed to, since he is unaware that they've
somehow ended up back on Earth), specifically says that they are "on
an unnamed planet in orbit around a star in the constellation of
Orion". He doesn't tell us the name of the star--which he probably
WOULD have, if it were one of the bright stars that actually had been
given a name (like Betelgeuse, Rigel, Meissa, Mintaka, Alnilam, etc.).
Taylor, then, WOULD have said, "We're on a planet in orbit around
Rigel/beta Orionis/whichever". The fact is, the particular star he
THINKS they've arrived at is one of the millions of stars in that
constellation, but one--evidently--that didn't have a popular name.
Hell, if it is a sun-like star 320 lightyears away, it might not even
have a catalogue number (like "Gliese 629" etc.), since the other
stars of Orion would out-shine it.
At any rate, Landon (and probably Dodge & Stewart) was not privy to
the information regarding their destination; they only knew that they
were on a voyage to another star system--and they probably figured out
that WHEREVER their destination was, it was somewhere in Orion, since
they didn't go into hibernation until about 6 months after they left
Earth, and they could see out the front windows of the spaceship the
stars in space: and the constellation Orion is the most recognizable
one of the bunch.
Why wouldn't the crew be informed about the actual destination star?
In Kubrick's "2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY" neither Bowman nor Poole knows
what the hibernating astronauts aboard DISCOVERY knows: the top-secret
information regarding the Tycho Monolith and its mysterious
transmission out to Jupiter... Perhaps the Taylor mission out to Orion
involves top-secret information that only their commander (Taylor)
knows--information that he will divulge to his fellow astronauts when
he feels the time is right for them to know it.
What could that information be? Taylor tells Landon that "somewhere in
the universe there has to be something better than Man..." Did Taylor
know something along these lines? Was he expecting to find intelligent
life at their destination--lifeforms that were "better than Man"?
In the novel I'm working on, I'm going into a lot of this sorta thing.
Of course, I'm not going to "give it away" here; that would ruin the
surprise!

Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 1-31-2002

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:
>
> All it takes is the most elementary knowledge of Astronomy and simple
> deduction. They think they are in Orion. They suppose that the sun shining
> could be Bellatrix. But no, it's too bright for Bellatrix. What's the other
> shoulder of Orion? Betelgeuse!
> Ergo, Sorror is in orbit around Betelgeuse. A moot point since in the film
> it's Earth
> And what is the constellation of Orion referred to as? The Hunter!
> Kim Hunter?...coincidense? Or something more?
>
> > Taylor tells
> > Landon that they are "three hundred twenty lightyears away from Earth
> > on an unnamed planet in orbit around a star in the constellation of
> > Orion"--but 'Ansanaut' (as that website owner calls himself)
> > interprets this line of dialogue as nothing more than a "line of
> > bullshit" directed at Landon.

.html  

Assuming it were possible to accelerate a spaceship to
a velocity that was within "a thousand millionth" the speed of light,
it WOULD only take about 2 years of SHIP-TIME to travel to ANYWHERE in
the universe.

  If it take Light 300 years to get to Betelguse and it's going the speed of light, how could a Ship going a thousand millionth slower get there in 2 Years?  Maybe your answer is in here somewhere.  I'll have to reread it when I have the time.  I dunno Pat, sounds like a buncha Sci-fi warp speed bullshit to me, but if there's a fomula in here for me to get extra time like that please post it.

<.html

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:

> > Assuming it were possible to accelerate a spaceship to
> > a velocity that was within "a thousand millionth" the speed of light,
> > it WOULD only take about 2 years of SHIP-TIME to travel to ANYWHERE in
> > the universe.
>
> If it take Light 300 years to get to Betelguse and it's going the speed of
> light, how could a Ship going a thousand millionth slower get there in 2
> Years? Maybe your answer is in here somewhere. I'll have to reread it when
> I have the time. I dunno Pat, sounds like a buncha Sci-fi warp speed
> bullshit to me, but if there's a fomula in here for me to get extra time like
> that please post it.

