> -----Original Message-----
> From: james611102 [JamesA1102@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 8:28
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] "Let's roll" up the Map
>
>
> Umm...E=MC2. Will that do?
>
> --- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:
> > Sorry James, you need to include Einstein's theory and at least
> take a page
> > to bore everyone before you get the nod from Pat.
> >
> > Sensible, concise comments just don't do it for him.
> >
> > Michelle
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken and Heather Taylor [ktaylor@...]
> Sent: Saturday, 27 April 2002 8:37
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: That FUCKING map!
>
>
> Patrick,
> I have no interest ( and I'm sure the rest of the group don't either ) in
> entering an email war with you so this will be my last post on
> the subject.
> In the spirit of free speach, I gave my opinion on your
> contribution to the
> seemingly never-ending map debate in what I thought to be a
> light- hearted,
> (albiet sarcastic) way. Poor judgement on my part? Perhaps.
> You obviously have supporters in this group who enjoy reading
> your laborious
> ( in my opinion) posts just as I enjoy reading most everyone elses. The
> essence of my email was that you need to lighten up. You appear to be SO
> serious about all this. As Bart Simpson used to say: "Where's
> Your sense of
> humor Man?" Being able to laugh at one's self is a good place to start.
> Gee, I find myself a constant source of amusement....obviously.
> Best,
> KEN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken and Heather Taylor [ktaylor@...]
Sent: Saturday, 27 April 2002 9:30
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] PLANET OF THE MEN

Has anyone read Boulle's script for the first propossed sequel to Planet? I was reading it yesterday ( it's been a while since I first read it) and it's pretty clear to see why it wasn't used. There's only about enough story to fill about 40 minutes of screen time. What is interesting is that a couple of the concepts were salvaged for Beneath. The Ape army march on the Forbidden Zone ( to fight Taylor and his tribe of humans) led by Gorilla Field Marshall Urus ( not Ursus). The battle described in the script is reminisent of the battle scene in both 'Battle' and 'POTA2001' ( the later, I'm sure to be a coinsidence).

For those who may have never read or seen the script, here's the 'Reader's Digest' version:

 

It starts directly from the last scene in Planet.

Almost immediately, Taylor & Nova encounter and befriend a tribe of humans.

Over the next few years Taylor teaches the humans to speak and work with tools, building a village and resurrecting the Statue Of Liberty.

Taylor & Nova has a son, Sirius. About 12 years pass.

Meanwhile Cornelius is running against Zaius in an election for the position of Minister of Science ( I think). Zaius wins by a landslide basically because of Cornelius past convictions of heresy.

The apes learn of Taylor's human city and plan to destroy it. Zira, Cornelius & Lucius travel to the Forbidden Zone to warn Taylor.

While Zira & Cornelius return, Lucius decides to stay with Taylor to fight for equality and freedom.

The younger human males, trained by Sirius ( who detests Apes ) prepare for war ( reminded me of Lord of the Flies as all the warriors are only young boys).

The humans lay in wait for the Apes with large trenches filled with spears surrounding their city.

The war begins. Much carnage. The humans outwit the apes who revert back into animal like beasts immediately.

Sirius' break away group march on Ape City and burn it to the ground killing and capturing all apes. Lucius is killed by one of Sirius' men ( boys).

Fearing the worst, Zira & Cornelius digest poison while in captivity. That's the end of them.

Oh, yeah, and Taylor gets killed by one of Sirius' troop also.

The final scene is at a human circus where Zaius is one of the main exhibits. He's dressed in a tux and top hat and does tricks for the audience like a circus ape.

 

That's pretty much the gist of it. For those who have read it, did I leave out any important details?

Like I said, easy to see why it wasn't filmed. Fox obviously gave Boulle a shot at the script hoping he'd come up with something really imaginative.

 

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

-----Original Message-----
From: mlccougar@... [mlccougar@...]
Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 11:30
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] There are Ape-made books on the POTA

*** If EVERY SINGLE DETAIL of the preceding human culture were
mirrored in the ape culture, then sure... but we don't use scrolls,
now, do we? Unless you think that the "human culture" in question were
a bunch of orthodox rabbis! We use BOOKS... but the Apes don't. So,
then, not every detail of their culture is necessarily based on our
precedent.

Nice try, but I don't buy it.

Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 4-27-2002

This statement you made here is Incorrect. The Apes do indeed use, as well as make books. Maybe you just didn't take time to think before saying this. I can give a few examples to you.

Example one: In the episode "The Cure," what is the council Orang shaking in his hand, a book, that's what. You may try to say it's an ancient human book, but you'd be incorrect in doing so. I mean during the whole Lawgiver (name) debate, you yourself used "The Ornan Period" mentioned by that Orang (taken out of that book of Apes History) to lay a tag on an earlier Lawgiver figure if I remember correctly. It is taken from an Apes book, pure and simple. I mean there's no way you can try to say that humans would document Apes historical accounts, and bound them in a book. The book is Ape made.

A second example: In the novelization of "The Surgeon" it describes some of the books in the Zaius study. It starts with describing some of the curios in there, then goes on to say "...and everywhere, heavy, black, handbound books." Later in the same paragraph, it tells of the books locked in the cabinet (these being the "dangerous" human books from times past). Of these books, it says "...he jimmied the door open and scanned the titles printed -unlike the usual ape-manufactured volume- on the spines. The next paragraph says of the  (medical text) book "It was smaller than the ape-made books, bound tightly and permanently by some machine process. The print was regular and legible..."

A third example: Check your Inkworks Planet of the Apes cards set. Look at card # 60. While it may say it's the Lawgiver, that is clearly the Minister from "Beneath." But that's not the point, the point is what is the minister is holding in his hands in that picture, a book. And again, you couldn't use the "It's an old human book..." argument. It'd more than likely be a book of apes religion, a book certainly not written by a human. (BTW, there are other pictures of that minister holding a book, but what sources I seen them in escapes me at this moment...)

And, last but not least, if you really want technicality, listen to the Power Records story "Mountain of the Delphi." In it, Galen mentions a "Book of Life." While I have no idea what would be contained in that book (other than a story of an Ape leading the way to a "promised land" for apes and humans), it is yet, another example of the Apes having books.

So, the Apes don't use books? I think they do....

***Btw, James was correct in his stating that humans used scrolls for 1,000's of years before the printing press. It could be the Apes still primarily use scrolls, because they're an easier way to send messages, etc... One could guess that they take their historical documents and make the information contained in their records (scrolls), and have those made into books. But this is all speculation on my part.

And, Patrick, as to your guess that the Apes use human skins as scrolls...I don't think so. Check out what is said in Planet. Cornelius says: "...The Sacred Scrolls wouldn't be worth their parchment..." Well, there seemed to have been a lot of cat-tails growing in the water around their city, so more than likely the source for the parchment they use is indeed plant sourced in origin.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

> Yes It is my contention because there is not one shred of evidence that it's not. If you want to rely on dialogue, Zaius refering to the Forbidden Zone as "our eastern desert" is the only statement that shows a directional relationship between Ape City and the Forbidden Zone. Cornelius never says that the Forbidden Zone was north in relation to Ape City. And from the map attached you can see where Taylor states he splashed down. I believe that would qualify as a lake or inland sea.
> If I've estimated the last place they saw Taylor correctly that would be 'towards the north' within the Forbidden Zone or more precisely northest of Ape City. As well as being between the lake and the sea with the coast on the left and the sea on the right.
> And human's did use scrolls for thousands of years before the invention of the printing press.

