--- In pota@y..., "Menluth" <menluth@y...> wrote:

> O Apes!
> I'm sure this one is old news for the veteran collectors out

there,

> but I am wondering how to tell the difference between the

1970s Mego

> Cornelius and Galen action figures. Are there differences in

color,

> clothing, "glyphs", or face? Is there any way of telling which one
> inhabits Ape City and which one Central City?
>

.the Series two bodies had plastic wrist joints as Series One had
"metal"...here's more info.....
tim

Planet of the Apes (1973 - 1975)
As Mego searched for it's next big hit following the success of the
first World's Greatest Super-Heroes line, they turned to a popular
movie which had won fans over world-wide, the Planet of the
Apes. Initially, they sold pretty well. Interest faded pretty quick as
new Sci-Fi toys by other makers became popular, and Mego was
left pushing them off on movie buffs and thus the line was
cancelled. The Astronauts Burke and Virdon are not made up as
many collectors believe but are based on the failed television
series.
The Planet of the Apes figures were sold in the following Series:
Series 1 Cornelius, Zira, Dr. Zaius, Soldier Ape and Astronaut
(all on Type 1 bodies). Sold in very limited numbers in window
boxes in 1973, then exclusively blister carded by 1974. Series 2
Virdon, Burke, Galen, Ursus and Urko (mostly Type 2 bodies with
a few Type 1s mixed in). Sold in limited numbers in 1974 and
more frequently in 1975.

Cornelius
Oh yes, the classic Cornelius. A great figure, probably the most
commonly found. He was sold in the first series on a Type 1 ape
body. Cornelius came fitted with a stylish olive green tunic and
pants and brown standard Mego moccasins. Two variations of
Cornelius exist: 1) a version with brown material instead of the
standard olive 2) a purple tinted leather part of his tunic rather
than brown (I have yet to see this carded and it IS Galen's
standard tunic color so this is yet unconfirmed in my eyes)

Zira
Ah, yes the good doctor. Zira is not exactly my favorite Mego, I
just think her head is too small and wobbly. Then again, she
does look the part! Zira came fitted with a stylish olive blouse
and skirt and some really sad brown cowboy boots (same as
Dynah Mite). The blouse has purple inner sleeves attached to
the outer sleeves. Also of note: Zira is the only standard Mego
utilizing "space-age" Velcro. It leads one to wonder why they did
not use it on any of the later figures, but it is possible that at the
time it was still new and fairly expensive and also Zira would be
the only figure with a FRONT snap, so perhaps they used Velcro
to avoid those unsightly sew strings from a snap. Some
variations also exist in this figure: 1) like Cornelius her blouse
and skirt were also made in limited numbers from brown
material 2) a version without inner sleeves has been found
carded

Dr. Zaius
Doctor #2 comes from the Jungles of East Africa, weighing in
at...oh sorry. Dr. Zaius was another popular figure in this series,
as well he should be. His head sculpt is excellent and his outfit
is very solid. Dr. Zaius did not have variants other than in the
boots he was sold with. Some versions were sold with Black
Superhero boots (not AJ Fisherman boots which are black
versions of the RC Batman boots) and some were sold with very
cool black "hiero" boots which have marking like hieroglyphics
on the sides.

The Soldier Ape
A definite hit, this figure is probably the second most common
to Cornelius and perhaps even more. I am not all that thrilled
with the head sculpt, it seems like they gave him too much hair
or something, but I wont complain too much. His gloves are
also pretty silly, but they beat brown plastic over mits which I am
sure they considered. An army of Soldiers is a must for the true
Ape collector, they just look great in mass. Each Soldier Ape
came complete with plastic bandolier, machine gun with string,
standard black AJ boots, brown cloth (with leather torso) tunic
and pants, and gloves. Several variations exist for the Soldier
Apes as well. All four exist with regard to the leather portion of the
outfits and the cloth remains the same on all four:
1) Navy Tunic - has a brighter blue leather portion of tunic/gloves
2) Brown Tunic - has a brown leather portion of tunic & gloves
3) Lizard Tunic - a "scaly" textured tunic & gloves
4) Silver Tunic - has a silvery/gray leather portion of tunic/gloves

Astronaut
A very generic product here, Mego could not get the rights to do a
Heston figure, so instead the made a plain figure and called him
the Astronaut. Sporting some super groovy sideburns, the
Astronaut is ready to boogie. He comes with a cool light
blue/gray flight suit, Helmet with visor, a white plastic Robin style
belt, and black low-top boots. He has also been seen with a
white elastic belt and white boots as well.

Galen
Hmm, looks familiar doesnt he? Yep, Mego cut the corners here
and he is identical to Cornelius. So very sad. Well, ok, they
painted his ears green and the leather portion of his tunic is
purplish in tint usually but otherwise that is the only difference
between this figure and the Cornelius figure. Oh, he was mostly
released on Type 2 Ape bodies.

Ursus
Also known as "Urko" or "Helmet Head" in the Ape world, Mego
really set out to confuse kids by changing the names on these
figures throughout production. Mego packaged Ursus and Urko
(the other General) under both names, but I will stick with the
more commonly accepted naming convention. Ursus is a really
sharp figure. Sporting a super-cool molded on helmet, he is an
intimidating figure for the others to stay clear of. Equipped with
General Bandolier (w/ knife), machine gun (w/ string), general
boots (great design) and a unique purple cloth top with mustard
colored tunic and cuffs.

Urko
Also known as "Ursus" or "Black Face" in Ape land. Urko is a
really cool figure and is my favorite in this line for some reason,
followed closely by Ursus. Urko comes equipped with a unique
tunic which is something like a Soldier Ape Tunic with leather
cuffs. Also wears a General Bandolier (w/ knife), machine gun
(w/ string), general boots (great design). Of note it should be
said that this figure was originally sold in Soldier Ape Attire (tunic
and gloves) but did have the proper General Bandolier. Thus all
variations of the Soldier Ape can exist in theory for Urko though I
have only confirmed the Brown and Silver variations myself.

Burke & Virdon
"I smell a human!" Burke, like his cohort in crime, Virdon, are
two wild and crazy guys on the run from the Ape Generals in the
short-lived TV Series, Planet of the Apes. Mego actually
reproduced them very well, they have great head sculpts and
nice "slave" attire. Burke (brown hair) comes complete with torn
light yellow pants, burlap type vest, brown shirt and standard
brown Mego moccasins. Virdon (yellow hair) came complete
with torn light yellow pants (same as Burke), torn light yellow top,
brown cloth vest and standard brown Mego moccasins.

Believe it or not, this is the second time I've answered this question
today.

There really is no distinction, once they've been removed from their
packages. Cornelius is more commonly found with the earlier body type
and Galen is more commonly found with the later, but there are no
characteristics that are exclusive to either figure.

ABMAC, the Mego expert

On Saturday, October 19, 2002, at 03:27 PM, Menluth wrote:

> O Apes!
> I'm sure this one is old news for the veteran collectors out there,
> but I am wondering how to tell the difference between the 1970s Mego
> Cornelius and Galen action figures. Are there differences in color,
> clothing, "glyphs", or face? Is there any way of telling which one
> inhabits Ape City and which one Central City?

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/02 3:30:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, alan@... writes:

Rory <Haristas@...> wrote:
> The novel is a much better work of art than the 1968 film.  If you
contend
> that it's the other way around, you don't know much about art!

For the benefit of people who disagree with you, define "art".

Alan

I know art when I see it!   But seriously, art seems to be whatever anyone says it is, therefore I say that a novel like "La Planete des Singes" is more a piece of art than the 1968 movie based on it.  The novel was the work of a single man, and written not necessarily with an eye on huge profits.  The movie was a collaborative effort with all those involved doing so for a paycheck.  Now if you want to be expansive with your definition of art then I guess you can include commercial films as art, but I'm more than a little bothered by it.  That's not to say I don't appreciate commercial films, quite the contrary, I love them, as you all know, but I wouldn't think of hanging strips of 35mm copies of POTA in the Louvre.

-- Rory<.html

.html In a message dated 10/19/02 9:40:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sand_hill_school@... writes:

And, when you've read it, let us know what it said. 

--Helen

Helen?!!  Wow!  Here's somebody we haven't heard from for a while.

-- Rory

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

Then I'm gonna read this one....and comment!

Does anybody care?