The answer IS in there somewhere... you gotta keep reading.
Really, I didn't think there were many sci-fi fans out there who
didn't have at least a cursory acquaintance with Einstein's Theory of
Relativity. Haven't you ever heard of the "twin paradox"?
Einstein postulated that three peculiar things happen to you when you
accelerate to "nearly the speed of light":
1.) your MASS increases.
2.) your LENGTH decreases.
3.) your TIME dilates (i.e. "slows down" relative to the rate at which
Time passes back on the Earth--the original "frame of reference").
After accelerating to near-light speed, then coasting at near-light
speed, and finally decelerating from near-light speed, you will end up
with the same Mass you had before you accelerated, and the same Length
you had... but the amount of Time you experienced will be LESS THAN
the amount of Time that your twin (who stayed behind on Earth)
experienced.
I suggest you purchase or check out a copy of any popularization of
Einstein's theories, or just read any thorough encyclopedia entry on
the topic. Look up EINSTEIN, RELATIVITY, LORENTZ CONTRACTION, TIME
DILATION, etc.
Remember in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, when the Mothership
lands, and the World War Two pilots come out of the ship... not having
aged (hardly) during the 30 or so years they were gone? One of the
scientists mutters to another, "Einstein was right..."
He was referring to the same Time Dilation effect. The Aliens abducted
a bunch of people during WW2 (including fighter pilots), took them out
into Space (accelerating to near-light velocity, coasting, then
decelerating at their alien destination) and then returned (again
accelerating, coasting, then decelerating back at Earth), with those
abductees having experienced only the amount of time it would take to
undergo the acceleration/deceleration phases of their "there-and-back"
journeys; during the "coasting" phases, they experienced only a short
amount of "shiptime"... but back on Earth, YEARS of "Earthtime" go by
simultaneously.
But don't take my word for it; read the science fact literature that
describes this phenomenon. It ain't "a buncha Sci-Fi warp speed
bullshit"... it's REAL!

Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 2-01-2002

.htmlIn a message dated 2/1/02 3:25:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Really, I didn't think there were many sci-fi fans out there who
didn't have at least a cursory acquaintance with Einstein's Theory of
Relativity. Haven't you ever heard of the "twin paradox"?
Einstein postulated that three peculiar things happen to you when you
accelerate to "nearly the speed of light":
1.) your MASS increases.
2.) your LENGTH decreases.
3.) your TIME dilates (i.e. "slows down" relative to the rate at which
Time passes back on the Earth--the original "frame of reference").
After accelerating to near-light speed, then coasting at near-light
speed, and finally decelerating from near-light speed, you will end up
with the same Mass you had before you accelerated, and the same Length
you had... but the amount of Time you experienced will be LESS THAN
the amount of Time that your twin (who stayed behind on Earth)
experienced.

I believe I understand this.  If something is 300 light years away it will take you 300 years to get there, but you experience it as only two years, whereas it's 300 years to someone left on earth.   It's a mind-bender, but I think I get it.  Anyway, I'm glad Boulle wasn't as wrong as I thought.  Now my question is:  Can a physical body such as ours survive the increase in mass and length?

-- Rory<.html

In a message dated Thu, 31 Jan 2002 4:09:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Michael Whitty" <whitty@...> writes:

<<What did Winona do? - I have not heard about it.>>

Check this out:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/News/02/01/ryder.charges.ap/index.html"

Matt

.html

But don't take my word for it; read the science fact literature that
describes this phenomenon. It ain't "a buncha Sci-Fi warp speed
bullshit"... it's REAL!

Well, there's real and then there's Real.  Maybe it's real for someone somewhere in the universe.  I am familiar with Einstein's theories, but until some alien hands us the technology they remain only theories.  We can't even put a pilot in an Aurora without knocking them out from the initial acceleration.  I guess the rally would have to accelerate for a year, just to keep from being squashed.  That being the case, wouldn't they have to decelerate for a year to keep from slamming into the bulkhead or over shooting their target?  I'm going to have to read it again thoroughly.  I'll reply again in about 3 light years.

<.html

Attachments :

Okay. I hope my question is not too basic… You guys have
watched
these movies frame by frame and know everything there is to know.
Maybe you can help?

We are researching the Apes movies to find models for female ape
costumes. Although we thought there were none, we have found what we
believe to be three female orangutans. Unfortunately, these are
shoulder shots with no obvious costume characteristics. (One is a
librarian in Conquest. One is in the crowd in Beneath. The last is
a school child in Battle.) We found what we believe is a female
gorilla in Conquest. If so, she was wearing a jumpsuit. Does
anyone know if there is a proper female orangutan or gorilla outfit?
Especially in the original movie? Is there a clue in there that we
haven't found?