> --- In pota@y..., "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@y...> wrote:
> *** It is YOUR contention, is it not, that the Map is shown to Taylor
> oriented the way that WE do: with NORTH on top, SOUTH on bottom, WEST
> on the left side, and EAST on the right side... right? If that IS what
> you believe regarding this goddamned Map, then your argument makes
> absolutely no sense whatsoever, due to the fact that the Map clearly
> shows an INLAND LAKE in the Forbidden Zone (where Taylor's ship
> splashed down in--that's what Taylor indicates with his hand-signing)
> and the coastline of an OCEAN/SEA--the very same coastline along which
> Taylor and Nova ride off towards the half-buried Statue of Liberty.
> The shoreline WHICH IS ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE LAND MASS, towards the
> RIGHT side of the Map along it, is the direction Taylor was heading.
> If THAT area--which is along the oceanic shoreline--is "the northern
> area of the Forbidden Zone", then the SOUTHERN area would be under the
> water. According to your interpretation, the "northern" area of the
> Forbidden Zone would be the area "above" the inland sea--the "Dead
> Lake" in which Taylor's ship splashed down and sunk. But that is
> plainly NOT where Taylor is at the end of PLANET: he's following the
> shoreline, just as he had told Lucius he would do. The ocean was on
> his RIGHT, a cliffside was at his LEFT, the "Cave" site was BEHIND
> him, and the Statue of Liberty was IN FRONT OF HIM. And ALL of this
> was "towards the North" of the location where Cornelius and Brent were
> as the former showed the latter the Map--"Ape City" is SOUTH of where
> Taylor was when Cornelius and Zira last saw him, the ONLY way that it
> could possibly be for Cornelius to logically say that relative to his
> current place (in Ape City) Taylor was heading "towards the NORTH".
> > *** It is YOUR contention, is it not, that the Map is shown to Taylor
> > oriented the way that WE do: with NORTH on top, SOUTH on bottom, WEST
> > on the left side, and EAST on the right side... right? If that IS what
> > you believe regarding this goddamned Map, then your argument makes
> > absolutely no sense whatsoever, due to the fact that the Map clearly
> > shows an INLAND LAKE in the Forbidden Zone (where Taylor's ship
> > splashed down in--that's what Taylor indicates with his hand-signing)
> > and the coastline of an OCEAN/SEA--the very same coastline along which
> > Taylor and Nova ride off towards the half-buried Statue of Liberty.
> > The shoreline WHICH IS ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE LAND MASS, towards the
> > RIGHT side of the Map along it, is the direction Taylor was heading.
> > If THAT area--which is along the oceanic shoreline--is "the northern
> > area of the Forbidden Zone", then the SOUTHERN area would be under the
> > water. According to your interpretation, the "northern" area of the
> > Forbidden Zone would be the area "above" the inland sea--the "Dead
> > Lake" in which Taylor's ship splashed down and sunk. But that is
> > plainly NOT where Taylor is at the end of PLANET: he's following the
> > shoreline, just as he had told Lucius he would do. The ocean was on
> > his RIGHT, a cliffside was at his LEFT, the "Cave" site was BEHIND
> > him, and the Statue of Liberty was IN FRONT OF HIM. And ALL of this
> > was "towards the North" of the location where Cornelius and Brent were
> > as the former showed the latter the Map--"Ape City" is SOUTH of where
> > Taylor was when Cornelius and Zira last saw him, the ONLY way that it
> > could possibly be for Cornelius to logically say that relative to his
> > current place (in Ape City) Taylor was heading "towards the NORTH".
> >
> > *** Wrong; IF Cornelius had drawn a simple upward-pointing arrow on
> > the Map, and placed an unmistakable "N" above it, then there would be
> > no question at all as to where "north" was on the Map. Aside from the
> > dashed line separating the Forbidden Zone on the RIGHT from the
> > inhabited areas on the LEFT, there are NO markings whatsoever. In
> > order to deduce where North is (etc), we must rely on the dialogue
> > given in the films PLANET and BENEATH. Cornelius (most probably) drew
> > the Map himself, so it makes sense to conclude that he knew that the
> > oceanic coast runs along the EAST side of the continental landmass,
> > with the Forbidden Zone NORTH of Ape City. He's an archaeologist, and
> > he tells Lewis Dixon that he "can even draw" maps, in addition to
> > reading them.
> >
> > > There is no indication that it is turned sideways. Since Ape culture
> > > was based on the human culture that proceeded it, there is no
> > > evidence that they wouldn't orient their maps the same way.
> > > Zaius's line "Our eastern desert" is far more exact in estabishing
> > > the relation of the Forbidden Zone to Ape City.
> >
> > *** If EVERY SINGLE DETAIL of the preceding human culture were
> > mirrored in the ape culture, then sure... but we don't use scrolls,
> > now, do we? Unless you think that the "human culture" in question were
> > a bunch of orthodox rabbis! We use BOOKS... but the Apes don't. So,
> > then, not every detail of their culture is necessarily based on our
> > precedent.
> >
> > Nice try, but I don't buy it.
> >
> > Patrick Michael Tilton
> > EARTH-TIME 4-27-2002

>Sure emr.

>Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: emr1623 [emr1623@m...]
> Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 1:19
> To: pota@y...
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] boulle's novel

> Yes, but do you know what smegma is?

> Patrick,

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

From: Michael Whitty

Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 6:06 PM

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Boulle's novel (et al)

 

Sure emr.

Do you have a name?

Rory will tell you all about Haristas - the original novel's "lawgiver".

I agree the endings are probably somewhat MORE similar than the end of the
original, but the "shock ending" promoted by the 2001 movie was guessed by
all with any POTA background knowledge - earth is being run by apes.

Sorry if you don't feel enlightened by this group's contributions.  Yes, the
monkey shit does fly at times (and there is often a pattern to what
instigates this), but there are some very interesting and worthy
contributions.  Maybe you should do the time warp and read some previous
postings in the archives.

I think when people first join this group they are treated with tolerance
and "kid gloves" by most of us (except Rory) for a time.  Then they
eventually learn what we do and do not tolerate with a thud.  Newcomers are
usually people who have not had a group of humans to discuss POTA with and
they do not realise this group contains a lot of people with knowledge on
the subject matter.

I seem to recall Rory making some (well deserved) attacks on Pat about 6
weeks ago (I think you called him insane and dangerous and invited him to
masturbate more frequently??), but for some reason Pat did not really
respond to these.

When Pat started his crap about spelling (which I would call a very personal
attack with little consideration for the bigger picture - eg maybe people
can't spell for a REASON) I had been passive for long enough and I let him
have it.  But I discovered Pat seems to think his version is flawless and
bullet proof, so there is no point trying to argue with him.

My personal approach is to take it all in (with the realisation that I do
not know the answers to everything) then decide my opinion.  That is, until
the other opinions being offered get a bit ridiculous (and at times this is
just a communication problem).  That's when I will want to debate (and
sometimes this gets a bit hairy, no pun intended!).  James and I exchanged a
few blows recently, but came through it having a bit of a laugh at (and
with) each other, and now I believe we get on just fine.

I also hate long postings.  I think they are anti-communicative.  So I shall
stop now.

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: emr1623 [emr1623@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 1:19
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] boulle's novel
>
>
> I just finished reading Boulle's novel.  It was actually pretty good
> except for the fact that I thought the ending was rather hurried.
> The thing of it is though, I actually thought the book was closer to
> the 2001 movie than the earlier movies.  I think it was the endings
> that seem similar.  And also the left out scenes of "vivisection"
> from the movie that are covered in the book.  I also came across a
> vague reference to Haristas.  Who was he?
> Little by little I am covering all the "Apes" matter... so much to
> see, so little time.  Yet interestingly enough, the more learned I
> become on the subject (still got a long way to go!), the more I see
> that, by the reading of these postings, it's not really how much you
> know, but how many people you can insult in one posting.
> Can I get anyone's witty tilt on this?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In pota@y..., mlccougar@a... wrote:
> *** If EVERY SINGLE DETAIL of the preceding human culture were
mirrored in the ape culture, then sure... but we don't use scrolls,
now, do we? Unless you think that the "human culture" in question were
a bunch of orthodox rabbis! We use BOOKS... but the Apes don't. So,
then, not every detail of their culture is necessarily based on our
precedent.
>Nice try, but I don't buy it.
>
> Patrick Michael Tilton
> EARTH-TIME 4-27-2002
>
> This statement you made here is Incorrect. The Apes do indeed use, as well as make books. Maybe you just didn't take time to think before saying this. I can give a few examples to you.
>
> Example one: In the episode "The Cure," what is the council Orang shaking in his hand, a book, that's what. You may try to say it's an ancient human book, but you'd be incorrect in doing so. I mean during the whole Lawgiver (name) debate, you yourself used "The Ornan Period" mentioned by that Orang (taken out of that book of Apes History) to lay a tag on an earlier Lawgiver figure if I remember correctly. It is taken from an Apes book, pure and simple. I mean there's no way you can try to say that humans would document Apes historical accounts, and bound them in a book. The book is Ape made.

*** Reply: Good point; allow me to clarify. What I meant to say was
that the Apes make use of scrolls on a regular basis--far more often
than they use books. I pointed out the fact that they use (by and
large the MAJORITY of the time) SCROLLS, which we in the late-20th/
early-21st Century do NOT use (with the exception of certain cases--
such as the "Torah scrolls" used by synagogues, etc. If the Ape
society were to emulate our own American society in such slavish
devotion to detail (as James seemed to be implying), then their use of
scrolls is incongruous, since the artifacts Cornelius found in the
Cave were from a culture that does not use scrolls. Whatever scrolls
you may see in our present time represent an out-of-the-ordinary
manner in which we print text onto paper. That was my point: that the
Ape society does NOT slavishly imitate every single detail of our
culture (i.e. the "North-is-up" rule for maps); I could have pointed
out the fact that Ape clothing styles are not only extremely different
from anything WE use, they also are undifferentiated from individual-
to-individual, with the exception of certain "special" persons (like
General Ursus' armor and helmet--which differs from the "standard"
clothing design worn by almost ALL other gorillas in PLANET and
BENEATH, save Julius in his custodial uniform). Why don't we see more
differentiation in clothing from person-to-person? People in OUR
culture dress ourselves in a variety of ways, all different from each
other; but the Apes seem to wear the "same" outfit styles. That
difference is but one more way in which this simian society does NOT
imitate their preceeding human culture.


>A second example: In the novelization of "The Surgeon" it describes some of the books in the Zaius study. It starts with describing some of the curios in there, then goes on to say "...and everywhere, heavy, black, handbound books." Later in the same paragraph, it tells of the books locked in the cabinet (these being the "dangerous" human books from times past). Of these books, it says "...he jimmied the door open and scanned the titles printed - unlike the usual ape-manufactured volume - on the spines. The next paragraph says of the (medical text) book "It was smaller than the ape-made books, bound tightly and permanently by some machine process. The print was regular and legible..."

*** Reply: It seems that you consider the text given in a novelization
to be "canon"; I could cite a plethora of details from the various
POTA film and TV novelizations which are in direct contradiction with
the details actually presented on screen (such as Ursus biting Brent's
hand near the end of BENEATH--it's in Michael Avallone's novelization,
but NOT in the film; or, the "ape-onauts" being salvaged on an
aircraft carrier--its in Pournelle's novelization of ESCAPE, but not
in the film [the ship is "beached"]).
Again--I didn't mean to suggest that the Apes NEVER used books of
their own; I pointed out the fact that for the most part they use
scrolls--which we, in our present, do NOT use (excepting rabbis,
etc.).