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2002 0:43
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Only Apes Can Speak--not Her, and not You!
>
>
> --- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> > In a message dated 10/19/02 2:25:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > whitty@c... writes:
> >
> >
> > > If someone here doesn't say something interesting soon I'm
> gonna read this post and comment on it!
> > >
> > > I'M SERIOUS!!!
> > >
> > > Michael
> >
> > I guess you might as well because things are sure dead around
> here the last couple days. Maybe with some luck we can have a
> good fight with Patrick.
> >
> > Hey Patrick, when you gettin' your own computer already, you menace?!!!
> >
> > Your ever-lovin' pal,
> > Rory
>
> *** My big-ass posting about "The Lawgiver's Plan for Mankind" was, in
> fact, typed on my brand new shiny Dell computer. I guess I forgot to
> mention that I was online at home now. It'll be a while before I can
> figure out how to do all sorts of neat tricks with it, like posting
> pics (as you do often) or doing screengrabs, etc. Eventually I'll
> start my own webpage, and all that. Man, it'd be nice to have had
> computer training in elementary school! Too bad that home computers
> didn't really hit big until well after I graduated high school. There
> are upstart pre-teens out there more computer-savvy now than I'll ever
> be, even if I had all the free time in the world to devote to learning
> all this stuff.
>
> BTW, in regards to our "vehement disagreement," it is NOT my
> contention that the humans in PLANET are intellectually aware of
> vocabulary, syntax, etc. Their purposeful suppression of their own
> latent potential as writers and speakers--as well as that of Taylor--
> is, by 3955 (or 3978, if you prefer, though I don't), the end result
> of Pavlovian conditioning. In a sense, I think that the Apes--after
> some critical turning point in history--felt the need to crack down on
> humans and their ability to concoct technological novelties (even
> peaceful ones, since the accumulation of any type of Knowledge
> ultimately will lead to the dangerous technologies which wiped out
> human civilization to begin with). This necessitated the front-on
> attack on human language use--so that any human from that time forward
> who dared to speak ANYTHING (and not just the word "No" to an Ape, as
> in BATTLE) was considered a demon-possessed pawn, like Satan speaking
> through the mouth of the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, or like the
> 'Son-of-Sam' David Berkowitz's black dog telling him to go out and
> kill. Since the Apes' have "Articles of Faith" which specifically
> refer to Apes being made by their God "the lord of the planet", and
> since Honorius asks Taylor "Why is it that humans have no souls? What
> is the proof that a divine spark exists within the simian brain?", for
> an Ape to witness a human being speaking intelligent words whilst not
> having a soul himself, would seem to them to be a form of demonic
> possession--since a soulless animal SPEAKING intelligently MUST be
> with the voice of an Intelligence which originates outside of the
> animal: a Devil or Demon. Imagine being a human being in a world where
> not only have your people been a slave-caste for centuries... but
> after some pivotal moment in history (perhaps a Race War, where humans
> tried to fight for equality with their Ape masters, only to be crushed
> and rendered worse off than they were as slaves) they are persecuted
> for daring to speak or to write. Or to wear clothing (other than a
> wretched animal hide to cover the naughty bits). Or to be seen using
> tools of any sort. To portray oneself as more-than-animal becomes so
> dangerous that in order to survive the humans fearfully quelch their
> innate abilities, fearing to speak (which would prevent their
> offspring from ever learning vocal language), and 'hushing' anyone who
> slipped up and uttered a sound by mistake.
> As Zira says, the humans don't speak because of a flaw in their brain,
> in their frontal lobes, where the "speech centers" are. That's why
> Zaius had Landon's frontal lobes cut out--to render him speechless
> without touching his vocal cords--what Urko refers to as "removing the
> front bump" in "THE INTERROGATION", to make humans more docile. The
> vocal cords are not so atrophied that humans CAN'T make sounds, since
> Nova is able to rasp out "Taylor!" in BENEATH--Zira said that she
> could find no physiological defect to explain why humans were mute.
> She tries to get mute humans to vocalize, as when she offers sugar to
> the "old-timer", saying, "Speak!"--like trying to get a dog to go
> "Woof!" for a Milk-Bone biscuit. But the humans are too frightened of
> the apes to dare make ANY vocal sounds, and when Taylor writes in the
> sand in the outdoor cage, they somehow know that his doing so is a
> danger--not only to him but to the rest of them as well--so they erase
> it on purpose. I don't think for one minute that any of those humans
> could themselves read what Taylor wrote in the sand, but they knew
> that 'making-lines-with-the-fingers-in-the-sand' is somehow DANGEROUS,
> and will bring upon them all persecution from the Apes. These humans
> are the end product of a mass-conditioning experiment, the official
> policy of the Commission of Animal Affairs, probably--the
> institutionalized dehumanization of Humanity. Metaphorically speaking,
> the Human Mind is like Cornelius' Cave--full of artifacts which point
> to a time in the Past when Humans were once the "superior" species...
> and Zaius blows up the Cave, just as his "in-the-know" ancestor-
> conspirators destroyed the Human Mind. Because there is a reason why
> knowledge must stand still--to save the Future from a threat which has
> already proven itself as such. Zaius does this--as his ancestors did
> their horrid deeds--"with no pleasure". It is probably heart-rending
> for him, as a proponent of "True Science", to destroy evidence which
> proves the "Real Truth" about the Past; as the Minister of Science he
> must be hypocritical in order to protect his own civilization, "in an
> hour of public danger". Zaius is NOT a villain, although his deeds are
> probably deemed villainous by his victims (Cornelius, Zira, Lucius, &
> Taylor). Hitler was a villain to his victims, but a Savior to his own
> people (at least before the tide turned on the Third Reich), since he
> had convinced his own "volk" that the Jews were not truly human but a
> race of "subhumans" ("untermenschen") which had fouled up the world
> for the noble Aryans with their insidious manipulation of the world's
> economies (the banking houses of Rothschild, etc.). Hitler's
> propaganda machine painted the Jews as disease-carrying vermin; the
> educational system Nazified the children--turning them into the
> Hitlerjugend ("Hitler Youth"), and it was only to be expected that
> children raised in such a hateful culture would become fanatical
> followers of Nazi doctrine. Sadly, the Palestinian youth of today have
> been indoctrinated with similar attitudes concerning the Israelis, and
> the waves of Islam-induced violence we've seen of late are the result.
>
> The PLANET OF THE APES saga is more relevant today than it was when
> they filmed it. And, unlike you, I set aside Boulle's conceptual
> scenario, which the movie vastly altered for the betterment of the
> film. As good as Boulle's novel was, the movie improved on it.
> Boulle's novel ends as a surprise--the movie ends as a shocking gut-
> punch, like the one that ended up killing Houdini.
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I think they stole them because they were shiny and different.

Regardless of what we all think, is there any genuine way to PROVE this?
Patrick, be sensible!

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2002 0:48
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: WARNING
>
>
> --- In pota@y..., "james611102" <JamesA1102@a...> wrote:
> > Read it to your twins it'll help put them to sleep at night. LOL
> >
> > But seriously, I've been observing this debate and do have a
> > question. In the beginning of Planet the humans steal and wreck the
> > astronauts' clothes & equipment. Do they do this because they were
> > just looking for food or were they trying to protect the astronauts
> > from the apes?
> >
> > --- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:
> > > If someone here doesn't say something interesting soon I'm gonna
> > read this post and comment on it!
> > >
> > > I'M SERIOUS!!!
> > >
> > > Michael
>
> *** James! You hit the nail on the head. Of COURSE the humans messed-
> up the astronauts' gear in order to protect them. To make them seem
> just as de-humanized & de-civilized as they are. The humans weren't
> looking for food--they had been surreptitiously following Taylor &
> Pals during the last leg of their journey through the wastelands of
> the Forbidden Zone--we can see them well before Landon spots the
> Scarecrows.
> Kudos on the observation.
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html In a message dated 10/19/02 10:43:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Imagine being a human being in a world where
not only have your people been a slave-caste for centuries... but
after some pivotal moment in history (perhaps a Race War, where humans
tried to fight for equality with their Ape masters, only to be crushed
and rendered worse off than they were as slaves) they are persecuted
for daring to speak or to write. Or to wear clothing (other than a
wretched animal hide to cover the naughty bits). Or to be seen using
tools of any sort. To portray oneself as more-than-animal becomes so
dangerous that in order to survive the humans fearfully quelch their
innate abilities, fearing to speak (which would prevent their
offspring from ever learning vocal language), and 'hushing' anyone who
slipped up and uttered a sound by mistake.

I don't believe the humans remained as a slave class for very long before being "run out of the garden" and back into the jungle.

We only know how to talk because we're culturally predisposed to do it.  Take away the culture, you take away everything to be learned from it including the ability to speak.

The apes at some point in their 'prehistory' did indeed have reason to finally shun mankind completely.  I believe humans would have been hunted relentlessly by the apes.  Now at first, just as in Boulle's book, man out numbered the apes.  By the time of 3978, what we see in the cornfield is part of the last remnants of mankind, reverted to an animal state and no longer possessing the ability to speak.  Their brains no longer form verbal representations of the outside world.

I don't think we're really too far apart on this, Patrick, though it's hard to tell because you write such long, rambling posts it's hard to keep track of the point your trying to make.  Maybe you could conclude by simply encapsulating the point you're trying to make?

-- Rory

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

I don't think the Medicoms will be at toy stores. The best bet is
specialty stores like comic shops, maybe Tower, Suncoast and the like. I got
the Kubricks at Tower, they seem to have all the weird stuff. The new
McFarlane cinema figures came out; the Terminator robot looks great (I'm
sure Alex got one, sigh). For those who don't totally resent Tim Burton they
just released an 18" Edward Scissorhands that looks good. - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim" <apefan23@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:00 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Medicoms


> Has anybody found the new Medicoms in stores? They're not at
> ToysRUS or KayBee......
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

> In a message dated 10/19/02 11:37:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> > Evidently, the Apes which evolve on all the various planets of

the Galaxy where Earth-like life develops do NOT shun technology,
since they're gallivanting around in solar-sail starships and going
to the "famous stock exchanges of Aldebaran" (or whatever).

>
> What the hell?!!! Patrick, your ability to jump to extreme

conclusions, or to misread text, seems to know no bounds!

>
> We have no idea how far into the future the prologue and epilogue

of Boulle's book are set. It could be centuries after the events in
Merou's transcript. Obviously Boulle is saying that the ape
civilization went on to spread to other planets through colonization.

>
> -- Rory

*** "Why must Knowledge stand still? What about the Future?!" Lucius
desperately asks Zaius, who is set to have Cornelius "silenced" and
his proof of the Human past wiped off the face of the Earth. The
point, you moron, is that in the film those who control the Ape
society have a dreaded FEAR OF TECHNOLOGY, hence making "knowledge
stand still". In Boulle's book there is NONE of this technophobia,
since the Apes on the various planets where they sprang from ("Yes--
sprang!") develop SPACEFLIGHT TECHNOLOGY: first an awareness of
Einsteinian relativity and ultimately INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL. The
society controlled by Zaius in the movie has NO HOPE WHATSOEVER of
developing such an ability, since the few who are in control of
things PURPOSELY SUPPRESS SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT due to their fear
that such advancement might ultimately lead to their ANNIHILATION.
Don't you friggin' GET IT? Boulle's novel didn't address this at all--
and he's not to be faulted for that, since his reasons for writing La
Planete des Singes were along totally different lines. Serling (et
al.) took the basic plot of Boulle's novel and IMPROVED upon it by
positing a more realistic scenario about how our human civilization
could conceivably be replaced by that of another group. Boulle didn't
address the nuclear issue at all, which is somewhat surprising since
the entire world at that time was gripped in a Cold War that had
almost gone into "sudden death" with the Cuban Missile Crisis. The
escalating arsenals of the US and the USSR were taking us closer and
closer to the brink, and a substantial percentage of the public
believed that there WOULD BE A NUCLEAR WAR IN THEIR LIFETIME. After a
blessed respite from that pervasive fear, it's starting to crop up
again with the emergence of NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES in countries like
Pakistan & India, and the revelation the other day of North Korea's
foray into building nukes. Iraq is undoubtedly working to develop
nukes--which is why we're probably going to go to war within the next
year. During the Gulf War, Iraq lobbed Scud missiles into Israel--a
country that did NOT take part in the Allied offensive against Iraq,
due to the influence of the US-- but Saddam wanted to ignite a Pan-
Muslim war against Israel then... and if he were to get ahold of
nukes, or of chemical weapons, or biological weapons, where the fuck
do you think he's liable to lob THOSE? Why, ISRAEL, of course! And
when that happens, Israel will use ITS nukes against Baghdad... and
WE shall be the generation which sees the first use of nukes against
civilian targets since Nagasaki got smacked down.
Yet Boulle--whose novel came out in 1963--didn't address the
possibility of a NUCLEAR reason for Man's downfall on either Soror or
on Earth. He imagines a human techno-civilization existing in the
year 2500, somehow having avoided the turmoils that we have yet to
solve. Serling (etc.) wisely thought up a better reason for Man's
downfall--our curious habit of KILLING EACH OTHER (as Cornelius puts
it in ESCAPE)... with Nukes.
I like Boulle's book, don't get me wrong. But I think his notion of a
general lazy ennui taking over ALL of humanity, which docilely hands
over the reins of civilization to the mimicking Apes, to be
absolutely absurd. It ain't gonna happen; there's always SOME group
out there with big plans, ambition, and the stick-to-it-iveness to
see their plans through. As "inferior" as the TV show is to the
films, especially episodes like "UP ABOVE THE WORLD SO HIGH", the
premise of that particular episode was far truer to human nature than
Boulle ever gave us credit for: one human being--a member of an
oppressed minority--risks his life to fulfill a dream of becoming the
first person to FLY. Is he a fool? Yes. But it's fools like him that
we owe our entire fucking civilization. Fools take the risks that
more "reasonable" people don't. Fools risk the ridicule of the
established authorities--as when Cornelius, having been cowed by
threats of legal action after his illegal trip into the Forbidden
Zone, finally "shows some strength" when their Talking Human friend
Taylor brings the question to the fore. Cornelius KNOWS that when he
shows his foolhardy courage, declaring "Yes... BEHOLD! This MARVEL!
This living paradox! This missing link in an evolutionary chain!", he
KNOWS that the Boot of the State will stomp down on him.
The film version of Cornelius has more "humanity" in him than
Boulle's version. Yeah, Boulle's book came first... sure. But the
film IMPROVED upon the basic plot. I can see why Boulle might be
dissatisfied with the changes made from novel-to-screen (every writer
is like that), but a more faithful adaptation would not have had the
same "oomph" to it that Schaffner's film had. Those who have both
read the book AND seen the movie (aside from "fools" like you, you
daft bastard) may give the book high praise... yet acknowledge that
the movie is the better product. I'm surprised that you don't, Rory.
You yourself told us all how much of an impact the ending of the film
had on the original theater audiences in 1968. Did the book have as
much of an impact on you? More of an impact? I fail to see how it
possibly COULD have, but if it did (for you) please tell us all about
how wowed you were by the novel's ending scenes (both Ulysse and Nova
at Orly spaceport and the Jinn & Phyllis scene). I'm all ears.