We continue our quest for masks and costume ideas. We have paid
special attention to your posts with original outfits as found in
Roddy #1 and Planet Hollywood pictures. Thank you for your previous
advice and contact information. Our "Dr. Zaius"
representation is
nearly complete – subject to artistic evolution. We are still
looking for a source of "Original Apes" masks. POTA 2001
masks are
readily available, but we are determined to portray the Original.
(Don't they still make them somewhere commercially? Or has POTA
2001
destroyed the market?)

Sometime we'd be interested to know if there was a reason for the
exclusion of females in the story. Was it a costume thing? Or was
it a comment on the [Earth-Time] times? The female chimpanzees
(except for Dr. Zira) were in the marketplace or with children in the
museum.

So much to learn.

Thanks.
--Helen

For excellent and current reproductions of character likenesses with regard
to ape masks, you can't go past apemania.com
Best,
KEN

sand_hill_school wrote:

> Okay. I hope my question is not too basic… You guys have
> watched
> these movies frame by frame and know everything there is to know.
> Maybe you can help?
>
> We are researching the Apes movies to find models for female ape
> costumes. Although we thought there were none, we have found what we
> believe to be three female orangutans. Unfortunately, these are
> shoulder shots with no obvious costume characteristics. (One is a
> librarian in Conquest. One is in the crowd in Beneath. The last is
> a school child in Battle.) We found what we believe is a female
> gorilla in Conquest. If so, she was wearing a jumpsuit. Does
> anyone know if there is a proper female orangutan or gorilla outfit?
> Especially in the original movie? Is there a clue in there that we
> haven't found?
>
> We continue our quest for masks and costume ideas. We have paid
> special attention to your posts with original outfits as found in
> Roddy #1 and Planet Hollywood pictures. Thank you for your previous
> advice and contact information. Our "Dr. Zaius"
> representation is
> nearly complete – subject to artistic evolution. We are still
> looking for a source of "Original Apes" masks. POTA 2001
> masks are
> readily available, but we are determined to portray the Original.
> (Don't they still make them somewhere commercially? Or has POTA
> 2001
> destroyed the market?)
>
> Sometime we'd be interested to know if there was a reason for the
> exclusion of females in the story. Was it a costume thing? Or was
> it a comment on the [Earth-Time] times? The female chimpanzees
> (except for Dr. Zira) were in the marketplace or with children in the
> museum.
>
> So much to learn.
>
> Thanks.
> --Helen
>
>
>
>

Oh, the chat with Birn will be great. That group will eat him alive, since
he doesn't even an appearance in the original to back him up.

- - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <Haristas@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:35 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Fwd:


>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I received a letter from Booth Colman. Here's what he said about POTA
2001: "I did see the picture and although it was free, I wanted my money
back. Dim, confusing story, one-dimensional roles (at least the heavies),
weak lead and generally messy. And now they are thinking about the sequel
you say!...I have heard comments about the new "Apes" film and they are
negative. I thought it was made for a 12-year-old audience". Booth is also
among those (such as Ron Harper and Naughton) who didn't like their TV show.
Mark Lenard and Roddy apparently did. - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <MTotsky@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 1:49 PM
Subject: RE: [Planet of the Apes] See you in court


> In a message dated Thu, 31 Jan 2002 4:09:31 PM Eastern Standard Time,
"Michael Whitty" <whitty@...> writes:
>
> <<What did Winona do? - I have not heard about it.>>
>
> Check this out:
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/News/02/01/ryder.charges.ap/index.html"
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 11:19 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] See you in court

In a message dated 1/31/02 1:06:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

Movieheadlines.com says there's an article in "The Hollywood Reporter" that a lawyer is filing a lawsuit against Fox on behalf of the ape extras used in the dusty Oberon desert scenes. The suit says they were exposed to carcinogens in the dust. I remember reading in "Cinefex" that they specifically were careful of those scenes because they knew people would wind up breathing that stuff in. The siuit says they weren't provided protection but I would think the apes would be better protected than the humans because of their masks. We'll see.