>
>A third example: Check your Inkworks Planet of the Apes cards set. Look at card # 60. While it may say it's the Lawgiver, that is clearly the Minister from "Beneath." But that's not the point, the point is what is the minister is holding in his hands in that picture, a book. And again, you couldn't use the "It's an old human book..." argument. It'd more than likely be a book of apes religion, a book certainly not written by a human. (BTW, there are other pictures of that minister holding a book, but what sources I seen them in escapes me at this moment...)
>
>And, last but not least, if you really want technicality, listen to the Power Records story "Mountain of the Delphi." In it, Galen mentions a "Book of Life." While I have no idea what would be contained in that book (other than a story of an Ape leading the way to a "promised land" for apes and humans), it is yet, another example of the Apes having books.

*** I don't consider the Power Records stories to be part of the
"canon" (you, however, are free to do so--it doesn't bother me if you
do). However, your assertion that the mere word "book" must mean a
bunch of paper bound along a spine (what in Latin is properly called a
"codex"), is incorrect. There are references in the Bible to "the Book
of Jasher", "the Book of [this or that]", etc., and in each case the
Hebrew word "Sefer" is translated into English as "book"--but the
"book" in question would almost certainly have been rolled up as a
scroll. The Hebrew word "Sefer" is TRANSLATED into English as "book",
yet the Hebrews customarily wrote their religious texts on scrolls. It
is the CONTENT--the actual TEXT--which is considered the "book" in
such cases, and the format (either codex-with-spine or scroll-rolled-
around-bar) has no bearing on the matter. The so-called "Five Books of
Moses" (the Torah, or Pentateuch) is printed nowadays in "book"
format, yet were originally hand-scribed onto scrolls. So, what Galen
refers to (in an AUDIO recording--we can't "see" this item he talks
about, can we?) as a "Book of Life" could very well be written either
on scrolls, or in codices, or even on a 3-ring binder left over from
an ancient "Office Max" store from Pre-Cataclysm times.
Besides, there are downloadable "books" available on various Internet
websites; these "books" can be stored on ZIP drives, on floppys, on
hard-drives, etc.; they can also be printed onto computer paper in any
computer cluster--but just because that hardcopy isn't bound along a
"spine" doesn't make it any less of a book. It is the CONTENT which
matters: the TEXT. That makes it a "book".

>
>So, the Apes don't use books? I think they do....

*** If I gave the impression that "Apes don't use books" AT ALL, then
"my bad" as they say. I meant that the Apes use scrolls for the most
part--a practice that is extremely rare in their supposed precedent
culture (ours) which they've "aped".

>
> ***Btw, James was correct in his stating that humans used scrolls for 1,000's of years before the printing press. It could be the Apes still primarily use scrolls, because they're an easier way to send messages, etc... One could guess that they take their historical documents and make the information contained in their records (scrolls), and have those made into books. But this is all speculation on my part.

*** The "more ancient culture" (ours) which the Apes "aped" is not the
same culture that has existed "for 1,000's of years". Our culture--the
one James insists the Apes based theirs on in every single detail--
does not use scrolls (excepting rabbis and theater groups who are
doing "period dramas" requiring a scroll as a prop in a production).
Our culture has been privy to an Industrial Revolution which radically
transformed our way of living from the way our ancestors lived those
"thousands of years" ago. Whatever elements of our culture were "aped"
by the Apes would have been from our culture as it existed when the
Nuclear War destroyed it--not from our ancestors' out-moded way of
life.

>
>And, Patrick, as to your guess that the Apes use human skins as scrolls... I don't think so. Check out what is said in Planet. Cornelius says: "...The Sacred Scrolls wouldn't be worth their parchment..." Well, there seemed to have been a lot of cat-tails growing in the water around their city, so more than likely the source for the parchment they use is indeed plant sourced in origin.

*** The phrase "worth their parchment" sounds to me like an idiomatic
expression (like someone being "worth his salt").
I didn't state that ALL simian scrolls were written on processed human
skin--only that such a practice MAY be part of the picture. It's
obvious that the Apes use paper--Taylor writes "MY NAME IS TAYLOR" on
just such a piece of paper from Zira's notepad. Similarly, when Taylor
writes out his Q&A with Cornelius and Zira (in the now-notorious "map"
scene), he's writing on what clearly appears to be paper.
Does this mean that ALL writing is done on PAPER, and paper only? By
no means. Even most Torah scrolls nowadays are printed on paper (if
I'm wrong about this, Judaism scholars out there, correct me);
however, in addition to the papyrus scrolls dug up at Qumran, there
are ALSO "vellum" scrolls--scrolls made out of the skins of dead
animals. Maybe--just maybe--the oldest manuscripts of the Lawgiver's
"Sacred Scrolls" were written on "man-skin" vellum; later on, in 3955,
when the Apes have a paper-making industry and (probably) a working
printing press, the majority of COPIES of the authoritative "original
texts" are printed on paper (or, as Cornelius calls it, "parchment").
Yet, perhaps, there are "deluxe editions" of the Sacred Scrolls which
are printed on "man-skin"--just like the oldest ones (maybe) were...
Regardless, it was an idea that I thought was intriguing and worth
speculating about. Cornelius' line does not mean that animal (human)
skin never has, isn't, and never will be used as a writing surface. He
was saying that IF his theory of Evolution is right, THEN the "Sacred
Scrolls" wouldn't be worth the parchment that they're printed on.
"Worth their parchment" sounds, as I said, like a colloquial idiomatic
expression--which would explain why he doesn't state the ENTIRE line
(i.e. "the parchment they're printed on", as opposed to just "their
parchment").

Finally, it's nice to haggle over POTA for a change. I know that some
out there prefer "short and sweet" messages--and they're free to skip
over this "long and bitter" one. Thanks for the critique; I hope you
find my reply informative--regardless of whether or not you agree with
what I have to say.

Best,
Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 4-28-2002

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

From: Michael Whitty

Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 6:11 PM

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Subject: RE: [Planet of the Apes] Re: That FUCKING map!

 

Yes, but do you know what smegma is?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: CheeseGOTAS@... [CheeseGOTAS@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 2:31
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: That FUCKING map!
>
>
> In a message dated 4/27/02 8:31:01 AM Central Daylight Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:
>
> << James asked me a question regarding POTA subject matter--the purpose
>  of this smeggin' Message Board, >>
>
> I'd just like to say that I LOVE Red Dwarf.
>
> -Joe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

From: patrickmichaeltilton

Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 10:36 AM

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Boulle's novel (et al)

 

--- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:

>Sure emr.

Do you have a name?

Rory will tell you all about Haristas - the original novel's
"lawgiver".

I agree the endings are probably somewhat MORE similar than the end of
the original, but the "shock ending" promoted by the 2001 movie was
guessed by all with any POTA background knowledge - earth is being run
by apes.

Sorry if you don't feel enlightened by this group's contributions. 
Yes, the monkey shit does fly at times (and there is often a pattern
to what instigates this), but there are some very interesting and
worthy contributions.  Maybe you should do the time warp and read some
previous postings in the archives.

I think when people first join this group they are treated with
tolerance and "kid gloves" by most of us (except Rory) for a time. 
Then they eventually learn what we do and do not tolerate with a thud. 
Newcomers are usually people who have not had a group of humans to
discuss POTA with and they do not realise this group contains a lot of
people with knowledge on the subject matter.

I seem to recall Rory making some (well deserved) attacks on Pat about
6 weeks ago (I think you called him insane and dangerous and invited
him to masturbate more frequently??), but for some reason Pat did not
really respond to these.I seem to recall Rory making some (well
deserved) attacks on Pat about 6 weeks ago (I think you called him
insane and dangerous and invited him to masturbate more frequently??),
but for some reason Pat did not really respond to these.

When Pat started his crap about spelling (which I would call a very
personal attack with little consideration for the bigger picture - eg
maybe people can't spell for a REASON) I had been passive for long
enough and I let him have it. But I discovered Pat seems to think his
version is flawless and bullet proof, so there is no point trying to
argue with him.

My personal approach is to take it all in (with the realisation that I
do not know the answers to everything) then decide my opinion.  That
is, until the other opinions being offered get a bit ridiculous (and
at times this is just a communication problem).  That's when I will
want to debate (and sometimes this gets a bit hairy, no pun
intended!).  James and I exchanged a few blows recently, but came
through it having a bit of a laugh at (and with) each other, and now I
believe we get on just fine. I also hate long postings.  I think they
are anti-communicative.  So I shall stop now.

>Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: emr1623 [emr1623@m...]
> Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 1:19
> To: pota@y...
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] boulle's novel

I just finished reading Boulle's novel.  It was actually pretty good
except for the fact that I thought the ending was rather hurried.
The thing of it is though, I actually thought the book was closer to
the 2001 movie than the earlier movies.  I think it was the endings
that seem similar.  And also the left out scenes of "vivisection" from
the movie that are covered in the book.  I also came across a vague
reference to Haristas.  Who was he?
Little by little I am covering all the "Apes" matter... so much to
see, so little time.  Yet interestingly enough, the more learned I
become on the subject (still got a long way to go!), the more I see
that, by the reading of these postings, it's not really how much you
know, but how many people you can insult in one posting.
Can I get anyone's witty tilt on this?