Patrick

Usually I get Alex when I e-mail him privately. He's not around. Maybe
somethink major happened to his computer. Last I heard, the DVD offer was
history. - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <kidro85@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:24 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex


> Has anybody had contact with Alex lately? Is he still in the group? are
his
> free Dvd offers a thing of the past? Or is he possibly chilling in the
> forbidden Zone?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Helen?! You're still here? Maybe there really is 120 people just
eavesdropping. - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:27 AM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: WARNING


> And, when you've read it, let us know what it said.
>
> --Helen
>
>
>
> --- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:
> > If someone here doesn't say something interesting soon I'm gonna
> read this
> > post and comment on it!
> >
> > I'M SERIOUS!!!
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@y...]
> > > Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2002 16:02
> > > To: pota@y...
> > > Subject: [Planet of the Apes] The Lawgiver's Plan for Mankind
> > >
> > >
> > > It's time to get back on-topic, I think. This post'll be longer
> than
> > > the recent short ones I've put up, so if you don't like 'em
> lengthy,
> > > feel free to skip it and ignore me (you know who you are...).
> > >
> > > Rory recently vehemently disagreed with my take on the "silent
> > > treatment" of the humans, portrayed in PLANET and BENEATH. Rory
> > > thinks that humans had "devolved" and lost their language
> > > through "becoming mere animals" (as in Boulle's novel), whereas I
> > > think that the silence of the humans is the end product of prior
> > > centuries of brutality directed against SPEAKING humans by
> > > intelligent (and fearful & righteously indignant) apes, who were
> able
> > > to shape the social environment in such a way as to force humans
> to
> > > adapt to that environment--by not speaking at all, resulting in
> the
> > > loss of any vocal language, and the deterioration of the no-
> longer-
> > > used "speech centers" in their brains.
> > >
> > > This all stems from the past history of the simian civilization,
> > > which--of course--is only hinted at here and there, partly through
> > > the archaeological artifacts dug up by Cornelius (and his &
> Taylor's
> > > interpretations of them) and also through the text (as quoted by
> > > Zaius and Cornelius, respectively) of the Sacred Scrolls.
> > >
> > > Zaius quotes from "the Thirteenth Scroll": "... and Proteus
> brought
> > > the upright beast into the garden, and chained him to a tree, and
> the
> > > children did make sport of him."
> > > Cornelius reads from "the Twenty-Ninth Scroll": (verse 6) "Beware
> the
> > > beast Man, for he is the Devil's pawn. Alone among God's primates
> he
> > > kills for sport, or lust, or greed. Yea, he will murder his
> brother
> > > to possess his brother's land. Let him not breed in great numbers,
> > > for he will make a desert of his home--and yours. Shun him! Drive
> him
> > > back into his jungle lair, for he is the Harbinger of Death."
> > >
> > > Zaius, referencing the 13th Scroll's passage, interprets it as
> having
> > > something to do with "the Ancients"--that is, the Apes who lived
> > > before the time when the Sacred Scrolls were written (1,200 years
> > > prior to the years 3955/3978 [pick whichever year you wish]). This
> > > scripture-historical figure, named Proteus, supposedly represents
> > > those Ancients who once tried to keep humans as household pets,
> > > before the time of the Lawgiver--since Zaius says "... UNTIL the
> > > Lawgiver proved that Man could not be tamed."
> > >
> > > If we presume that there actually was a person named Proteus
> (living
> > > sometime prior to the writing of the Sacred Scrolls circa
> 2755/2778),
> > > then he could only have lived between the time when Apes became
> > > dominant over Man (i.e. after the Nuclear War, which I've deduced
> > > elsewhere to have probably been in 2006 A.D.) and the time when
> the
> > > human-hating Lawgiver wrote the Scrolls, around 2755 A.D. The
> human
> > > skeletons in the Cave date back to the time prior to
> the "carnivorous
> > > gorillas" in their state of "primitive barbarism" with
> their "cutting
> > > tools and arrowheads of quartz", so this "more ancient culture"
> > > (which "is more advanced" than the Zaius-dominated culture of
> PLANET)
> > > with its "knowledge of metallurgy"--which we in the audience know
> is
> > > OUR culture, from the late 20th/early 21st centuries--is from the
> > > same chronological era wherein Zaius refers to Proteus and "the
> > > Ancients".
> > >
> > > This Proteus fellow "chained him [a human, "the upright beast"]
> to a
> > > tree," which is what we do with dogs and horses, when we don't
> want
> > > them to go running off chasing either cars or mares,
> respectively. It
> > > seems reasonable that Zaius could interpret this human-chaining
> act
> > > as that of a pet-owner (Proteus) and a pet (the human)... but
> Zaius
> > > has an agenda at work when he offers Cornelius this
> interpretation of
> > > the passage from the 13th Scroll. Zaius KNOWS that Cornelius is
> right
> > > about the Past; in Taylor's words, Zaius "knew it all along, long
> > > before you [Cornelius] found your Cave, he knew..." Zaius admits
> as
> > > much himself, eventually: "And you're right! I have ALWAYS known
> > > about Man." So, Zaius KNOWS that his interpretation of "SS:13" is
> a
> > > bogus one even as he spouts that "scripture" to Cornelius. Zaius
> is
> > > not above selectively quoting simian Scripture and giving it
> a "spin"
> > > which serves an Agenda: keeping the human race in a state of
> > > savagery. So, too, did pro-slavery advocates selectively quote the
> > > Bible to bolster their claim that it wasn't ungodly to enslave
> > > the "inferior" races.
> > >
> > > Zaius is, as Taylor accuses him, the "Guardian of the Terrible
> > > Secret" concerning the once-dominant technological society of
> Humans
> > > predating the luddite Simian civilization. The simian Masses (the
> > > ordinary citizens) were to be made ignorant about the truth
> regarding
> > > Man, and how he had been "superior" (at least, technologically, if
> > > not morally), and then KEPT ignorant; this sort of on-going
> > > conspiracy requires that SOMEONE (or, preferably, some group)
> retain
> > > the Truth, keeping it alive only amongst those "in-the-know"
> whilst
> > > pretending to everybody else that the uninformed opinions held by
> the
> > > masses about Man are the truth. This sort of conspiracy, on-going
> > > throughout the many centuries of the simian culture, would require
> > > that any and all artifacts of that prior civilization would be
> > > destroyed--melted down and turned into bullets for the gorilla
> army,
> > > perhaps! And really BIG artifacts--like the wrecked skyscrapers
> > > Ursus' army sees, and the Statue of Liberty--would necessitate
> that
> > > entire regions would be made "off-limits" to the ignorant public.
> > >
> > > Thus, we have "the greatest ape of all" make his appearance on the
> > > Timeline: the Lawgiver. It was he who established the "ancient
> taboo"
> > > by having "pronounced this whole area deadly". Not only is it a
> taboo
> > > for a civilian to "exceed his orders" on his "travel permit" and
> > > travel into the Forbidden Zone--it is an ecclesiastical crime.
> > > Cornelius makes reference to beheading as a punishment for
> > > this "crime", even though Zaius says later that "if [they] are
> > > convicted of Heresy, the most [they'd] get is two years" of
> > > imprisonment. Evidently, in past centuries, they'd have gotten
> their
> > > heads chopped off--which is what "capital" punishment is: the
> > > punitive removal of the "caput" (Latin for "head"). Although
> heretics
> > > are no longer put to death (as they once had been), there still
> is a
> > > death penalty--for Treason, which Zaius says is by hanging. So,
> when
> > > Cornelius asks Zira, "Are you trying to get my head chopped
> off?!",
> > > it is like somebody nowadays making reference to pre-modern forms
> of
> > > punishment, like being tarred-&-feathered, or put in "stocks"
> (like
> > > in Puritan times), or guillotined. Things have changed in Ape City
> > > since "old times"--Doctor Galen makes reference to how "the Quota
> > > System's been abolished", when Chimpanzees were disenfranchised by
> > > the ruling Orangutan faction.
> > >
> > > The Lawgiver--who himself knew that Humans were once
> technologically
> > > brilliant, to a fault--purposely lies about Mankind in his so-
> > > called "scripture". He paints Mankind as a race of "upright
> beasts"
> > > which are used by the Devil to do his evil bidding. I've compared
> > > this notion to the Biblical tale (in Genesis) of the Serpent in
> the
> > > garden, through whom Satan beguiled Eve and Adam into rebellion
> > > against the will of God. The Serpent is the most
> obvious "scriptural"
> > > parallel to the Sacred Scrolls passage, the most obvious example
> of
> > > an animal being "used" by a malevolent yet sweet-talking demonic
> > > spirit. Interestingly enough, the 13th Scroll passage has Proteus
> > > bringing the "upright beast" (Man) "into the Garden" and chaining
> him
> > > to "a Tree". This sounds a lot like the Garden of Eden, and the
> Tree
> > > of Knowledge of Good and Evil motif. The name "Proteus", taken
> from
> > > Greek mythology, means "first man" (according to Robert Graves, in
> > > his book "THE GREEK MYTHS"), though the word "man" is only
> implied in
> > > the actual name. The choosing of the name "Proteus" for that
> ancient
> > > Ape who chained the human to a Tree, seems to suggest that he was
> > > the "first Ape": the simian "Adam". We have no way of knowing
> which
> > > of the three ape species Proteus was--whether chimpanzee,
> gorilla, or
> > > orangutan; perhaps the Apes had a strange mythic tale of how
> > > the "first Ape" was neither a Chimpanzee, Gorilla, or Orangutan,
> but
> > > was a "pure Ape" in a state of Innocence (which Zaius would try
> to re-
> > > establish by keeping Apes ignorant), and how the three kinds of
> apes
> > > were all descended from him through three different bloodlines;
> this
> > > would be like how the Biblical authors viewed the "3 races" (of
> > > Europe, Asia, and Africa) as descended from the 3 sons of Noah