                                                              - - - Jeff

You forgot to say "Toodles!"  Anyway, what a load of huggermugger this suit is.  High-priced Fox lawyers will get this thrown out, and those poor extras WILL NEVER DO ANOTHER MOVIE!  That's the way it works in Hollywood -- don't make waves.

Speaking of 'See you in court,' when is the trial for "The Thief of Beverly Hills," also known as Winona Ryder?   There's a messed up chick.  I think she should get a part in the next APES movie as a kleptomaniac monkey, like that one on "Captain Simian and the Space Monkeys."   Anybody here remember that show?  I liked it.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

visit www.apemania.com for masks/prosthetics inc female (chimp only of female)

:

.htmlIn a message dated 2/2/02 2:54:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

I received a letter from Booth Colman. Here's what he said about POTA
2001: "I did see the picture and although it was free, I wanted my money
back. Dim, confusing story, one-dimensional roles (at least the heavies),
weak lead and generally messy. And now they are thinking about the sequel
you say!...I have heard comments about the new "Apes" film and they are
negative. I thought it was made for a 12-year-old audience". Booth is also
among those (such as Ron Harper and Naughton) who didn't like their TV show.
Mark Lenard and Roddy apparently did.                           - - - Jeff

I wish you could get Booth Colman to share his remembrances of Maurice Evans.

-- Rory<.html

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:

>
> > But don't take my word for it; read the science fact literature that
> > describes this phenomenon. It ain't "a buncha Sci-Fi warp speed
> > bullshit"... it's REAL!
>
> Well, there's real and then there's Real. Maybe it's real for someone
> somewhere in the universe. I am familiar with Einstein's theories, but until
> some alien hands us the technology they remain only theories. We can't even
> put a pilot in an Aurora without knocking them out from the initial
> acceleration. I guess the rally would have to accelerate for a year, just to
> keep from being squashed. That being the case, wouldn't they have to
> decelerate for a year to keep from slamming into the bulkhead or over
> shooting their target? I'm going to have to read it again thoroughly. I'll
> reply again in about 3 light years.

You do realize, I hope, that "light years" are units of DISTANCE, and
not of TIME...? A "year" is a unit of Time (duh!), and a "light year"
is the Distance that a ray of light travels in 1 Year (equal to
9.460528177 x 10^15th meters).
And, sorry, but No: they do NOT remain only theories. Clocks that can
tell time by the microsecond, synchronized when together at their
initial frame of reference, have been separated: one remaining
stationary, whilst the other is flown in a fast jet aircraft. The
result? The one that underwent accelerations did not click away as
many microseconds as the motionless one--and even though the
acceleration resulted in a velocity that was nowhere near the speed of
light, it DID cause the "ship-time" clock to dilate at exactly the
amount Einstein's theory postulates--I'm talking about the Lorentz
contraction equation: ET = ST/(1 - (v/c)^2).
Not only that, but since Gravity is a form of acceleration, and the
force of gravity is felt more intensely the closer you get to the
center of a massive body (like the planet Earth), then something that
weighs "x" amount at sea level should weigh slightly LESS at the top
of Mt. Everest, and slightly MORE at the bottom of Death Valley...
and, lo and behold, this has been tested and the same sort of Lorentz
contraction comes into play!
-
As far as Boulle's astronaut characters having to accelerate for one
year (lest they get squashed, at a "higher than one-gee" rate of
acceleration) and also (after "coasting") undergoing a similar
deceleration, yes, that's true. Otherwise, they WOULD overshoot their
target.
Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 2-02-2002

.htmlIn a message dated 2/2/02 9:55:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Clocks that can
tell time by the microsecond, synchronized when together at their
initial frame of reference, have been separated: one remaining
stationary, whilst the other is flown in a fast jet aircraft. The
result? The one that underwent accelerations did not click away as
many microseconds as the motionless one--and even though the
acceleration resulted in a velocity that was nowhere near the speed of
light, it DID cause the "ship-time" clock to dilate at exactly the
amount Einstein's theory postulates--I'm talking about the Lorentz
contraction equation: ET = ST/(1 - (v/c)^2).

Well, as you know, Patrick, nothing is 'stationary' in the universe, and time is, like damn near everything else, 'relative.'   It's just too bad we humans weren't made to, relatively, travel at super high velocities, but the STAR TREK theory of a matter/anti-matter reactor creating a magnetic field so strong around a craft that it 'warps' the space around it and allows it to slice through space at speeds greater than light is a good one, but is it possible?  (Alright, get ready for another 'relatively' long response from Patrick.)