*** Well, "emr1623", you got "(dim)witty" to chime in; here's the
"tilt" to clarify some things.
The ape referred to as "Haristas" in Boulle's novel was not a
"lawgiver" by any means; his name [H-ARIST-AS] evokes the name of
ARISTOTLE, whom Dante called "the Master of men who Know". Aristotle--
though a "pagan"--was considered to be the paragon of Intelligence;
his views on Science were taken as "gospel" by medieval Christian
theologians (Thomas Aquinas' "Summa" was written to "marry"
Aristotelian philosophy to Christian doctrine). When Galileo and
Copernicus came on the scene and were able to disprove several key
points of Aristotle's "official science", the Church put its foot
down; the same sort of thing is par for the course on Soror (Boulle's
"planet of the apes"), where the Orangutans represent the "orthodoxy"
which clings to the teachings of Haristas (the simian "Aristotle")
despite the contradictory contributions of the Chimpanzee scientists
who, among other things, have discovered Relativity. Boulle never
mentions Haristas being a "lawgiver" of any sort. Haristas' out-moded
views are like the Ptolemaic, "Earth-centered" view of the Universe,
which Copernicus proved to be false.

Regarding the following paragraph by Mick,
      "I seem to recall Rory making some (well deserved) attacks on Pat         
about 6 weeks ago (I think you called him insane and dangerous and
invited him to masturbate more frequently??), but for some reason Pat
did not really respond to these."
                                           I should probably state
that some so-called "well-deserved attacks" are beneath anyone's
dignity to respond to. Especially Mick's talentless attempts at
disparaging wit. He amuses himself, and assures me that others he
personally knows are also amused, but I find him to be as witty as
Landon was intelligent--AFTER the lobotomy.

Mick talks about me "starting [my] crap about spelling", implying that
I had some sort of superiority complex and looked down on those whose
postings were riddled with chronic misspellings. His false assumption
has prompted him to sling his "monkey crap" slanders in my direction.
I've admitted that I have a "pet peeve" against atrocious spelling; as
an English major, it sort of goes with the territory. James (one of
the message posters here) did not inform me that the reason for his
misspellings was dyslexia (I cut him some slack once I found out about
it); Mick thinks that I should have assumed that James had dyslexia,
and that my NOT assuming this makes me a person who is prone to
"personal attacks" with "little consideration" for the feelings of
others. Thus, Mick justifies hurling the vilest invective at me, laced
with homoerotic underpinnings (he calls me a "bitch" and wants me to
"lick [his] balls"). For someone who doesn't like "personal attacks"
he sure has a hypocrite's way of conducting himself.

Mick would have you believe that I have "set-in-stone" beliefs
regarding the details given in the POTA films, but this is quite
misleading; if you "do the time warp" (as he suggested) and review
past postings (by me and others), you'll discover that I'm in the
process of writing a huge POTA novel, adapting the 1968 film and re-
adapting the 4 sequel films as well as the 14 TV episodes, doing with
the "extant POTA saga" something similar to what Malory did with the
plethora of Arthurian tales milling about in his time: making one
complete, self-consistent, narrative epic. Mick's reference to my
"version" being "flawless and bullet proof" concerns this project of
mine. The reason I've posted my "take" on various details of the POTA
saga is to invite arguments from those who don't agree with me, to get
them to prove me wrong (if they can) based on the evidence given in
the "canon" (i.e. the actual details presented on screen, in dialogue
especially). I don't "expect" anybody to adopt my novel's scenario,
any more than any of the scores of authors of STAR TREK novels expect
other Trek fans to adopt their novels as "canon". The scenario I've
been putting together for my novel is controversial, I'll admit, but
it is consistent with the "facts" given in the films and TV episodes.
It works for me (which is all I really need it to do); but I welcome
any critique of my logic/reasoning, because I do value the responsible
criticisms of others. So, feel free to review my prior postings and
criticize them all you like; I welcome it, even though I can't
guarantee that I'll agree with specific quibbles you may have. It's
open to interpretation--and my interpretation isn't popular with Mick
(and Rory, and probably several others here), but that's neither "here
nor there" as they say.

Mick hates long postings; I prefer them. I tend to have substantive
things to say about POTA, backing up my perspective with evidence from
the filmed saga. Sometimes other folks get sick of reading postings
that seem (to them) to be "beating it to death", but they're free to
skip 'em and read on. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if Mick
were to completely ignore anything I post here; there are those
("Lynne" recently admitted as much) who like reading what I've got to
say, and I value that perspective infinitely more than I do Mick's
mediocre attempts at denigratory wit.

Welcome to the "Madhouse", Emr1623 (by the way, are you related to
THX-1138? Just wondering...)!

Patrick Michael "Tilt"on
EARTH-TIME 4-28-2002

-----Original Message-----
From: mlccougar@... [mlccougar@...]
Sent: Monday, 29 April 2002 6:04
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Beware the beast man

In a message dated 4/28/2002 2:21:15 PM Central Standard Time, emr1623@... writes:

if I can get past the insults (what WERE we talking about?)  I enjoy reading everyone's posts, lengthy, convoluted, or otherwise.  My next step is to watch the movies... I have to get them first.  Then I might actually know what you all are talking about... LOL  You might find my interest inane considering I know little about the topic.  But I find myself intrigued by the idea that POTA represents... you know, the topsy-turvy world turned upside down... what if apes were in control.  And so my interest grows... as I read and learn or watch and learn.
Eileen  no relation to THX 1138, although familiar, I can't quite place him/her/it.  

I will say I agree with you here. I mean I had been "lurking" these last few weeks before deciding to (yet again) join the group. What started out as a disagreement over a map has turned into much more... I mean even Patrick seems to be tiring of it, (as he said to my Ape-made books posting something of the effect "It's good to be debating Apes again...") yet again at the same time he got in a jab when he said something about Whitty's reply to the
Haristas/Lawgiver post. You can't have it both ways, I mean if you're willing to let it go, let it go, or take it private. Michael seemed to say he'd go privately with this fued, so let it go that way. (Michael, if I misread you, and you didn't say you'd "war" with him privately, feel free to correct my assumption.) I can see where you're being put off by this "in fighting" amongst the group members.

As to you still not seeing the Apes movies, do yourself a favor and SEE THEM! If you don't see any of them but one, make sure the one you see is the original PLANET. That, by far, is the best of them.