> > > (Japheth, Shem, and Ham, respectively).
> > >
> > > The Lawgiver knew (as Zaius knows) that Man had once had a higher
> > > civilization, where the technological level gave him the power to
> > > destroy that civilization. Man's wisdom walks hand-in-hand with
> his
> > > idiocy. So, after having turned a Paradise into a Desert, ages
> ago,
> > > Man had to be subjugated by the "morally superior" intelligent
> Apes,
> > > and it would take an on-going effort to KEEP Mankind humbled.
> Just as
> > > the simian Masses had to be made ignorant and then KEPT ignorant
> > > about the Past, so too did the Humans have to be brought low and
> then
> > > kept in that condition. This would require periodic interactions
> > > between Humans and those Apes who are best equipped to deal with
> > > potentially dangerous "animals": the Gorillas. Just in case
> there's a
> > > band of not-so-savage Humans out there in "his jungle lair"
> working
> > > their way back up the ladder of Civilization, the Apes would
> require
> > > their armed forces to periodically disrupt the Humans, quelling
> any
> > > emergent spark of Culture. This HUNT activity would not be done
> (at
> > > least initially) as a "sport", but rather as what is
> called "culling
> > > the herd". This would be a vital function of the gorillas--to
> harass
> > > the humans out in the forests (and in the Apes' croplands) with
> the
> > > ever-present threat of Death. The reason the Apes (who
> have "learned
> > > to live in innocence", where the Lawgiver had forbidden them to
> kill
> > > each other) keep an Army is to deal with this threat posed by the
> > > Humans. Humans are said to "kill for sport, or lust, or greed";
> the
> > > gorilla hunters (who Cornelius says, to Lewis Dixon, "hunted
> humans
> > > for sport") may make a sport of it in some respects... but the
> Hunt
> > > sequence looks more like a military attack. The gorillas don't
> > > resemble good-ol'-boys out for a bit of sporting fun--their
> manner of
> > > dress has the appearance of a uniform. They all dress alike. When
> the
> > > audience first saw that scene, it was before they saw that most of
> > > the other apes dressed in similar garb, with the exception of the
> > > Minister in his vestments, Julius in his "working-class threads",
> and
> > > the President of the Academy in his somewhat more ornate garb. So
> the
> > > first impression of the gorilla hunters is that their uniformity
> of
> > > dress is military in nature (at least, that's the impression I
> got).
> > >
> > > The hunting of humans is done in order to fulfill
> the "commandment"
> > > given by the Lawgiver: "... let [Man] not breed in great numbers,
> for
> > > he will make a desert of his home--and yours." The only way to
> keep
> > > the "numbers" of humans small is to periodically reduce it--by
> > > killing them. Zaius would prefer to have them exterminated, but
> > > evidently that is out of the question; humans, after all,
> are "among
> > > God's primates". That is, they were one of the species which were
> > > the "highest order of mammals" (according to my Oxford
> dictionary);
> > > if the simian "God" didn't want any humans around, then He either
> > > made a mistake in creating them in the first place (and a "god"
> isn't
> > > a god if He makes mistakes, after all), or He should have ordered
> the
> > > Apes to exterminate the Humans. What might the orthodox religion
> of
> > > the Apes think was God's purpose in creating Man? Why did the god
> of
> > > the Bible create Serpents? According to the later interpretations
> of
> > > Genesis, God had to test Adam's obedience... which required a
> Devil
> > > to do the dirty work of Temptation. And the Devil, in order to
> pull
> > > off the scheme, had to disguise himself... which required another
> > > creature in which to conceal himself and through whose mouth his
> > > deceitful lies could emerge. Perhaps the Ape theologians believe
> that
> > > God created Humans so that the Devil could have a vessel through
> > > which he could test Simian obedience to God's Will.
> > >
> > > Since God "created" Humans (as far as Ape religion goes), then it
> > > would be a sin to "un-create" them, barring any explicit command
> from
> > > God to do so. Yet humans would have to be dealt with on a regular
> > > basis. They had to be kept to a minimal population size ("let him
> not
> > > breed in great numbers"), which would require periodic acts of
> > > organized killing: the Hunts. They had to be shunned. They had to
> be
> > > driven away from Simian civilization, back into the jungle to
> live as
> > > savages--ever fearful of hearing that shofar-like hunting horn
> sound
> > > prior to the onslaught of a gorilla attack. The Lawgiver, who gave
> > > these "commandments" to the Apes via his pseudo-scripture, knew
> the
> > > REAL reason that Humans had to be treated in such a horrific
> manner:
> > > the Humans "deserved" such treatment because of how they had
> abused
> > > their Intelligence, through creating weapons of mass
> destruction...
> > > and then USING them. Their actions had proven their Nature as "a
> > > warlike creature who gives battle to everything around him... even
> > > himself". So... they deserve to be mistreated by the Apes. But it
> > > wouldn't do for the simian Masses to know this real reason, or
> else
> > > the "bleeding hearts" amongst the "liberal" faction (the Chimps)
> > > would protest the treatment of intelligent creatures as mere
> animals.
> > > In order to successfully foist this conspiracy on Ape society, it
> > > required the creation of a religion--a set of dogmatic beliefs
> > > (a "credo", like the "Apostle's Creed", which Honorius
> > > calls "Articles of Faith") which tells a mythic tale of Beginnings
> > > which the very writer KNOWS is not true, yet must be told to serve
> > > a "higher purpose". And this religious Orthodoxy requires that
> > > everyone in the society tow-the-line and Believe the doctrines and
> > > Obey the "authority" of the Priesthood. What happens to those who
> > > renounce their beliefs, who "apostacize"? Zaius says that "only an
> > > apostate would flee to the Forbidden Zone." He says it as if IT'S
> > > HAPPENED BEFORE. When the Lawgiver (and his faction of pretend-
> > > believers who conspired to subjugate Man) foisted his new
> religion on
> > > Apedom, there must have been those who rejected it. And after the
> > > Lawgiver's "revelation" had been accepted by the majority
> (probably
> > > after pogroms against "heretics"), every so often there must have
> > > cropped up individuals who came across traces of evidence which
> > > contradicted the official dogmas of "Lawgiverism" and "true
> > > religion". If that individual persisted in his or her "heresy",
> then
> > > a harsh punishment was inflicted: Beheading. In order to escape
> such
> > > punishment, the only recourse was to flee somewhere where Apes
> don't
> > > go: the Forbidden Zone fits the bill, because the Lawgiver himself
> > > had declared it off-limits.
> > >
> > > And all this happens because the Lawgiver considers Mankind to be
> so
> > > prone to destruction that the situation necessitates the
> subjugation
> > > of that species... and the enforced ignorance of the Masses.
> Humans
> > > weren't just one of many species of beasts... they were especially
> > > dangerous. Metaphorically speaking, the Devil uses them as pawns
> in
> > > his war against God. In private chambers, the Lawgiver--like
> Zaius,
> > > centuries later--would "talk heresy" (probably) and admit that his
> > > religion is a Lie... but a lie which serves a higher purpose. It
> > > would be "justified racism"--justified, at least, in his view. But
> > > woe to the poor wretches who are on the receiving end of that
> harsh
> > > policy of the pogrom, the "organized massacre" which Humans had to
> > > endure for hundreds of years.
> > >
> > > Patrick Michael Tilton
> > > EARTH-TIME 10-16-2002
> > >
> > > Postscript: Remember those books with titles like "EVERYTHING I
> > > NEEDED TO KNOW I LEARNED FROM WATCHING 'STAR TREK'"? Well,
> as "PLANET
> > > OF THE APES" and its sequels were the foremost formative
> influences
> > > in my life, everything (at least, 'much' if not 'most') of what
> > > I "need" to know--including how to look at the reasons the world
> is
> > > the way it is--I got from soaking in the ambience of the "world
> gone
> > > insane"... the Planet of the Apes. Through satire and allegory,
> > > Serling & Wilson & Dehn (etc.) held a funhouse mirror of our own
> > > world up for us to see ourselves. Ah, Zanuck... thanks for "green-
> > > lighting" the Schaffner flick--but how could you NOT see the
> deeper
> > > levels of meaning that were not-so-hidden in this "adventure"
> film?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Attachments :

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 7:32 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: POTA Movie Cap Object Quiz

In a message dated 10/19/02 10:08:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, abmac@... writes:

Beneath, just before the gorilla wings Brent and the bird flies up.

ABMAC

Yeah, I agree.  That's where Brent and Nova are hiding from the gorilla on patrol around Ape City.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 8:44 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] "Cripple fight!"

In a message dated 10/19/02 11:37:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Good book. GREAT movie... and a BETTER work of Art. When people think
"PLANET OF THE APES" they do NOT think about Boulle's source novel--
they think about the 1968 classic film.

Patrick

Patrick, that's only because most people DON'T READ NOVELS! (Which goes to show you how much Boulle was right about the innate laziness of man.)

I just got through reading buyers comments of the Boulle book on Amazon.com.  Nearly everyone gives it four stars.  You should go read them, Patrick.

The novel is a much better work of art than the 1968 film.  If you contend that it's the other way around, you don't know much about art!   Just because most people think of the movie instead of the book doesn't mean the book is inferior.  What kind of an idiot argument is that?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

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

> In a message dated 10/19/02 11:37:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> > Antelle reverts to a state of animality--unable to speak human

language after mere MONTHS of zoo-dwelling captivity, cuddling up to
a warm, naked female.