-- Rory<.html

Attachments :

.html Hello Helen,

Personally, I have never seen a female orangutan outfit, but three years ago we did do designs for both Orangs and Gorilla females.

I have seen ONE female gorilla outfit which was a prototype that FOX made for the 1968 film.  It's unclear if it was ever used.
It is owned by a collector in New York and really is nothing more than the ZIRA patter in Gorilla purple textile without leather.
It has two buckle/clasps on the chest flap like the ZIRA outfit used in many of the first film's publicity fotos.  Here's a foto..

Hope this helps.

Brian Penikas
Keeper of the Glue and Faith for APEMANIA.COM
 
 
 

sand_hill_school wrote:

Okay.  I hope my question is not too basic…  You guys have
watched
these movies frame by frame and know everything there is to know.
Maybe you can help?

We are researching the Apes movies to find models for female ape
costumes.  Although we thought there were none, we have found what we
believe to be three female orangutans.  Unfortunately, these are
shoulder shots with no obvious costume characteristics.  (One is a
librarian in Conquest.  One is in the crowd in Beneath.  The last is
a school child in Battle.)  We found what we believe is a female
gorilla in Conquest.  If so, she was wearing a jumpsuit.   Does
anyone know if there is a proper female orangutan or gorilla outfit?
Especially in the original movie?  Is there a clue in there that we
haven't found?

We continue our quest for masks and costume ideas.  We have paid
special attention to your posts with original outfits as found in
Roddy #1 and Planet Hollywood pictures.  Thank you for your previous
advice and contact information.  Our "Dr. Zaius"
representation is
nearly complete ­ subject to artistic evolution.  We are still
looking for a source of "Original Apes" masks.  POTA 2001
masks are
readily available, but we are determined to portray the Original.
(Don't they still make them somewhere commercially?  Or has POTA
2001
destroyed the market?)

Sometime we'd be interested to know if there was a reason for the
exclusion of females in the story.  Was it a costume thing?  Or was
it a comment on the [Earth-Time] times?  The female chimpanzees
(except for Dr. Zira) were in the marketplace or with children in the
museum.

So much to learn.

Thanks.
--Helen
 
 

<.html

In a message dated 2/2/02 11:44:04 AM Central Standard Time,
apeman@... writes:

<< I have seen ONE female gorilla outfit which was a prototype that FOX made
for the 1968 film. It's unclear if it was ever used. >>

I've seen pictures of female Gorrilla toys that MLCCOUGAR linked me too. Ask
him.

-Joe

.html

Personally I thought all that dust made the scene even worse.

I dunno Jeff . . . the chances you do get to see the fighting in the background, you can see that it's not serious and that they're just goofing around.  I can't see that making that clearer would have helped.<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 2/2/2002 8:55:41 AM Central Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

You do realize, I hope, that "light years" are units of DISTANCE, and
not of TIME...? A "year" is a unit of Time (duh!),

Yes, Duh!

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 2/2/2002 8:55:41 AM Central Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Clocks that can
tell time by the microsecond, synchronized when together at their
initial frame of reference, have been separated: one remaining
stationary, whilst the other is flown in a fast jet aircraft. The
result? The one that underwent accelerations did not click away as
many microseconds as the motionless one--and even though the
acceleration resulted in a velocity that was nowhere near the speed of
light, it DID cause the "ship-time" clock to dilate at exactly the
amount Einstein's theory postulates--I'm talking about the Lorentz
contraction equation: ET = ST/(1 - (v/c)^2).

A person isn't a clock, Duh!

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 2/2/2002 8:55:41 AM Central Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Not only that, but since Gravity is a form of acceleration, and the
force of gravity is felt more intensely the closer you get to the
center of a massive body (like the planet Earth), then something that
weighs "x" amount at sea level should weigh slightly LESS at the top
of Mt. Everest, and slightly MORE at the bottom of Death Valley...

Can't you tell I'm just F***ing with you, Duh!

<.html

In case you haven't gotten it....
You write yards of theory, and I write two lines to challange it.
Now who knows time better, he?

.html

(Alright, get ready for another 'relatively' long response from Patrick.)