(And, I know I'm fueling the fires here, but as far as the whole map thing goes, James (and Rory) are right.)
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@...]
> Sent: Monday, 29 April 2002 2:13
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: There are Ape-made books on the POTA
>
>
> *** My responses to each point will be inserted throughout mlccougar's
> posting. PMT
>
> --- In pota@y..., mlccougar@a... wrote:
> > *** If EVERY SINGLE DETAIL of the preceding human culture were
> mirrored in the ape culture, then sure... but we don't use scrolls,
> now, do we? Unless you think that the "human culture" in question were
> a bunch of orthodox rabbis! We use BOOKS... but the Apes don't. So,
> then, not every detail of their culture is necessarily based on our
> precedent.
> >Nice try, but I don't buy it.
> >
> > Patrick Michael Tilton
> > EARTH-TIME 4-27-2002
> >
> > This statement you made here is Incorrect. The Apes do indeed
> use, as well as make books. Maybe you just didn't take time to
> think before saying this. I can give a few examples to you.
> >
> > Example one: In the episode "The Cure," what is the council
> Orang shaking in his hand, a book, that's what. You may try to
> say it's an ancient human book, but you'd be incorrect in doing
> so. I mean during the whole Lawgiver (name) debate, you yourself
> used "The Ornan Period" mentioned by that Orang (taken out of
> that book of Apes History) to lay a tag on an earlier Lawgiver
> figure if I remember correctly. It is taken from an Apes book,
> pure and simple. I mean there's no way you can try to say that
> humans would document Apes historical accounts, and bound them in
> a book. The book is Ape made.
>
> *** Reply: Good point; allow me to clarify. What I meant to say was
> that the Apes make use of scrolls on a regular basis--far more often
> than they use books. I pointed out the fact that they use (by and
> large the MAJORITY of the time) SCROLLS, which we in the late-20th/
> early-21st Century do NOT use (with the exception of certain cases--
> such as the "Torah scrolls" used by synagogues, etc. If the Ape
> society were to emulate our own American society in such slavish
> devotion to detail (as James seemed to be implying), then their use of
> scrolls is incongruous, since the artifacts Cornelius found in the
> Cave were from a culture that does not use scrolls. Whatever scrolls
> you may see in our present time represent an out-of-the-ordinary
> manner in which we print text onto paper. That was my point: that the
> Ape society does NOT slavishly imitate every single detail of our
> culture (i.e. the "North-is-up" rule for maps); I could have pointed
> out the fact that Ape clothing styles are not only extremely different
> from anything WE use, they also are undifferentiated from individual-
> to-individual, with the exception of certain "special" persons (like
> General Ursus' armor and helmet--which differs from the "standard"
> clothing design worn by almost ALL other gorillas in PLANET and
> BENEATH, save Julius in his custodial uniform). Why don't we see more
> differentiation in clothing from person-to-person? People in OUR
> culture dress ourselves in a variety of ways, all different from each
> other; but the Apes seem to wear the "same" outfit styles. That
> difference is but one more way in which this simian society does NOT
> imitate their preceeding human culture.
>
>
> >A second example: In the novelization of "The Surgeon" it
> describes some of the books in the Zaius study. It starts with
> describing some of the curios in there, then goes on to say
> "...and everywhere, heavy, black, handbound books." Later in the
> same paragraph, it tells of the books locked in the cabinet
> (these being the "dangerous" human books from times past). Of
> these books, it says "...he jimmied the door open and scanned the
> titles printed - unlike the usual ape-manufactured volume - on
> the spines. The next paragraph says of the (medical text) book
> "It was smaller than the ape-made books, bound tightly and
> permanently by some machine process. The print was regular and legible..."
>
> *** Reply: It seems that you consider the text given in a novelization
> to be "canon"; I could cite a plethora of details from the various
> POTA film and TV novelizations which are in direct contradiction with
> the details actually presented on screen (such as Ursus biting Brent's
> hand near the end of BENEATH--it's in Michael Avallone's novelization,
> but NOT in the film; or, the "ape-onauts" being salvaged on an
> aircraft carrier--its in Pournelle's novelization of ESCAPE, but not
> in the film [the ship is "beached"]).
> Again--I didn't mean to suggest that the Apes NEVER used books of
> their own; I pointed out the fact that for the most part they use
> scrolls--which we, in our present, do NOT use (excepting rabbis,
> etc.).
>
> >
> >A third example: Check your Inkworks Planet of the Apes cards
> set. Look at card # 60. While it may say it's the Lawgiver, that
> is clearly the Minister from "Beneath." But that's not the point,
> the point is what is the minister is holding in his hands in that
> picture, a book. And again, you couldn't use the "It's an old
> human book..." argument. It'd more than likely be a book of apes
> religion, a book certainly not written by a human. (BTW, there
> are other pictures of that minister holding a book, but what
> sources I seen them in escapes me at this moment...)
> >
> >And, last but not least, if you really want technicality, listen
> to the Power Records story "Mountain of the Delphi." In it, Galen
> mentions a "Book of Life." While I have no idea what would be
> contained in that book (other than a story of an Ape leading the
> way to a "promised land" for apes and humans), it is yet, another
> example of the Apes having books.
>
> *** I don't consider the Power Records stories to be part of the
> "canon" (you, however, are free to do so--it doesn't bother me if you
> do). However, your assertion that the mere word "book" must mean a
> bunch of paper bound along a spine (what in Latin is properly called a
> "codex"), is incorrect. There are references in the Bible to "the Book
> of Jasher", "the Book of [this or that]", etc., and in each case the
> Hebrew word "Sefer" is translated into English as "book"--but the
> "book" in question would almost certainly have been rolled up as a
> scroll. The Hebrew word "Sefer" is TRANSLATED into English as "book",
> yet the Hebrews customarily wrote their religious texts on scrolls. It
> is the CONTENT--the actual TEXT--which is considered the "book" in
> such cases, and the format (either codex-with-spine or scroll-rolled-
> around-bar) has no bearing on the matter. The so-called "Five Books of
> Moses" (the Torah, or Pentateuch) is printed nowadays in "book"
> format, yet were originally hand-scribed onto scrolls. So, what Galen
> refers to (in an AUDIO recording--we can't "see" this item he talks
> about, can we?) as a "Book of Life" could very well be written either
> on scrolls, or in codices, or even on a 3-ring binder left over from
> an ancient "Office Max" store from Pre-Cataclysm times.
> Besides, there are downloadable "books" available on various Internet
> websites; these "books" can be stored on ZIP drives, on floppys, on
> hard-drives, etc.; they can also be printed onto computer paper in any
> computer cluster--but just because that hardcopy isn't bound along a
> "spine" doesn't make it any less of a book. It is the CONTENT which
> matters: the TEXT. That makes it a "book".
>
> >
> >So, the Apes don't use books? I think they do....
>
> *** If I gave the impression that "Apes don't use books" AT ALL, then
> "my bad" as they say. I meant that the Apes use scrolls for the most
> part--a practice that is extremely rare in their supposed precedent
> culture (ours) which they've "aped".
>
> >
> > ***Btw, James was correct in his stating that humans used
> scrolls for 1,000's of years before the printing press. It could
> be the Apes still primarily use scrolls, because they're an
> easier way to send messages, etc... One could guess that they
> take their historical documents and make the information
> contained in their records (scrolls), and have those made into
> books. But this is all speculation on my part.
>
> *** The "more ancient culture" (ours) which the Apes "aped" is not the
> same culture that has existed "for 1,000's of years". Our culture--the
> one James insists the Apes based theirs on in every single detail--
> does not use scrolls (excepting rabbis and theater groups who are
> doing "period dramas" requiring a scroll as a prop in a production).
> Our culture has been privy to an Industrial Revolution which radically
> transformed our way of living from the way our ancestors lived those
> "thousands of years" ago. Whatever elements of our culture were "aped"
> by the Apes would have been from our culture as it existed when the
> Nuclear War destroyed it--not from our ancestors' out-moded way of
> life.
>
> >
> >And, Patrick, as to your guess that the Apes use human skins as
> scrolls... I don't think so. Check out what is said in Planet.
> Cornelius says: "...The Sacred Scrolls wouldn't be worth their
> parchment..." Well, there seemed to have been a lot of cat-tails
> growing in the water around their city, so more than likely the
> source for the parchment they use is indeed plant sourced in origin.
>
> *** The phrase "worth their parchment" sounds to me like an idiomatic
> expression (like someone being "worth his salt").
> I didn't state that ALL simian scrolls were written on processed human
> skin--only that such a practice MAY be part of the picture. It's
> obvious that the Apes use paper--Taylor writes "MY NAME IS TAYLOR" on
> just such a piece of paper from Zira's notepad. Similarly, when Taylor
> writes out his Q&A with Cornelius and Zira (in the now-notorious "map"
> scene), he's writing on what clearly appears to be paper.
> Does this mean that ALL writing is done on PAPER, and paper only? By
> no means. Even most Torah scrolls nowadays are printed on paper (if
> I'm wrong about this, Judaism scholars out there, correct me);
> however, in addition to the papyrus scrolls dug up at Qumran, there
> are ALSO "vellum" scrolls--scrolls made out of the skins of dead
> animals. Maybe--just maybe--the oldest manuscripts of the Lawgiver's
> "Sacred Scrolls" were written on "man-skin" vellum; later on, in 3955,
> when the Apes have a paper-making industry and (probably) a working
> printing press, the majority of COPIES of the authoritative "original
> texts" are printed on paper (or, as Cornelius calls it, "parchment").
> Yet, perhaps, there are "deluxe editions" of the Sacred Scrolls which
> are printed on "man-skin"--just like the oldest ones (maybe) were...
> Regardless, it was an idea that I thought was intriguing and worth
> speculating about. Cornelius' line does not mean that animal (human)
> skin never has, isn't, and never will be used as a writing surface. He
> was saying that IF his theory of Evolution is right, THEN the "Sacred
> Scrolls" wouldn't be worth the parchment that they're printed on.
> "Worth their parchment" sounds, as I said, like a colloquial idiomatic
> expression--which would explain why he doesn't state the ENTIRE line
> (i.e. "the parchment they're printed on", as opposed to just "their
> parchment").
>
> Finally, it's nice to haggle over POTA for a change. I know that some
> out there prefer "short and sweet" messages--and they're free to skip
> over this "long and bitter" one. Thanks for the critique; I hope you
> find my reply informative--regardless of whether or not you agree with
> what I have to say.
>
> Best,
> Patrick Michael Tilton
> EARTH-TIME 4-28-2002
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> *** Look at the Map pic you attached; Taylor's finger is pointing

> the spot where his ship landed--in the "inland sea" (as Zaius

> it), also known as "Dead Lake" (as Cornelius calls it).
> Your designation of "Ape City" is also correct here: on the left

> of the dashed line, with the river running through it. This same

> is forded by a bridge which can be seen running through Ape City in
> the very first establishing shot, after the "Hunt" scene.
>
> However, your contention that "the last place Cornelius and Zira

> Taylor" is along the shore of "Dead Lake" is just plain wrong. If
> you'll recall, there's a scene in the film where Taylor asks,
> "Cornelius? Where does this river lead?"
> Cornelius replies that "it runs to a sea [the ocean--NOT "Dead

> some miles from here--that's where we'll find the Diggings."
> Taylor: "And beyond that?"
> Cornelius: "No one knows; you can't ride along the shore at high

> and we had no boats on our last expedition."
> Taylor: "You've never told me: why is this region called "the
> Forbidden Zone"?"
> Cornelius: "No one really knows. It's an ancient taboo, set forth

> the Sacred Scrolls; the Lawgiver pronounced this whole area deadly."
>
> Earlier, Cornelius had told Taylor that "It's a long detour to Dead
> Lake. What would we find there?"
> The reason it's a "long detour to Dead Lake" is because they are

> heading for any location along the winding, convoluted shore of

> "inland sea"--rather, they are heading for a site (the Cave, "the
> Diggings", with the Doll, etc.) which is on the shoreline of the
> ocean--where that "river leads to", where that river empties into

> Ocean. Look at the shoreline of "Dead Lake"--it depicts the same

> of winding shoreline which can be seen at the Lake Powell site

> they filmed it. But the OCEAN shoreline does NOT wind all about:
> Taylor and Nova ride along the Ocean's shoreline--NOT along the
> shoreline of Dead Lake.
>
> The "Cave" wherein Cornelius found his artifacts of the long-dead
> human culture is NOT somewhere along the shore of Dead Lake. It's
> along the shore of the Ocean--what Cornelius refers to as "a Sea

> miles from here" (i.e. from where the river flows into the

> Zone from Ape City). The Statue of Liberty is NOT situated on the
> shore of Dead Lake; it's on the shore of the Ocean. You can SEE

> Dead Lake--review the "splashdown" scene: there are plenty of
> panoramic views showing the convolutions of the coastline, with the
> other side of the shore plainly visible. But you CANNOT see

> shore" from the beach where Taylor sees the Statue--because this

> is the shore of an Ocean--the Atlantic Ocean.
>
> The Cave site--relative to Ape City--is to the SOUTHEAST, if the