> > He friggin' HOWLS at Ulysse Merou, fer Christ's sake! The Apes

didn't do that to him--he did it to himself, succumbing to the
temptation to divest himself of his intellect for the pleasures of
being well-fed and well-fucked.

>
> How do you reach this conclusion?!!! Antelle was so shocked by

the reality that he was confronted with on Soror that his mind was
traumatized and reverted to a state where it abandoned reasoned
thought.

>
> -- Rory

*** What happened to the human race on Soror centuries earlier...
what is concurrently happening on Earth while Ulysse & pals are away
on their interstellar journey... is what Boulle has Ulysse refer to
as "the appalling scourge that is menacing the human race" (Chapter
Two). Human beings turn away from the "light" of intelligence and
revert to the darkness of mere animal consciousness. Here's where
I "wow" you with my acumen, Rory, and it involves an explication of
the meanings of the names of the main character (Ulysse) and
his "fallen" comrade (Antelle).
Antelle comes from the Greek word "antelios" (from "anti"
+ "helios"), meaning "opposite the sun" or "against the sun". The Sun
is an ancient symbol for God, for Wisdom, for the Light of Knowledge.
Ulysse bemoans the fact that humanity--which he believes was created
in God's image ("... me, Ulysse Merou, a man created in the image of
God!" [Chapter 17], and "I who believed myself entrusted with a semi-
divine mission!" he says in Chapter 36, regarding the restoration of
Intelligence to the Sororan humans)--had lost that spark of Genius
which set humans apart from the rest of the Animal Kingdom. He had
recently "noticed a marked change among the men" due to his visits,
the beginnings of the re-awakening he hoped to bring about as a
Savior of humanity on Soror. Antelle... the last thing Ulysse writes
concerning him is: "To hell with the professor! I could no longer do
anything for him, and he has apparently found a satisfactory solution
to the problem of existence. Only I shudder occasionally when I think
that had I been placed in the same environment as he was, and without
Zira's presence, I, too, might have fallen equally low." Yes...
to "hell" with Antelle, whose very name means a rejection ("anti") of
the Light of knowledge, the "Sun" ("helios").
The name "Ulysse" is the French form of the Latin form (Ulysses--
actually "Ulixes" in Cassell's dictionary) of the Greek
name "Odysseus" (of Homer's "Odyssey"); the name Odysseus comes from
the Greek word "odyssomai", which means "to be grieved" or "to be
wroth at". And in the very first line of the Odyssey, Homer refers to
him as "polytropon"--the epithet most fitting to describe him,
meaning "much-turned" i.e. "much-travelled, wandering" and "turning
many ways, versatile, ingenious; changeful". In other words, Odysseus
can "turn" a thought, a plot, a plan, around and around in his clever
mind and come up with a solution to whatever dilemma he finds himself
in, as he proves throughout his long journey back to Ithaca from
Troy.
By giving his protagonist the same name, Boulle was inviting his well-
read readers to ponder the mental qualities of the "Ulysses-figure":
the CLEVER type of person. As a sailor, Odysseus had to be able to
steer a course over seas out of sight of the land--by observing the
LIGHTS of the STARS (to find North, etc.) and of the rising & setting
Sun & Moon. It takes HUMAN consciousness to develop such skills, and
it is THAT type of mind that we are to think of when we see how
Ulysse Merou deals with his situation. His ways of trying to prove
his intelligence to Zira, and to Zaius. His drawing of "the
geometrical figure illustrating the theorem of Pythagorus" [Chapter
18]--yes! his use of Mathematics & Geometry, to prove his
intelligence. That sort of thing.
Yet Antelle reverts to that "satisfactory solution to the problem of
existence"--letting his "masters" feed him & provide him with a warm
female body to snuggle up to. That's what Antelle settles for,
ultimately. Antelle represents what Boulle thinks of the average man,
who ultimately isn't concerned with the mental struggles of the
Odyssean rarity. Remember how Odysseus' crew is turned into swine?
Symbolically, that is because his crew did not have his same
cleverness of mind, his dissatisfaction with things as they are.
Dante wrote his own sequel to the "Odyssey" in Canto 26 of the
Inferno, where he has Ulysses gather together one last crew in order
to sail beyond the "pillars of Hercules" (the Straits of Gibraltar),
beyond which Man was not meant to go, by order of Zeus... all because
of an unquenchable thirst for Knowledge--even that knowledge which
the Gods had forbidden. Dante's Ulysses is damned for it, though the
Greeks would consider such "impiety" to be what made Ulysses great.
Antelle succumbs to the same temptations that Humanity succumbed to
on Soror in the Past (and on Earth during the 700 years Ulysse is
gone)--he goes "back to the Garden of Eden" where things are all cozy
and safe... under the heels of his new "master" Apes (what God was to
Adam & Eve, the Apes are to Antelle). Ulysse--like Ulysses before him-
-is the type who would eat the forbidden fruit, acquiring Knowledge
EVEN IF IT GETS HIM KICKED OUT OF THE COZY GARDEN/PRISON. Adam was
not fully human until he acquired Knowledge, which can ONLY be
acquired through rebellion against the dictates of a "master" (God,
in GENESIS, the "Orthodoxy" in the Real World).
Do you get it yet, Rory?

Patrick

I just checked Alex's "Terminator" site, www.skynetsite.com . It's updated
through Oct. 19 (hey, that's today!). I guess he's around. Maybe he feels he
let us down or is just too busy doing the site to check in. But an educated
guess is he's still alive. - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <veetus@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex


> Usually I get Alex when I e-mail him privately. He's not around. Maybe
> somethink major happened to his computer. Last I heard, the DVD offer was
> history. - - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <kidro85@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:24 PM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
>
>
> > Has anybody had contact with Alex lately? Is he still in the group? are
> his
> > free Dvd offers a thing of the past? Or is he possibly chilling in the
> > forbidden Zone?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

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

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 9:10 AM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Boulle's POTA

Here's a kind of an interesting take on the book. . . .


Classical french "anticipation", January 1, 1999
Reviewer: A reader from Montreal, Canada

I read the original book in french something like three decades ago. It was pretty strong stuff at the time, because of the sex involved. Sex between humans in zoo cages! Talk about a mix of bestialism and exhibitionism. But this was by a noted author, so it was Art. Of course, not everybody sees Art this way. Even now, the original french edition cover would be the object of much debate if not outright bans in the USA because it showed a wispy (it looked like charcoal pen) drawing of a very naked and very attractive human female behind a zoo's bars. Of course, there was more to it than sex, but I was a teenager at the time, so... --This text refers to the Hardcover edition







Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

The Burke I have has the metal wrists. Maybe someone put the head and
clothes on a series 1 body but how would they have everything but the body?
Usually it's the clothes they don't have. Anyway, he wound up on John
Chambers' birthday cake and that wound up in "Makeup Artist" magazine, so he
served his purpose. The soldier ape I also put on the cake got ripped off
there, and some old lady tried to make off with Burke. As it was, he lost a
shoe. What a world! - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony B. McElveen" <abmac@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Mego Cornelius vs. Galen action figures


> Believe it or not, this is the second time I've answered this question
> today.
>
> There really is no distinction, once they've been removed from their
> packages. Cornelius is more commonly found with the earlier body type
> and Galen is more commonly found with the later, but there are no
> characteristics that are exclusive to either figure.
>
> ABMAC, the Mego expert
>
> On Saturday, October 19, 2002, at 03:27 PM, Menluth wrote:
>
> > O Apes!
> > I'm sure this one is old news for the veteran collectors out there,
> > but I am wondering how to tell the difference between the 1970s Mego
> > Cornelius and Galen action figures. Are there differences in color,
> > clothing, "glyphs", or face? Is there any way of telling which one
> > inhabits Ape City and which one Central City?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 2:40 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] "Cripple fight!"

In a message dated 10/19/02 3:30:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, alan@... writes:

Rory <Haristas@...> wrote:
> The novel is a much better work of art than the 1968 film.  If you
contend
> that it's the other way around, you don't know much about art!

For the benefit of people who disagree with you, define "art".

Alan

I know art when I see it!   But seriously, art seems to be whatever anyone says it is, therefore I say that a novel like "La Planete des Singes" is more a piece of art than the 1968 movie based on it.  The novel was the work of a single man, and written not necessarily with an eye on huge profits.  The movie was a collaborative effort with all those involved doing so for a paycheck.  Now if you want to be expansive with your definition of art then I guess you can include commercial films as art, but I'm more than a little bothered by it.  That's not to say I don't appreciate commercial films, quite the contrary, I love them, as you all know, but I wouldn't think of hanging strips of 35mm copies of POTA in the Louvre.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/02 6:20:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

I'm all ears.

Patrick

Seems to me you're all ass!

The society controlled by Zaius in the movie has NO HOPE WHATSOEVER of
developing such an ability, since the few who are in control of
things PURPOSELY SUPPRESS SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT due to their fear
that such advancement might ultimately lead to their ANNIHILATION.
Don't you friggin' GET IT?

Oh I get it alright!  What I get is that you're trapped in a mental loop like the supposed APES timeloop you pathetically cling to!  Who's to say where the ape society in the first film would go?  Of course we'll never know because obsessives like Serling and Dehn had to introduce then perpetuate the insane possibility of nuclear destruction -- something I actually believe mankind will avoid, and I think occurred to Boulle but he was against.

Serling (et al.) took the basic plot of Boulle's novel and IMPROVED upon it by
positing a more realistic scenario about how our human civilization
could conceivably be replaced by that of another group.

You may think it improved it, but I think it was by that time a rather trite conceit that Serling borrowed from "The Twilight Zone" where he explored it to death already.   And it's no more a realistic scenario than Boulle since it's highly unlikely a nuclear war would destroy all of mankind.

But I think his notion of a general lazy ennui taking over ALL of humanity, which docilely hands over the reins of civilization to the mimicking Apes, to be
absolutely absurd. It ain't gonna happen; there's always SOME group
out there with big plans, ambition, and the stick-to-it-iveness to
see their plans through.

Here you prove, Patrick, that you don't get Boulle at all.  You're a 'literalist,' and it's oh so boring, as most here will attest from your posts.  Boulle was engaged in an allegorical satire, pondering how civilizations fall and just what constitutes intelligence.  He wasn't trying to speculate on how a possible future for mankind might happen.  You don't get the films as well, since they weren't trying to say "this is what's going to happen" either!

But the film IMPROVED upon the basic plot.

The film simplified the plot of the book!  The only way that I think the film was an improvement on the book was in making the protagonist a misanthrope, and that was Michael Wilson's contribution, I believe, not Serling's.  Serling's screenplay was a failure, Patrick!  Another thing you don't get!