I think I've got that sorted.<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 2/2/02 3:31:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, LordTZer0@... writes:

(Alright, get ready for another 'relatively' long response from Patrick.)

I think I've got that sorted.


Hey!  I'm starting to like these long responses from Patrick.  They're too much for me to reply too without wanting to blow my brains out, but at least they give me something interesting to read.   Patrick kinds of reminds me of Jeremy Boob from YELLOW SUBMARINE.  I have no problem with him.

-- Rory<.html

There's a female gorilla toy in Sauseville's collectibles book.
- - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <CheeseGOTAS@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Where are the females?


> In a message dated 2/2/02 11:44:04 AM Central Standard Time,
> apeman@... writes:
>
> << I have seen ONE female gorilla outfit which was a prototype that FOX
made
> for the 1968 film. It's unclear if it was ever used. >>
>
> I've seen pictures of female Gorrilla toys that MLCCOUGAR linked me too.
Ask
> him.
>
> -Joe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 12:25 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Check out Table of Contents

In a message dated 2/2/2002 8:55:41 AM Central Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

You do realize, I hope, that "light years" are units of DISTANCE, and
not of TIME...? A "year" is a unit of Time (duh!),

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

<.html

.html

Hey!  I'm starting to like these long responses from Patrick.

Pat's cool, he's doing his thing.  He's obviously given the matter a lot of thought.  Some may say too much.  But that's cool.  But if I'm going to be thinking about POTA it'll probably be about a doble' with hot human honey and a chimpette cutie!  As you can see my think is making flip offhand remarks.  Can't we all just get along?<.html

"D'oh!", you say? Well... Eat My Shorts!

--- In pota@y..., <veetus@e...> wrote:
> I see your "duh!" and raise you a "d'oh!".
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: LordTZer0@A...
> To: pota@y...
> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 12:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Check out Table of Contents
>
>
> In a message dated 2/2/2002 8:55:41 AM Central Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
>
> You do realize, I hope, that "light years" are units of DISTANCE, and
> not of TIME...? A "year" is a unit of Time (duh!),
>
>
> Yes, Duh!
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:

> In a message dated 2/2/2002 8:55:41 AM Central Standard Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> > Clocks that can
> > tell time by the microsecond, synchronized when together at their
> > initial frame of reference, have been separated: one remaining
> > stationary, whilst the other is flown in a fast jet aircraft. The
> > result? The one that underwent accelerations did not click away as
> > many microseconds as the motionless one--and even though the
> > acceleration resulted in a velocity that was nowhere near the speed of
> > light, it DID cause the "ship-time" clock to dilate at exactly the
> > amount Einstein's theory postulates--I'm talking about the Lorentz
> > contraction equation: ET = ST/(1 - (v/c)^2).
> >
>
> A person isn't a clock, Duh!

Au contraire! Before elaborate time-pieces were invented, they had to
use the human pulse to calculate short-duration time--it's what they
used when figuring out how long it took variously sized balls (hey, no
joking around now!) to roll down an inclined plane. If I remember
right, it was Galileo who did that little experiment, which proved
Aristotle wrong regarding the time it took different masses to "fall".
Barring air resistance, everything falls at the same rate of
acceleration... and Galileo's own heartbeat (an internal "clock") was
used to figure this out.
I raise your "Duh!" with this "Yo!"
Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 2-03-2002

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:

> In a message dated 2/2/02 9:55:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:

Clocks that can tell time by the microsecond, synchronized when
together at their initial frame of reference, have been separated: one
remaining stationary, whilst the other is flown in a fast jet
aircraft. The result? The one that underwent accelerations did not
click away as many microseconds as the motionless one--and even though
the acceleration resulted in a velocity that was nowhere near the
speed of light, it DID cause the "ship-time" clock to dilate at
exactly the amount Einstein's theory postulates--I'm talking about the
Lorentz contraction equation: ET = ST/(1 - (v/c)^2).


Well, as you know, Patrick, nothing is 'stationary' in the universe,
and time is, like damn near everything else, 'relative.' It's just
too bad we humans weren't made to, relatively, travel at super high
velocities, but the STAR TREK theory of a matter/anti-matter reactor
creating a magnetic field so strong around a craft that it 'warps' the
space around it and allows it to slice through space at speeds greater
than light is a good one, but is it possible? (Alright, get ready for
another 'relatively' long response from Patrick.)