> is to be oriented the way you insist on doing it: towards the RIGHT
> side of the Map and DOWN, along the shoreline of the Ocean. But,

> Cornelius tells Brent that this area is the last place they saw

> (which it is) and that it is "towards the NORTH", then that can

> mean that the RIGHT side of the Map is actually the NORTH side, the
> ocean shoreline running North and South along the EAST coast of the
> continent. The Forbidden Zone--as depicted on the Map--extends all

> way to the Ocean (the furthest EAST it can possibly extend), and it
> follows that "above" the Map image (off the Map) there must be

> desert--towards the WEST--which would be "our western desert" in
> relation to their "eastern desert".
>
> Two of your "red letter" designations on the Map pic are correct:

> "splashdown" site, and the "Ape City" location. But the third is
> patently incorrect: the Cave site is on the Ocean's shore, as is

> Statue of Liberty, and NOT anywhere near "Dead Lake".
>
> Patrick Michael Tilton
> EARTH-TIME 4-28-2002
>
>
> > --- In pota@y..., "patrickmichaeltilton"

> > *** It is YOUR contention, is it not, that the Map is shown to

> > oriented the way that WE do: with NORTH on top, SOUTH on bottom,

> > on the left side, and EAST on the right side... right? If that IS

> > you believe regarding this goddamned Map, then your argument

> > absolutely no sense whatsoever, due to the fact that the Map

> > shows an INLAND LAKE in the Forbidden Zone (where Taylor's ship
> > splashed down in--that's what Taylor indicates with his hand-

> > and the coastline of an OCEAN/SEA--the very same coastline along

> > Taylor and Nova ride off towards the half-buried Statue of

> > The shoreline WHICH IS ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE LAND MASS, towards

> > RIGHT side of the Map along it, is the direction Taylor was

> > If THAT area--which is along the oceanic shoreline--is "the

> > area of the Forbidden Zone", then the SOUTHERN area would be

> > water. According to your interpretation, the "northern" area of

> > Forbidden Zone would be the area "above" the inland sea--

> > Lake" in which Taylor's ship splashed down and sunk. But that is
> > plainly NOT where Taylor is at the end of PLANET: he's following

> > shoreline, just as he had told Lucius he would do. The ocean was

> > his RIGHT, a cliffside was at his LEFT, the "Cave" site was

> > him, and the Statue of Liberty was IN FRONT OF HIM. And ALL of

> > was "towards the North" of the location where Cornelius and Brent

> > as the former showed the latter the Map--"Ape City" is SOUTH of

> > Taylor was when Cornelius and Zira last saw him, the ONLY way

> > could possibly be for Cornelius to logically say that relative to

> > current place (in Ape City) Taylor was heading "towards the

> > > *** It is YOUR contention, is it not, that the Map is shown to

> > > oriented the way that WE do: with NORTH on top, SOUTH on

> > > on the left side, and EAST on the right side... right? If that

> > > you believe regarding this goddamned Map, then your argument

> > > absolutely no sense whatsoever, due to the fact that the Map

> > > shows an INLAND LAKE in the Forbidden Zone (where Taylor's ship
> > > splashed down in--that's what Taylor indicates with his hand-

> > > and the coastline of an OCEAN/SEA--the very same coastline

> > > Taylor and Nova ride off towards the half-buried Statue of

> > > The shoreline WHICH IS ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE LAND MASS,

> > > RIGHT side of the Map along it, is the direction Taylor was

> > > If THAT area--which is along the oceanic shoreline--is "the

> > > area of the Forbidden Zone", then the SOUTHERN area would be

> > > water. According to your interpretation, the "northern" area of

> > > Forbidden Zone would be the area "above" the inland sea--

> > > Lake" in which Taylor's ship splashed down and sunk. But that

> > > plainly NOT where Taylor is at the end of PLANET: he's

> > > shoreline, just as he had told Lucius he would do. The ocean

> > > his RIGHT, a cliffside was at his LEFT, the "Cave" site was

> > > him, and the Statue of Liberty was IN FRONT OF HIM. And ALL of

> > > was "towards the North" of the location where Cornelius and

> > > as the former showed the latter the Map--"Ape City" is SOUTH of

> > > Taylor was when Cornelius and Zira last saw him, the ONLY way

> > > could possibly be for Cornelius to logically say that relative

> > > current place (in Ape City) Taylor was heading "towards the

> > >
> > > *** Wrong; IF Cornelius had drawn a simple upward-pointing

> > > the Map, and placed an unmistakable "N" above it, then there

> > > no question at all as to where "north" was on the Map. Aside

> > > dashed line separating the Forbidden Zone on the RIGHT from the
> > > inhabited areas on the LEFT, there are NO markings whatsoever.

> > > order to deduce where North is (etc), we must rely on the

> > > given in the films PLANET and BENEATH. Cornelius (most

> > > the Map himself, so it makes sense to conclude that he knew

> > > oceanic coast runs along the EAST side of the continental

> > > with the Forbidden Zone NORTH of Ape City. He's an

> > > he tells Lewis Dixon that he "can even draw" maps, in addition

> > > reading them.
> > >
> > > > There is no indication that it is turned sideways. Since Ape

> > > > was based on the human culture that proceeded it, there is no
> > > > evidence that they wouldn't orient their maps the same way.
> > > > Zaius's line "Our eastern desert" is far more exact in

> > > > the relation of the Forbidden Zone to Ape City.
> > >
> > > *** If EVERY SINGLE DETAIL of the preceding human culture were
> > > mirrored in the ape culture, then sure... but we don't use

> > > now, do we? Unless you think that the "human culture" in

> > > a bunch of orthodox rabbis! We use BOOKS... but the Apes don't.

> > > then, not every detail of their culture is necessarily based on

> > > precedent.
> > >
> > > Nice try, but I don't buy it.
> > >
> > > Patrick Michael Tilton
> > > EARTH-TIME 4-27-2002

> *** The "more ancient culture" (ours) which the Apes "aped" is not

> same culture that has existed "for 1,000's of years". Our culture--

> one James insists the Apes based theirs on in every single detail--
> does not use scrolls (excepting rabbis and theater groups who are
> doing "period dramas" requiring a scroll as a prop in a

> Our culture has been privy to an Industrial Revolution which

> transformed our way of living from the way our ancestors lived

> "thousands of years" ago. Whatever elements of our culture

> by the Apes would have been from our culture as it existed when the
> Nuclear War destroyed it--not from our ancestors' out-moded way of
> life.

--- In pota@y..., mlccougar@a... wrote:
>Those Orangs in the court scene
> are as "blinded" by anything that'd contradict the Lawgiver's
writings and
> the ape world's "official science" as those in the novel
are "covering their
> eyes" to anything that'd contradict Haristas.

>I think Patrick and I can send each other PRIVATE emails to insult each
>other from now on so the rest of the group does not get too bored.

>
> Also, in the current "Comic Buyer's Guide", columnist Andrew Smith mourns
>the cancellation of the POTA comic book, saying,"it was a solidly crafted
>series, with enough wit, action and drama to keep me interested...it was
>better than the movie!"
> - - Jeff

>
>I was at the comic shop yesterday and the moment I've been telling the owne=
>r about for months has arrived! The latest Previews catalogue has a full p=
>age devoted to the POTA Medicoms being available in North America for $12.9=
>9 U.S. each. They are available for order right now and will ship in Septe=
>mber. There are 18 different ones but the only ones you can order at this =
>time are Cornelius, Lucious, Ursus and Soldier Ape. Other will be availabl=
>e on a monthly basis!
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Melkor" <melkor@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 9:40 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Marketing Marky-Mark


> >
> > Also, in the current "Comic Buyer's Guide", columnist Andrew Smith
mourns
> >the cancellation of the POTA comic book, saying,"it was a solidly crafted
> >series, with enough wit, action and drama to keep me interested...it was
> >better than the movie!"
> > - - Jeff
>
> It was really good and better than the movie -- at first. By the last
issue
> the comic got so bad that I didn't care that it was canceled. I had
expected
> better from Dark Horse. Much better.
>
> -Tom
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 10:52 AM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: boulle's novel, sort of (OT?)


--- In pota@y..., "emr1623" <emr1623@m...> wrote:

> Little by little I am covering all the "Apes" matter... so much to
> see, so little time. Yet interestingly enough, the more learned I
> become on the subject (still got a long way to go!), the more I see
> that, by the reading of these postings, it's not really how much
you
> know, but how many people you can insult in one posting.
> Can I get anyone's witty tilt on this?

Elaine's post inspired me.

I am surprised at the amount of information on this site. Although I
have practically no knowledge of the TV series, the cartoons, the
comics, or the commentaries, I have been inspired to read Pierre
Boulle, Eric Greene, Joe Russo, even Ray Bradbury. I find myself
discussing Ape costumes, politics, rites of passage, architecture,
geography, gender, and race with my children. We talk about time
travel, screen bloopers (oh, for a freeze frame like you all seem to
have), set design, scripts, and actors. Family conversations often
include some new Ape question or some Ape mystery solved.

I don't think my contribution to this group is worth much, but what I
have gained is fascinating. Even though I prefer to accept the
casualties of production and not try to unflub things, I have been
keeping up with Patrick's posts because his theories and the
responses he receives are interesting. I have been avoiding some
recent posts because they appear to be of a more personal nature - on
all sides.

When it comes to insults, I couldn't hold a candle to you gentlemen.
I hope that Elaine isn't right. I hope that the insults aren't what
define a true Apes-lover.

I don't mean to interfere. I'll just go back to being a
wallflower.........