You yourself told us all how much of an impact the ending of the film
had on the original theater audiences in 1968. Did the book have as
much of an impact on you? More of an impact? I fail to see how it
possibly COULD have, but if it did (for you) please tell us all about
how wowed you were by the novel's ending scenes (both Ulysse and Nova
at Orly spaceport and the Jinn & Phyllis scene).

Yes, the film had more impact on me, but I was eight when I saw it.  I doubt it would have had as much impact if I was twenty-eight.  When I finally read the book when I was fourteen my first reaction after I finished was "Why didn't they film this?"   I think the movie is great, but I pride myself on having enough sophistication to recognize that it's an oversimplification of what Boulle was trying to get at.

A very good discussion tonight.  I'm glad you finally got a computer, Patrick.  I have to go now, but "I'll be back."

-- Rory
<.html

Attachments :

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/02 7:58:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

That original cover is in Desmond Morris' book "Men and Apes". - - - Jeff

And it's also in this post!

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/02 8:13:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

Wha- Wha - What? Rory, you LOVE the original film! You're saying it's not art? I think art is self expression. it's harder in movies because that's collaboration but it's possible. I think the book and the movie have different things to say. It's hard to say one is better than the other except on an entertainment level and personal preference. The book drags in places. I don't think a faithful movie would work 100%, there would have to be some tinkering. - - - Jeff

Of course!  Things are black and white, except maybe in the world of Patrick.  If you want to call SF movies art, and at a certain level they are, then PLANET is one of the best examples.

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/2002 7:08:33 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

 The Burke I have has the metal wrists. Maybe someone put the head and
clothes on a series 1 body but how would they have everything but the body?
Usually it's the clothes they don't have. Anyway, he wound up on John
Chambers' birthday cake and that wound up in "Makeup Artist" magazine, so he
served his purpose. The soldier ape I also put on the cake got ripped off
there, and some old lady tried to make off with Burke. As it was, he lost a
shoe. What a world! - - - Jeff

The initial batch of the 2nd series of figures had the metal wrists...<.html

.html

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

From: mlccougar@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:09 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Mego Cornelius vs. Galen action figures

In a message dated 10/19/2002 7:08:33 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

 The Burke I have has the metal wrists. Maybe someone put the head and
clothes on a series 1 body but how would they have everything but the body?
Usually it's the clothes they don't have. Anyway, he wound up on John
Chambers' birthday cake and that wound up in "Makeup Artist" magazine, so he
served his purpose. The soldier ape I also put on the cake got ripped off
there, and some old lady tried to make off with Burke. As it was, he lost a
shoe. What a world! - - - Jeff

The initial batch of the 2nd series of figures had the metal wrists...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/2002 8:43:13 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

Really? Thanks. I guess there's no way to tell, except if he doesn't have the metal wrists he's definitely Galen. - - - Jeff

That's not necessarily true either... They did do the later runs of the 1st batch of figures with the "type 2" body as well... I mean I have seen Zaius and the Soldier Ape with the plastic wrists for example...<.html

.html

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

From: mlccougar@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:09 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Mego Cornelius vs. Galen action figures

In a message dated 10/19/2002 7:08:33 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

 The Burke I have has the metal wrists. Maybe someone put the head and
clothes on a series 1 body but how would they have everything but the body?
Usually it's the clothes they don't have. Anyway, he wound up on John
Chambers' birthday cake and that wound up in "Makeup Artist" magazine, so he
served his purpose. The soldier ape I also put on the cake got ripped off
there, and some old lady tried to make off with Burke. As it was, he lost a
shoe. What a world! - - - Jeff

The initial batch of the 2nd series of figures had the metal wrists...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

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

From: mlccougar@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:48 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Mego Cornelius vs. Galen action figures

In a message dated 10/19/2002 8:43:13 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

Really? Thanks. I guess there's no way to tell, except if he doesn't have the metal wrists he's definitely Galen. - - - Jeff

That's not necessarily true either... They did do the later runs of the 1st batch of figures with the "type 2" body as well... I mean I have seen Zaius and the Soldier Ape with the plastic wrists for example...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/2002 8:54:41 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

 But could that be someone switching heads; maybe a body is worn out and they want it to look more mint? - - - Jeff

No, if there are 1st series figures on type 2 bodies, they're legit... I mean yes there is the possibility of head switching, but usually thats not the case...

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/2002 8:57:03 PM Central Standard Time, mlccougar@... writes:

But could that be someone switching heads; maybe a body is worn out and they want it to look more mint? - - - Jeff

No, if there are 1st series figures on type 2 bodies, they're legit... I mean yes there is the possibility of head switching, but usually thats not the case...

I also forgot to mention that overseas (England for example) there were a lot of the 1st series figures on the type one bodies... Or so it appears that way from the eBay listings I see on them...<.html

.html

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

From: veetus@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:53 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] But is it art?

  The first definition of "art" in the dictionary I have is "creative adaptation". Probably they mean "adapting" a flower to a painting or "adapting" a feeling to a poem or song. But "creative adaptation" certainly applies to the POTA movie. Probably the def people think of is:"application of skill to the production of beautiful things, esp. in painting, sculpture, music, literature, architecture, and dancing". I've also heard that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". So I guess we could never reach a solid conclusion of whether POTA is art. Man, this is heavy for a Saturday! - - - Jeff

 

 

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

From: mlccougar@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:09 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Mego Cornelius vs. Galen action figures

In a message dated 10/19/2002 7:08:33 PM Central Standard Time, veetus@... writes:

 The Burke I have has the metal wrists. Maybe someone put the head and
clothes on a series 1 body but how would they have everything but the body?
Usually it's the clothes they don't have. Anyway, he wound up on John
Chambers' birthday cake and that wound up in "Makeup Artist" magazine, so he
served his purpose. The soldier ape I also put on the cake got ripped off
there, and some old lady tried to make off with Burke. As it was, he lost a
shoe. What a world! - - - Jeff

The initial batch of the 2nd series of figures had the metal wrists...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/02 9:53:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

  The first definition of "art" in the dictionary I have is "creative adaptation". Probably they mean "adapting" a flower to a painting or "adapting" a feeling to a poem or song. But "creative adaptation" certainly applies to the POTA movie. Probably the def people think of is:"application of skill to the production of beautiful things, esp. in painting, sculpture, music, literature, architecture, and dancing". I've also heard that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". So I guess we could never reach a solid conclusion of whether POTA is art. Man, this is heavy for a Saturday! - - - Jeff

The late Pauline Kael, who's opinion I value much higher than Patrick's, said that "Planet of the Apes" was not art.  She included some other movies along with it.  Of course, she was writing in the era of the film's original release.  It takes the passage of some time to weed out the good from the bad in such matters.  In the end art is whatever people want it to be.

There is a difference between movies as art and, say, paintings or sculptures as art.  Movies tend to be commercial ventures, and that commercial aspect tends to devalue them as art.  When was the last time you saw a list of the 100 best paintings ever painted, or statues ever sculpted, or books ever written?  Pretty rarely, if ever.  But there's always some damn list of the ten best or one hundred best movies.  That should tell you something.

Movies are art of a certain kind, but not high art.  Some, like "Citizen Kane," have certainly attained a higher level as art than others, but what idiot would argue that because "Citizen Kane" is art and a movie, than since "Porky's II" is also a movie, it's art?

Where's Gene Siskel when we need him?

-- Rory<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/02 7:03:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Here's where I "wow" you with my acumen, Rory, and it involves an explication of
the meanings of the names of the main character (Ulysse) and
his "fallen" comrade (Antelle). Antelle comes from the Greek word "antelios" (from "anti" + "helios"), meaning "opposite the sun" or "against the sun".

The only thing you've "wowed" me with, Patrick, is how much you sound like the father in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"!

The name "Ulysse" is the French form of the Latin form (Ulysses--
actually "Ulixes" in Cassell's dictionary) of the Greek
name "Odysseus" (of Homer's "Odyssey"); the name Odysseus comes from
the Greek word "odyssomai", which means "to be grieved" or "to be
wroth at".

You're a riot, Patrick!  Go see the movie and you'll know what I mean.  By the way, Merou is supposed to mean a grouper, a lowly fish.  What do you make of the juxtaposition of Ulysse with Merou, Patrick?

Ulysse--like Ulysses before him--is the type who would eat the forbidden fruit, acquiring Knowledge EVEN IF IT GETS HIM KICKED OUT OF THE COZY GARDEN/PRISON. Adam was not fully human until he acquired Knowledge, which can ONLY be acquired through rebellion against the dictates of a "master" (God,
in GENESIS, the "Orthodoxy" in the Real World). Do you get it yet, Rory?

Ummmmmm. . . . NO!  What is the point here, Patrick?  Certainly not the one on your head, so what the hell are you talking about?

-- Rory the puzzled<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/19/2002 11:36:12 PM Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

Where's Gene Siskel when we need him?

He's in a grave.
But he's also a Culver man!<.html

I got the impression he was more interested in associating himself with a
website dedicated to a movie that was popular.

He fought so hard to convince himself and others that POTA 2001 was great,
then he realised and jumped ship. Here's hoping T3 is a success.

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: veetus@... [veetus@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2002 9:30
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
>
>
> I just checked Alex's "Terminator" site, www.skynetsite.com .
> It's updated
> through Oct. 19 (hey, that's today!). I guess he's around. Maybe
> he feels he
> let us down or is just too busy doing the site to check in. But
> an educated
> guess is he's still alive. - - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <veetus@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 3:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
>
>
> > Usually I get Alex when I e-mail him privately. He's not around. Maybe
> > somethink major happened to his computer. Last I heard, the DVD
> offer was
> > history. - - - Jeff
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <kidro85@...>
> > To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:24 PM
> > Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> >
> >
> > > Has anybody had contact with Alex lately? Is he still in the
> group? are
> > his
> > > free Dvd offers a thing of the past? Or is he possibly chilling in the
> > > forbidden Zone?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

The book was great satire, and the original movie was of course more visual and hard-hitting in that respect.  I like the movie best, even though I did appreciate the finer points the book made. 

When Burton tried to make some commentary re: our society with the ape taking the false teeth out, etc. it just looked silly to me.  Didn't work at all.  What do you think?

I believe that art is subjective.  Those who disagree are usually those hard-headed people who believe they know better than everyone else.

Glad we don't have people like that here.

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 9:30:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, valwp@... writes:

When Burton tried to make some commentary re: our society with the ape taking the false teeth out, etc. it just looked silly to me.  Didn't work at all.  What do you think?

I believe that art is subjective.  Those who disagree are usually those hard-headed people who believe they know better than everyone else.

Glad we don't have people like that here.

Kass 

Yeah, I know what you mean, Kassio.  Sometimes I think I'm the only one around here, except for a few others, who's open-minded.