-- Rory

Hi, Rory (hey, I sound like Scooby Doo saying, 'Hi, Laurie!').
It doesn't matter that "nothing is 'stationary' in the universe, since
the diverging of two clocks (EARTH-TIME and the accelerating SHIP-
TIME) happens after the two clocks were initially synchronized whilst
occupying the same initial "frame-of-reference". When a ship
accelerates OUT of that initial "frame" it experiences the Lorentz
contraction as per Einstein's theory. Relative to each other (prior to
the start of the acceleration), the two objects (the planet Earth and
the spaceship) WERE stationary--that is, both occupying that initial
"frame of reference", which can be thought of as a 4-dimensional
"spacetime" coordinate (X,Y,Z spatial and T for Time).

As for the StarTrekkian "warp drive" idea... is it possible? Well, a
guy named Miguel Alcubierre came up with something interesting a few
years back which shows that in theory we can't rule it out. Look up
his name on any search engine, and I'm sure you'll find the page which
depicts his equation for the "metric" (I think that's what he called
it) and a graphic depiction of the encapsulating warpfield curve. I'll
see if I can locate the specific page which has it.

As you may recall (if you've read all my postings here, or my postings
over at the "Ansanaut" website Message Board ("goingfaster")), the
scenario I've cooked up for my POTA novel-in-progress involves a
"Hassleinian hyperdrive" which does involve warping spacetime around
spaceships; the warpfield in question instantaneously (when "engaged")
zips off at a "refracted lightspeed", since the warpfield sorta fools
the universe into thinking it is a photon... but not just an ordinary
photon--rather, a photon that has mass.
The quick depiction of the warpfield is that an array of high-
intensity lasers all focus their energy onto a central focal point (of
a "lasing chamber"), and that energy ["E"] is transformed into mass
["m"] via Einstein's famous equation ["E = mc^2"]; however, the mass
created from that laser light comes into existence at a density that
is so high (due to the hyperfocusing of the photon beams) that it is
already a black hole (a very very low-mass black hole--nowhere near
the mass of naturally-created black holes from exploding giant stars).
This micro-mass black hole is then topologically deformed by various
other parts of the "warpdrive", so that it spins hellaciously fast,
its initially spherical event horizon deforming through various stages
of oblation until it becomes a flat disc--with its ring-shaped
singularity now a Naked Singularity.
Then another part of the warpdrive deforms that Naked Singularity into
a "cyclic cardioid"--a geometrical 3-dimensional figure that sorta
looks like what an apple-skin would look like provided the apple's
insides were gone: the singularity would be at the "cusp" of this
thing (where the apple's "stem" attaches to the apple). From that
cusp-point, the warpage extends back, conically fanning out, and then
expands around and in front, so that a near-spherical spatial
microcosm is surrounded by this warpage, which "pierces" through the
surrounding spacetime continuum at the speed of the "substance" it was
initially made out of: Light (albeit, light which has to "lug around"
a massive spaceship inside it). This is why (in my explanatory
scenario) it takes Taylor's ship 2006 years (1972 to 3978) to travel
only 320 lightyears, and Virdon's ship 9 years (1971 to 1980) to
travel only 4.34 lightyears. The mass of the ship prevents the
warpfield from propagating at the same speed as an ordinary (massless)
ray of light.

You did say to get ready for another "relatively" long response!

By the way, in all the stuff I've read about HOW the Star Trek
warpdrive supposedly works, I have yet to find out "exactly" WHERE the
warpage originates, HOW it is actually created (and why do you need
"dilithium crystals"--what's their function?), how you can have ships
with any number of warp "nacelles" (I've seen blueprints for 1-
engined, 2, 3, even 4-engined ships), and so on. Chalk it up to
"technobabble"--a phenomenon that the non-original-series incarnations
of Trek makes WAY too much use of.

Of course, my above depiction of my "Hassleinian hyperdrive" probably
sounds like a similar load of "technobabble" to some of you out there!
Who am I to complain about TNG, DS9, VOY, & now "Enterprise"?

Toodles! (Hey, how the f**k did THAT get there!)

Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 2-03-2002

.htmlIn a message dated 2/3/02 10:17:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Of course, my above depiction of my "Hassleinian hyperdrive" probably
sounds like a similar load of "technobabble" to some of you out there!
Who am I to complain about TNG, DS9, VOY, & now "Enterprise"?