-- Helen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Melkor" <melkor@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 9:56 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Medicoms have arrived! Go Ape, folks!


>
> >
> >I was at the comic shop yesterday and the moment I've been telling the
owne=
> >r about for months has arrived! The latest Previews catalogue has a full
p=
> >age devoted to the POTA Medicoms being available in North America for
$12.9=
> >9 U.S. each. They are available for order right now and will ship in
Septe=
> >mber. There are 18 different ones but the only ones you can order at
this =
> >time are Cornelius, Lucious, Ursus and Soldier Ape. Other will be
availabl=
> >e on a monthly basis!
> >
>
> I already got all 18 from Japan, and paid around $35 for each one. I
bought
> a few at a time, and couldn't resist getting a few more until I had them
all.
> I don't even want to think about what I paid for the whole set. I'm glad
> they will be released in the US, both the 6" Medicoms and the Medicom
Kubricks
> are way too cool to only be released in Japan. I also got a 6" Star Trek
First
> Contact Geordi figure to stand in for McDonald in Conquest.
>
> I hope they also release the variants, and even better, new figures. I
only
> have the Beneath Soldier variant. The other three variant figures are
Battle
> Caesar, Chimp Slave (Aldo?), and Cornelius in brown. I would love to have
at
> least the first two.
>
>

--- In pota@y..., "Melkor" <melkor@m...> wrote:
> I already got all 18 from Japan, and paid around $35 for each one.
I bought
> a few at a time, and couldn't resist getting a few more until I had
them all.
> I don't even want to think about what I paid for the whole set.
I'm glad
> they will be released in the US, both the 6" Medicoms and the
Medicom Kubricks
> are way too cool to only be released in Japan. I also got a 6"
Star Trek First
> Contact Geordi figure to stand in for McDonald in Conquest.
>
> I hope they also release the variants, and even better, new
figures. I only
> have the Beneath Soldier variant. The other three variant figures
are Battle
> Caesar, Chimp Slave (Aldo?), and Cornelius in brown. I would love
to have at
> least the first two.
>
>

<http://toychest.diamondcomics.com/toys/05_02/29_clsc_pota_figs.htm>
 

veetus@... wrote:

  According to Brian, they aren't planning to create any new figures. But
it's interesting that these are being released on the heels of the
disasterous sales of the POTA2001 toys. We'll see if stores get over their
fear of "Apes" as the kiss of death. I know there are fans who are bitter
that POTA is being blamed and not the filmmakers. If these figures do well,
it'll show that quality rules the planet. Steak, not sizzle.
     - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Melkor" <melkor@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 9:56 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Medicoms have arrived! Go Ape, folks!

>
> >
> >I was at the comic shop yesterday and the moment I've been telling the
owne=
> >r about for months has arrived!  The latest Previews catalogue has a full
p=
> >age devoted to the POTA Medicoms being available in North America for
$12.9=
> >9 U.S. each.  They are available for order right now and will ship in
Septe=
> >mber.  There are 18 different ones but the only ones you can order at
this =
> >time are Cornelius, Lucious, Ursus and Soldier Ape.  Other will be
availabl=
> >e on a monthly basis!
> >
>
> I already got all 18 from Japan, and paid around $35 for each one.  I
bought
> a few at a time, and couldn't resist getting a few more until I had them
all.
> I don't even want to think about what I paid for the whole set.  I'm glad
> they will be released in the US, both the 6" Medicoms and the Medicom
Kubricks
> are way too cool to only be released in Japan.  I also got a 6" Star Trek
First
> Contact Geordi figure to stand in for McDonald in Conquest.
>
> I hope they also release the variants, and even better, new figures.  I
only
> have the Beneath Soldier variant.  The other three variant figures are
Battle
> Caesar, Chimp Slave (Aldo?), and Cornelius in brown.  I would love to have
at
> least the first two.
>
> _______________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

------------------------ ---------------------~-->
Buy Stock for $4
and no minimums.
FREE Money 2002.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/k6cvND/n97DAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
 
 

>
>If you're looking for the variant figures there's a British web site
>that ships to the US:
>http://www.funkyzilla.com/index.html"
>Each figure is about $21 plus shipping.
>

--- In pota@y..., "Melkor" <melkor@m...> wrote:
> >
> >If you're looking for the variant figures there's a British web
site
> >that ships to the US:
> >http://www.funkyzilla.com/index.html"
> >Each figure is about $21 plus shipping.
> >
>
> Thanks James. The Chimp Slave variant was out of stock but I did
order
> the Battle Caesar figure! I never thought I would be able to get
it for
> only 25 Euros. Even with shipping it was a few bucks less than I
paid
> for the regular figures. Can't wait till it gets here!
>
> -Tom
>

> I just got to thinking. IF the scrolls were made of human skin
> (shutter) what do you suppose the lovely, light-colored orangutan
> glyphs were made of? Actually, considering their [the orangs]
> contempt for all things human, this doesn't seem too far-fetched.
> One of the "ickiest" parts of the movie is passing the humans

> by their feet like freshly slaughtered meat. The Apes did

> with them.

----- Original Message -----
From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 5:53 AM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Scrolls and Substance


> I just got to thinking. IF the scrolls were made of human skin
> (shutter) what do you suppose the lovely, light-colored orangutan
> glyphs were made of? Actually, considering their [the orangs]
> contempt for all things human, this doesn't seem too far-fetched.
> One of the "ickiest" parts of the movie is passing the humans hanging
> by their feet like freshly slaughtered meat. The Apes did SOMETHING
> with them.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: veetus@... [veetus@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 May 2002 1:01
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] No Hard Feelings
>
>
> "Hollywood Reporter" says Tim Burton is going to direct "Big
> Fish", to be
> produced by Richard Zanuck. Guess "Apes" was a good experience
> for them (and
> despite the jabs at "Apes", it certainly hasn't hurt Burton's
> career). It's
> certainly a stretch for Burton, about a guy who returns home to
> get to know
> his estranged dad, who's dying of cancer. It's based on the novel
> "Big Fish:
> A Novel of Mythic Proportions". Burton's father, who he didn't get along
> with, died during the making of "Apes" and they reportedly grew closer at
> the end. The subject matter is right on target with what Burton went
> through. And I guess it keeps the "Ape" family together if there is a
> sequel; perhaps it means Burton's closer to returning. The movie is for
> Columbia though, not Fox. Etc. - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 5:53 AM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Scrolls and Substance
>
>
> > I just got to thinking. IF the scrolls were made of human skin
> > (shutter) what do you suppose the lovely, light-colored orangutan
> > glyphs were made of? Actually, considering their [the orangs]
> > contempt for all things human, this doesn't seem too far-fetched.
> > One of the "ickiest" parts of the movie is passing the humans hanging
> > by their feet like freshly slaughtered meat. The Apes did SOMETHING
> > with them.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

>
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: CheeseGOTAS@... [CheeseGOTAS@...]
> Sent: Monday, 29 April 2002 4:45
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: That FUCKING map!
>
>
> In a message dated 4/28/02 1:43:49 PM Central Daylight Time,
> emr1623@...
> writes:
>
> << jeez... ball sweat, nut cheese >>
>
> Mmmm.... *Drools*
>
> -Joe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> From: "whitty@..." <whitty@...>
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] THE END
> Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 10:48:47 +1000
>
> Pat
>
> I think you read too much into my comment.
>
> The invitation to "Lick My Balls" is just an insult, not perverted
> homoerotica. Similar to "Suck My Dick". Even close to "Go and

> your
> Monkey", ie do something useful! I think you are taking things too
> literally.
>
> I wrote this because I thought it was appropriate at the time but I
> was
> wrong. I was frustrated by your incapacity to appreciate anybody's
> comment/opinions but your own and I responded rather childishly (as
> one
> does), so sorry about the insult Pat (and if you thought it was an
> invitation rather than an insult then cancel your ticket to
> Australia, I
> retract!).
>
> I won't enter a debate about who offered to go private with the
> insults
> because I have concluded there is no point in attempting to
> communicate with
> you - you just don't listen.
>
> I think you'll find my criticism is (at least intended to be) more
> constructive than abusive, and I would actually invite you to gather
> evidence and compare the two.
>
> Anyway, I absolutely REFUSE to continue with this Pat and sorry to
> the rest
> of the group for having to put up with it.
>
> THE END
>
>
> *** Ken,
> I too don't have any interest in getting into "an email war" with
> anybody. I suggested that Mick refrain from littering this Message
> Board with perverted homoerotica ("lick my balls" etc.), sending

> messages directly to my email address if he couldn't help himself

> absolutely HAD to direct his venom at me (then I could either read
> his
> trash or not and delete it at my leisure). I would prefer it if
> everybody would spare everybody else and keep the personal attacks
> off
> this site--using private emails if they insisted on sending the
> attacks anyway. Mick has a sick fetish, though, and insists on
> "dissing" me; his prima donna prancing doesn't amuse me--but he's
> gonna do what he's gonna do... PUBLICLY, it seems.
>
> If I "appear to be SO serious" about POTA, it's because I have a
> vested interest in getting the "facts" right so that my novel-in-
> progress will be self-consistent. I'm trying to "dot my i's and

> my t's" here, and I should think that POTA fans would at least
> appreciate that effort even IF a percentage of them don't "agree"
> with
> my scenario. I don't have a problem with your intended sarcasm,

> keep in mind that it isn't always that obvious that something is
> intended as "light-hearted". Unfortunately, tone-of-voice is not
> transmitted along with text. Maybe a "just kidding" (or something
> like
> it) could be included with such comments, to keep it unambiguous.
>
> I have a fine sense of humor, by the way. I have no problem with
> laughing when clowns throw pies at my face... but when Mick hurls

> "monkey crap" in my direction I fail to see any humor in it. I

> he's like the jerk in "GOOD MORNING VIETNAM" who thinks he's funny,
> and yet everybody else knows he's pathetic. His intent towards me,
> however, is abusive, not constructive, so I respond (if at all) in

> manner appropriate to the intent of the provocation--though, again,
> I'd prefer to spare this Board the "back-and-forth" between Mick

> me... but he likes the "spotlight" of this site and will continue

> witless rants against me regardless of what anybody else says.
>Sigh<
>
> Best,
> Patrick Michael Tilton
> EARTH-TIME 4-28-2002
>
>
> ------------------------ ---------------------

> Buy Stock for $4
> and no minimums.
> FREE Money 2002.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/k6cvND/n97DAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>
>
>

>
>
>

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/30/2002 7:54:47 PM Central Standard Time,
> whitty@c... writes:
>
>
> > I can only assume that you have your ownreasons for wanting to
alienate 95%
> > of your audience and I have also explained this. Maybe you are
writing
> > this epic to gain entry to MENSA?
>
> I thought about joining MENSA once, but I decided it wouldn't be a
smart
> move.
> Oh sure, they'd get my most arcane joke, but nobody likes a
smartass. If
> they did I'd have more friends then I could stand.