Art is subjective.  It's all a matter of opinion.  I say Patrick is wrong about this or that just for the sake of argument.  I love arguing about the things he seems to want to talk about.  Too bad I come off as if I'm saying everyone's an idiot if they don't agree with me, but that's how I argue.  Deal with it!

I agree with you about the Burton film, in fact even to a greater degree.  I felt so sick after I left the theatre.  He made a movie that made the whole concept of the Planet of the Apes seem so silly that for a few days it nearly ruined the old films for me.

-- Rory<.html

Rory <Haristas@...> wrote:

> Hey, anybody else here remember seeing this low-budget SF film from

1956 on

> TV as a kid? It was shot in Cinemascope and is like a combination

of 1960's

> "The Time Machine" and "Planet of the Apes." It even has Rod Taylor

in it.

I've never seen it, but it's one that is on my list of films to check
out - is it any good (by the standards of the time, at least!) and is
it available anywhere outside of bootlegs or hoping for reruns?

Alan

Rory <Haristas@...> wrote:

> Movies are art of a certain kind, but not high art. Some, like

"Citizen

> Kane," have certainly attained a higher level as art than others,

but what

> idiot would argue that because "Citizen Kane" is art and a movie,

than since

> "Porky's II" is also a movie, it's art?

Of course nobody would argue that, but what it does suggest is that
since one movie is recognised as art, it's perfectly acceptable that
other movies can be art as well. In that respect, there is a case for
saying that "Porky's II" had the potential to be art. Obviously once
they've seen the film, nobody in their right mind (perhaps) would
argue that it actually IS art, but you get my point.

Alan

Very good. I'll have to find something more difficult next time.

--- In pota@y..., "Anthony B. McElveen" <abmac@i...> wrote:
> Beneath, just before the gorilla wings Brent and the bird flies up.
>
> ABMAC

I'm not sure I agree with you here. Boule had to work with editors
and publishers, as well as printers and book distributors all
working for a paycheck. So you can hardly say that the book was the
work of one man or that he wasn't looking for book sales to make a
profit.
The Museum of Modern Art here in NY as well as many others regularly
features films and TV shows, and even commercials sometimes, as art.

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> I know art when I see it! But seriously, art seems to be
whatever anyone
> says it is, therefore I say that a novel like "La Planete des
Singes" is more
> a piece of art than the 1968 movie based on it. The novel was the
work of a
> single man, and written not necessarily with an eye on huge
profits. The
> movie was a collaborative effort with all those involved doing so
for a
> paycheck. Now if you want to be expansive with your definition of
art then I
> guess you can include commercial films as art, but I'm more than a
little
> bothered by it. That's not to say I don't appreciate commercial
films, quite
> the contrary, I love them, as you all know, but I wouldn't think
of hanging
> strips of 35mm copies of POTA in the Louvre.
>
> -- Rory

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:08:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, alan@... writes:

I've never seen it, but it's one that is on my list of films to check
out - is it any good (by the standards of the time, at least!) and is
it available anywhere outside of bootlegs or hoping for reruns?

Alan

"World Without End" is a typical low-budget "Sci-fi" flick from the fifties.  If you've seen movies like "Destination Moon" or "The Conquest of Space" then you have a pretty good idea of how it plays.  What's so interesting about it now is how it anticipated later SF films like POTA.  I forgot to mention that Booth Colman is in it too.  He plays one of the last remnants of humanity living below the surface.  They wear cornball outfits that are like the mutant outfits from BENEATH meet Star Trek.  He's a villain too.

I have a very good VHS copy of the film I taped off cable about ten years ago.  It's pan&scan unfortunately but the print is very bright and clean.  It's a cool film to look at if you'd grown up loving POTA.  I'd be happy to make anyone a copy if they send me a tape and return postage.

-- Rory<.html

I had a seance last night and spoke with Rod Serling & Arthur Jacobs
and they agree with you Michael.

PS They also told me the map wasn't sideways.

--- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:
> I think they stole them because they were shiny and different.
>
> Regardless of what we all think, is there any genuine way to PROVE
this?

It took you long enough to ask....

We are a home school -- a little eccentric, maybe. I would have
changed the moniker, but that is how I signed up with Yahoo! The name
follows me around.

(My phobia is that Patrick is going to start correcting my posts! --
"Hi Patrick.")

--Helen

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 10/19/02 1:24:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> sand_hill_school@y... writes:
>
>
> > Gosh **blush**. You remember me.
> >
> > I'm around.
> >
> > Helen
>
> I've always wondered, Helen, what is the Sand Hill School?
>
> -- Rory

Yes.

--Helen

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 10/19/02 1:24:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > sand_hill_school@y... writes:
> >
> >
> > >> Gosh **blush**. You remember me.
> >>
> >> I'm around.
> >>
> >> Helen
> >
> >
>
> "And what shall be required of you but to do justice, to love
mercy, and to
> walk humbly with thy God."
>
> That's the God of the Lawgiver, right Helen?
>
> -- Rory

Thanks, LT. I usaully check up on you guys once or twice a week.

--Helen

--- In pota@y..., LordTZer0@A... wrote:
>
> > Gosh **blush**. You remember me.
> >
> Of course!
> You've been deeply missed Helen.

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:21:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, JamesA1102@... writes:

I'm not sure I agree with you here. Boulle had to work with editors
and publishers, as well as printers and book distributors all
working for a paycheck. So you can hardly say that the book was the
work of one man or that he wasn't looking for book sales to make a
profit.
The Museum of Modern Art here in NY as well as many others regularly
features films and TV shows, and even commercials sometimes, as art.

Well, I'm sure there are plenty that would say that all modern art is just junk, and in fact sometimes actually IS junk!  But I give in -- movies are art.  I really don't want to have to keep defending myself about this matter because it's all a question of degree with me and VERY subjective.  It's the same way with literature.  Are romance novels just as much art as "Moby Dick"?

-- Rory

<.html

Most of the great works of painting and sculptures from the
renaissance were commercial ventures. They were usually commissioned
by the church or wealthy families such as the Borgias in Italy. Even
artists today do their work for money. And while all films do not
rise to the level of Citizen Kane, all painting do not rise to the
level of the Mona Lisa, all sculptures do not rise to the level of
Michalangelo's David.

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> The late Pauline Kael, who's opinion I value much higher than
Patrick's, said
> that "Planet of the Apes" was not art. She included some other
movies along
> with it. Of course, she was writing in the era of the film's
original
> release. It takes the passage of some time to weed out the good
from the bad
> in such matters. In the end art is whatever people want it to be.
>
> There is a difference between movies as art and, say, paintings or
sculptures
> as art. Movies tend to be commercial ventures, and that
commercial aspect
> tends to devalue them as art. When was the last time you saw a
list of the
> 100 best paintings ever painted, or statues ever sculpted, or
books ever
> written? Pretty rarely, if ever. But there's always some damn
list of the
> ten best or one hundred best movies. That should tell you
something.
>
> Movies are art of a certain kind, but not high art. Some,
like "Citizen
> Kane," have certainly attained a higher level as art than others,
but what
> idiot would argue that because "Citizen Kane" is art and a movie,
than since
> "Porky's II" is also a movie, it's art?
>
> Where's Gene Siskel when we need him?
>
> -- Rory

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:25:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, JamesA1102@... writes:

I had a seance last night and spoke with Rod Serling & Arthur Jacobs
and they agree with you Michael.

PS They also told me the map wasn't sideways.

Wow!  I had a seance last night too and Michael Wilson and Franklin J. Schaffner told me the map was sideways.  Paul Dehn said he couldn't recall and no longer cared.  I asked him about the timelines, but he seemed confused.<.html

That's funny I tried to get Wilson and Schaffner too but Rod said
they were busy jerking someguy off in another seance;-)

--- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> Wow! I had a seance last night too and Michael Wilson and
Franklin J.
> Schaffner told me the map was sideways. Paul Dehn said he
couldn't recall
> and no longer cared. I asked him about the timelines, but he
seemed
> confused.

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:40:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, JamesA1102@... writes:

Very good. I'll have to find something more difficult next time.

Yeah, make it a real puzzler.<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:40:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, JamesA1102@... writes:

That's funny I tried to get Wilson and Schaffner too but Rod said
they were busy jerking someguy off in another seance;-)

Jerking me off?!!!!   That's what Paul Dehn wanted to do!<.html

Yup. I tend to be a bit of a wallflower. But I doubt I'm the only
one.