I've watched every episode of ENTERPRISE so far.  I'm enjoying it.

As you well know, Patrick, the Icarus spacecraft is a highly unlikely one to go at nearly the speed of light -- windows that look out toward the front? -- and more likely a landing craft.  It would have to have somekind of warpfield around it to be traveling through space as seen in the opening of PLANET.  I'm assuming a warpfield protects the craft from the debris it's going to be passing through, and counteracts the increase in mass and length that would destroy the human body?

How would you design a 'fast-as-light' spacecraft, Patrick?  I once saw a concept painting of a craft that had a funnel in front and back.  This spaceship would scoop up the matter it passed through and use it as fuel for thrust, of somekind, that would be expelled out the opposite funnel.  Whenever I dream of the film of Boulle's book that I'd like to see, I imagine a craft of this kind for Professor Antelle's spaceship.  Maybe it wouldn't be appropriate but from the painting I saw it certainly would make a spectacular visual impression as the matter hitting the front funnel puts out a huge lightshow.

-- Rory<.html

Seems like I'm getting a lot of inquiries from folks as to where to get the
cartoons on tape these days.

I know there was a guy on eBay for awhile who had a pretty decent collection of tv
ape stuff. Anyone got any leads?

Brian

Attachments :

Matt <MTotsky@...> wrote:

> I know Diamond has the Kubricks out now as well. They are around $12 a set

I

> think.

According to the last issue of Previews, the Kubricks have been held back
until May (they were supposed to be shipping in Jan/Feb). A two-page advert
appeared (twice!) in Previews. (see attachments)

Alan

.htmlIn a message dated 2/3/02 1:38:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, apeman@... writes:

Seems like I'm getting a lot of inquiries from folks as to where to get the
cartoons on tape these days.

I know there was a guy on eBay for awhile who had a pretty decent collection of tv
ape stuff.  Anyone got any leads?

Brian

Try this email address:  zaius53761@...

This person calls himself "KAMN" and sells the cartoon show in three volumes (VHS tapes) for $10 each.

-- Rory<.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: Haristas@... [Haristas@...]
Sent: Monday, 4 February 2002 7:02
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Planet of the Apes Cartoons

In a message dated 2/3/02 1:38:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, apeman@... writes:

Seems like I'm getting a lot of inquiries from folks as to where to get the
cartoons on tape these days.

I know there was a guy on eBay for awhile who had a pretty decent collection of tv
ape stuff.  Anyone got any leads?

Brian

Try this email address:  zaius53761@...

This person calls himself "KAMN" and sells the cartoon show in three volumes (VHS tapes) for $10 each.

-- Rory

<.html

This is a "Knock Off" Astro Ape I believe - they were at carnivals when I
was abot 12 (1977).

Other than the ones you identified and the costume Brian tells of, there are
not a lot of female apes depicted!!!

Someone spoke recently of the novel of Conquest referring to a female orang
I think? Anyone help here?

Michael

.htmlIn a message dated 2/3/02 3:47:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Someone spoke recently of the novel of Conquest referring to a female orang
I think?  Anyone help here?

Michael

What's the matter with you, Michael?  There's a female orangutan in the bookstore in CONQUEST -- in the movie!

-- Rory<.html

.html

Anyone got any leads?

There's always Terry, but if he's on tour you'll have a long wait.

<.html

.html

Whenever I dream of the film of Boulle's book that I'd like to see, I imagine a craft of this kind for Professor Antelle's spaceship. 

Though it may not be able to reach those time shifting speeds, I always thought that Phyllis and Jinn's ship, with the solar sail, was the most elegant design.<.html

.html Thanx Rory.  That's the guy!  You've just made some 13 year old girl in Porter Rico very happy.

Brian

Haristas@... wrote:

 In a message dated 2/3/02 1:38:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, apeman@... writes:
 
 

Seems like I'm getting a lot of inquiries from folks as to where to get the
cartoons on tape these days.

I know there was a guy on eBay for awhile who had a pretty decent collection of tv
ape stuff.  Anyone got any leads?

Brian

Try this email address:  zaius53761@...

This person calls himself "KAMN" and sells the cartoon show in three volumes (VHS tapes) for $10 each.

-- Rory
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html