> I just wanted her to spell check her posts. That's all. Is that

> ask?

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:
>
> > Still not sure if I'd want these clowns making another apes film
anyway
>
> Well, since Fox has the rights, they can get who ever they want.
But I can't
> blame them. Zanuck was the producer. He hired Burton in the first
place.
> Sure he had an impossible production schedule. Is that an excuse
for shoddy
> film making? I dunno. I doubt anyone on this list knows the whole
story.
> But I can't think of a single good reason not to redub their voices
so that
> they talk properly. You can say, "If the apes had teeth that big
they would
> talk that way," all you want -- it just doesn't fly.

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 7:20 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] No Hard Feelings

Still not sure if I'd want these clowns making another apes film anyway

Well, since Fox has the rights, they can get who ever they want.  But I can't blame them.  Zanuck was the producer.  He hired Burton in the first place.  Sure he had an impossible production schedule.  Is that an excuse for shoddy film making?  I dunno. I doubt anyone on this list knows the whole story.  But I can't think of a single good reason not to redub their voices so that they talk properly.  You can say, "If the apes had teeth that big they would talk that way," all you want -- it just doesn't fly.

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 1:02 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Beware the beast man

Pat decided to respond to that by continuing to keep it public then accuse me of wanting the spotlight.

I think Pat has the spotlight in the 'flogging a dead horse so boringly long your brain will run out your ears' department.  Perhaps I should print his posts out, for when I don't have anything to read in the toilet.  Seem an appropriate place to read them.  Since many of his theories seem like a bunch of crap.  Though I can't be sure, since I tend to nod off half way through them.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:54 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Sorry Roddy!

would it be a bad thing if I have tasted smegma?

I'm pretty sure that that is the definition of bad.
Though I saw a pic from rotton.com that had it trumped in spades.
Don't make me send it to you.

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

>
> > Easier said then done for those of us that post directly to the
> > board, rather than via Email.
>
> I said if she didn't have it I would have tried to read her e-

> Come bach whatshername whereeveryouare!
>
> back is purposely misspelled in tribute to her. Whereeversheis.
>

> Other over-rated directors.
> Lucas
> Spielberg
> Cameron

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 8:27 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Boulle's novel (et al)

But when one resorts to insults, it seems to me, the person who needs to resort to those insults uses them as a means to bring another person down to his or her level (yes! a feeling of inferiority, real or imagined SORRY

Sorry I called you a Sonofabitch Eileen.  It was meant as just one of the hilarious japes we play on each other.  Since you didn't sign that post I thought you were a dude.  It should have just said, you bitch.  Again I apologize.  For those of you tired of off topic posts. allow me to point out that if you take the J from japes it spells apes.  That's a spelling joke.  I'd also like to apologize for the poor quality of humor in this post.  I should be able to be funny without taking jabs at the other members, but I'm having an off day.

"Never apologize.  It's a sign of weakness."
                         ~~~John Wayne~~~~~

"Hey, never apologize, for anything!"
~~~Christopher Walken as Kim Ulander in Search & Destroy~~~

I haven't seen that movie yet, if the quote is wrong, I apologize.

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 7:35 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] No Hard Feelings

The movie is for Columbia though, not Fox. Etc.

Yeah, the way I heard it, Burton's problems weren't with Zanuck or the production staff, but with the studio.  If they're going to do a sequel for Apes, maybe they should hand it off to Fox Searchlights, their fake independent branch.  As long as the budget's there.  I always felt that the original had an independent feel to it.  Anything to let the film makers make a decent film.  I don't see that the studio interference did anything to improve the final product.  Then again without some kind of deadline we might still be waiting for it.  That would be fine with me.  I love the anticipation.  As long as it's worth the wait.


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

>From: LordTZer0@...
>Subject: Re: Digest Number 1034
>> suggest taking it to private email and coming back once
>> you've remembered how to discuss without resorting to juvenile attacks.
>Oh yeah? Well, screw you man. That's a joke. Remember, when you take

>out of T Zer0 it spells T Zer. Nyah nyah, nyah nyah, nyah . . . nyah. SP?
>Isn't it interesting that that is always said to the tune of Ring Around The
>Rosy? Anyway, I'm going to end the map debate with one statement of fact!
>Somebody drew a bad map. There you go! Debate's over.

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

From: mlccougar@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:09 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Two Gorillas

This is really nothing but something to start some "talk" in here.  

Can anyone in here say "for sure" where the 2 gorillas featured on the television series card # 38 "Gorillas Catch On" are from? (They are also shown on the card's display box in a slightly different picture.)  I'm going to guess they are from the infamous deleted scene from Planet (when Zira and Lucius' wagon is stopped by the hunters...), but I can't say 100% positively. I do know that they aren't from any television series scene I ever seen... So it's my guess Topps had that picture in it's possession, but didn't use it at the time the movie cards came out. Anyone have any ideas of what scene those two are really from?

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 1:56 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes]

Here's a humorous POTA site, commenting on the Marvel film adaptation.
Very funny!!

Speaking of movies and comics Spiderman will be shooting for a top opening.  According to The Grid POTA made a respectable # 3 of all time.  Will Spiderman sling them down the list?  I'd be happy with 4th if it would take Harry Potter off # 1.

<<Debuting in a whopping 3,615 theaters (of 7,000 in the U.S.), just how much
Spider-cash will the blockbuster haul in this weekend? School's not out yet, but
most expect the film to take aim at the top openings ever:

#1 HARRY POTTER $90.3M
#2 LOST WORLD $72.1M
#3 PLANET OF THE APES $68.5M
#4 THE MUMMY RETURNS $68.1M
#5 RUSH HOUR 2 $67.4M

Until last year only 2 films had hit the $60m mark on a 3-day weekend, LOST WORLD and
THE PHANTOM MENACE.  In 2001, 5 more pictures achieved that number, including POTTER'S
monumental opening in November. Thanks to boxofficemojo.com for the handy data.





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: mlccougar@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 1:09 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Two Gorillas

This is really nothing but something to start some "talk" in here.  

Can anyone in here say "for sure" where the 2 gorillas featured on the television series card # 38 "Gorillas Catch On" are from? (They are also shown on the card's display box in a slightly different picture.)  I'm going to guess they are from the infamous deleted scene from Planet (when Zira and Lucius' wagon is stopped by the hunters...), but I can't say 100% positively. I do know that they aren't from any television series scene I ever seen... So it's my guess Topps had that picture in it's possession, but didn't use it at the time the movie cards came out. Anyone have any ideas of what scene those two are really from?

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 12:15 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Comings and goings

So, how was your week? Etc.

Well, I haven't had any kids this week, but I didn't die either.  The screenplay got a good review from the Prof. He just wants me to get the treatment to more of a three act format to shop to the suits.  Then maybe I can do something to fix that new POTA in the sequel.  If my summer school class load isn't too taxing.  Anyone know how to get Fox's attention?  I could use the extra money.  Or do they care any more?

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

Well the interesting thing is that the background scenery of card #38 is the same scenic setting as that at the beginning of "The Trap" episode, where the gorillas were signalling each other re: Galen and the astronauts location.  I don't have a screen grab showing that very same background, but I'll attach one that shows at least the similarity of the background from that episode. 

Kassidy 

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

From: Kassidy Rae

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 6:28 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] re: The Two Gorillas

Well the interesting thing is that the background scenery of card #38 is the same scenic setting as that at the beginning of "The Trap" episode, where the gorillas were signalling each other re: Galen and the astronauts location.  I don't have a screen grab showing that very same background, but I'll attach one that shows at least the similarity of the background from that episode. 

Kassidy 

Subject: Two Gorillas

This is really nothing but something to start some "talk" in here.

Can anyone in here say "for sure" where the 2 gorillas featured on the
television series card # 38 "Gorillas Catch On" are from? (They are also
shown on the card's display box in a slightly different picture.) I'm going
to guess they are from the infamous deleted scene from Planet (when Zira and
Lucius' wagon is stopped by the hunters...), but I can't say 100% positively.
I do know that they aren't from any television series scene I ever seen... So
it's my guess Topps had that picture in it's possession, but didn't use it at
the time the movie cards came out. Anyone have any ideas of what scene those
two are really from?

---