--Helen

--- In pota@y..., <veetus@e...> wrote:
> Helen?! You're still here? Maybe there really is 120 people just
> eavesdropping. - - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@y...>
> To: <pota@y...>
> Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 6:27 AM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: WARNING
>
>
> > And, when you've read it, let us know what it said.
> >
> > --Helen
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:
> > > If someone here doesn't say something interesting soon I'm gonna
> > read this
> > > post and comment on it!
> > >
> > > I'M SERIOUS!!!
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@y...]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2002 16:02
> > > > To: pota@y...
> > > > Subject: [Planet of the Apes] The Lawgiver's Plan for Mankind
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It's time to get back on-topic, I think. This post'll be
longer
> > than
> > > > the recent short ones I've put up, so if you don't like 'em
> > lengthy,
> > > > feel free to skip it and ignore me (you know who you are...).
> > > >
> > > > Rory recently vehemently disagreed with my take on the "silent
> > > > treatment" of the humans, portrayed in PLANET and BENEATH.
Rory
> > > > thinks that humans had "devolved" and lost their language
> > > > through "becoming mere animals" (as in Boulle's novel),
whereas I
> > > > think that the silence of the humans is the end product of
prior
> > > > centuries of brutality directed against SPEAKING humans by
> > > > intelligent (and fearful & righteously indignant) apes, who
were
> > able
> > > > to shape the social environment in such a way as to force
humans
> > to
> > > > adapt to that environment--by not speaking at all, resulting
in
> > the
> > > > loss of any vocal language, and the deterioration of the no-
> > longer-
> > > > used "speech centers" in their brains.
> > > >
> > > > This all stems from the past history of the simian
civilization,
> > > > which--of course--is only hinted at here and there, partly
through
> > > > the archaeological artifacts dug up by Cornelius (and his &
> > Taylor's
> > > > interpretations of them) and also through the text (as quoted
by
> > > > Zaius and Cornelius, respectively) of the Sacred Scrolls.
> > > >
> > > > Zaius quotes from "the Thirteenth Scroll": "... and Proteus
> > brought
> > > > the upright beast into the garden, and chained him to a tree,
and
> > the
> > > > children did make sport of him."
> > > > Cornelius reads from "the Twenty-Ninth Scroll": (verse
6) "Beware
> > the
> > > > beast Man, for he is the Devil's pawn. Alone among God's
primates
> > he
> > > > kills for sport, or lust, or greed. Yea, he will murder his
> > brother
> > > > to possess his brother's land. Let him not breed in great
numbers,
> > > > for he will make a desert of his home--and yours. Shun him!
Drive
> > him
> > > > back into his jungle lair, for he is the Harbinger of Death."
> > > >
> > > > Zaius, referencing the 13th Scroll's passage, interprets it as
> > having
> > > > something to do with "the Ancients"--that is, the Apes who
lived
> > > > before the time when the Sacred Scrolls were written (1,200
years
> > > > prior to the years 3955/3978 [pick whichever year you wish]).
This
> > > > scripture-historical figure, named Proteus, supposedly
represents
> > > > those Ancients who once tried to keep humans as household
pets,
> > > > before the time of the Lawgiver--since Zaius says "... UNTIL
the
> > > > Lawgiver proved that Man could not be tamed."
> > > >
> > > > If we presume that there actually was a person named Proteus
> > (living
> > > > sometime prior to the writing of the Sacred Scrolls circa
> > 2755/2778),
> > > > then he could only have lived between the time when Apes
became
> > > > dominant over Man (i.e. after the Nuclear War, which I've
deduced
> > > > elsewhere to have probably been in 2006 A.D.) and the time
when
> > the
> > > > human-hating Lawgiver wrote the Scrolls, around 2755 A.D. The
> > human
> > > > skeletons in the Cave date back to the time prior to
> > the "carnivorous
> > > > gorillas" in their state of "primitive barbarism" with
> > their "cutting
> > > > tools and arrowheads of quartz", so this "more ancient
culture"
> > > > (which "is more advanced" than the Zaius-dominated culture of
> > PLANET)
> > > > with its "knowledge of metallurgy"--which we in the audience
know
> > is
> > > > OUR culture, from the late 20th/early 21st centuries--is from
the
> > > > same chronological era wherein Zaius refers to Proteus
and "the
> > > > Ancients".
> > > >
> > > > This Proteus fellow "chained him [a human, "the upright
beast"]
> > to a
> > > > tree," which is what we do with dogs and horses, when we don't
> > want
> > > > them to go running off chasing either cars or mares,
> > respectively. It
> > > > seems reasonable that Zaius could interpret this human-
chaining
> > act
> > > > as that of a pet-owner (Proteus) and a pet (the human)... but
> > Zaius
> > > > has an agenda at work when he offers Cornelius this
> > interpretation of
> > > > the passage from the 13th Scroll. Zaius KNOWS that Cornelius
is
> > right
> > > > about the Past; in Taylor's words, Zaius "knew it all along,
long
> > > > before you [Cornelius] found your Cave, he knew..." Zaius
admits
> > as
> > > > much himself, eventually: "And you're right! I have ALWAYS
known
> > > > about Man." So, Zaius KNOWS that his interpretation
of "SS:13" is
> > a
> > > > bogus one even as he spouts that "scripture" to Cornelius.
Zaius
> > is
> > > > not above selectively quoting simian Scripture and giving it
> > a "spin"
> > > > which serves an Agenda: keeping the human race in a state of
> > > > savagery. So, too, did pro-slavery advocates selectively
quote the
> > > > Bible to bolster their claim that it wasn't ungodly to enslave
> > > > the "inferior" races.
> > > >
> > > > Zaius is, as Taylor accuses him, the "Guardian of the Terrible
> > > > Secret" concerning the once-dominant technological society of
> > Humans
> > > > predating the luddite Simian civilization. The simian Masses
(the
> > > > ordinary citizens) were to be made ignorant about the truth
> > regarding
> > > > Man, and how he had been "superior" (at least,
technologically, if
> > > > not morally), and then KEPT ignorant; this sort of on-going
> > > > conspiracy requires that SOMEONE (or, preferably, some group)
> > retain
> > > > the Truth, keeping it alive only amongst those "in-the-know"
> > whilst
> > > > pretending to everybody else that the uninformed opinions
held by
> > the
> > > > masses about Man are the truth. This sort of conspiracy, on-
going
> > > > throughout the many centuries of the simian culture, would
require
> > > > that any and all artifacts of that prior civilization would be
> > > > destroyed--melted down and turned into bullets for the gorilla
> > army,
> > > > perhaps! And really BIG artifacts--like the wrecked
skyscrapers
> > > > Ursus' army sees, and the Statue of Liberty--would necessitate
> > that
> > > > entire regions would be made "off-limits" to the ignorant
public.
> > > >
> > > > Thus, we have "the greatest ape of all" make his appearance
on the
> > > > Timeline: the Lawgiver. It was he who established the "ancient
> > taboo"
> > > > by having "pronounced this whole area deadly". Not only is it
a
> > taboo
> > > > for a civilian to "exceed his orders" on his "travel permit"
and
> > > > travel into the Forbidden Zone--it is an ecclesiastical crime.
> > > > Cornelius makes reference to beheading as a punishment for
> > > > this "crime", even though Zaius says later that "if [they] are
> > > > convicted of Heresy, the most [they'd] get is two years" of
> > > > imprisonment. Evidently, in past centuries, they'd have gotten
> > their
> > > > heads chopped off--which is what "capital" punishment is: the
> > > > punitive removal of the "caput" (Latin for "head"). Although
> > heretics
> > > > are no longer put to death (as they once had been), there
still
> > is a
> > > > death penalty--for Treason, which Zaius says is by hanging.
So,
> > when
> > > > Cornelius asks Zira, "Are you trying to get my head chopped
> > off?!",
> > > > it is like somebody nowadays making reference to pre-modern
forms
> > of
> > > > punishment, like being tarred-&-feathered, or put in "stocks"
> > (like
> > > > in Puritan times), or guillotined. Things have changed in Ape
City
> > > > since "old times"--Doctor Galen makes reference to how "the
Quota
> > > > System's been abolished", when Chimpanzees were
disenfranchised by
> > > > the ruling Orangutan faction.
> > > >
> > > > The Lawgiver--who himself knew that Humans were once
> > technologically
> > > > brilliant, to a fault--purposely lies about Mankind in his so-
> > > > called "scripture". He paints Mankind as a race of "upright
> > beasts"
> > > > which are used by the Devil to do his evil bidding. I've
compared
> > > > this notion to the Biblical tale (in Genesis) of the Serpent
in
> > the
> > > > garden, through whom Satan beguiled Eve and Adam into
rebellion
> > > > against the will of God. The Serpent is the most
> > obvious "scriptural"
> > > > parallel to the Sacred Scrolls passage, the most obvious
example
> > of
> > > > an animal being "used" by a malevolent yet sweet-talking
demonic
> > > > spirit. Interestingly enough, the 13th Scroll passage has
Proteus
> > > > bringing the "upright beast" (Man) "into the Garden" and
chaining
> > him
> > > > to "a Tree". This sounds a lot like the Garden of Eden, and
the
> > Tree
> > > > of Knowledge of Good and Evil motif. The name "Proteus", taken
> > from
> > > > Greek mythology, means "first man" (according to Robert
Graves, in
> > > > his book "THE GREEK MYTHS"), though the word "man" is only
> > implied in
> > > > the actual name. The choosing of the name "Proteus" for that
> > ancient
> > > > Ape who chained the human to a Tree, seems to suggest that he
was
> > > > the "first Ape": the simian "Adam". We have no way of knowing
> > which
> > > > of the three ape species Proteus was--whether chimpanzee,
> > gorilla, or
> > > > orangutan; perhaps the Apes had a strange mythic tale of how
> > > > the "first Ape" was neither a Chimpanzee, Gorilla, or
Orangutan,
> > but
> > > > was a "pure Ape" in a state of Innocence (which Zaius would
try
> > to re-
> > > > establish by keeping Apes ignorant), and how the three kinds
of
> > apes
> > > > were all descended from him through three different
bloodlines;
> > this
> > > > would be like how the Biblical authors viewed the "3 races"
(of
> > > > Europe, Asia, and Africa) as descended from the 3 sons of Noah
> > > > (Japheth, Shem, and Ham, respectively).
> > > >
> > > > The Lawgiver knew (as Zaius knows) that Man had once had a
higher
> > > > civilization, where the technological level gave him the
power to
> > > > destroy that civilization. Man's wisdom walks hand-in-hand
with
> > his
> > > > idiocy. So, after having turned a Paradise into a Desert, ages
> > ago,
> > > > Man had to be subjugated by the "morally superior" intelligent
> > Apes,
> > > > and it would take an on-going effort to KEEP Mankind humbled.
> > Just as
> > > > the simian Masses had to be made ignorant and then KEPT
ignorant
> > > > about the Past, so too did the Humans have to be brought low
and
> > then
> > > > kept in that condition. This would require periodic
interactions
> > > > between Humans and those Apes who are best equipped to deal
with
> > > > potentially dangerous "animals": the Gorillas. Just in case
> > there's a
> > > > band of not-so-savage Humans out there in "his jungle lair"
> > working
> > > > their way back up the ladder of Civilization, the Apes would
> > require
> > > > their armed forces to periodically disrupt the Humans,
quelling
> > any
> > > > emergent spark of Culture. This HUNT activity would not be
done
> > (at
> > > > least initially) as a "sport", but rather as what is
> > called "culling
> > > > the herd". This would be a vital function of the gorillas--to
> > harass
> > > > the humans out in the forests (and in the Apes' croplands)
with
> > the
> > > > ever-present threat of Death. The reason the Apes (who
> > have "learned
> > > > to live in innocence", where the Lawgiver had forbidden them
to
> > kill
> > > > each other) keep an Army is to deal with this threat posed by
the
> > > > Humans. Humans are said to "kill for sport, or lust, or
greed";
> > the
> > > > gorilla hunters (who Cornelius says, to Lewis Dixon, "hunted
> > humans
> > > > for sport") may make a sport of it in some respects... but the
> > Hunt
> > > > sequence looks more like a military attack. The gorillas don't
> > > > resemble good-ol'-boys out for a bit of sporting fun--their
> > manner of
> > > > dress has the appearance of a uniform. They all dress alike.
When
> > the
> > > > audience first saw that scene, it was before they saw that
most of
> > > > the other apes dressed in similar garb, with the exception of
the
> > > > Minister in his vestments, Julius in his "working-class
threads",
> > and
> > > > the President of the Academy in his somewhat more ornate
garb. So
> > the
> > > > first impression of the gorilla hunters is that their
uniformity
> > of
> > > > dress is military in nature (at least, that's the impression I
> > got).
> > > >
> > > > The hunting of humans is done in order to fulfill
> > the "commandment"
> > > > given by the Lawgiver: "... let [Man] not breed in great
numbers,
> > for
> > > > he will make a desert of his home--and yours." The only way to
> > keep
> > > > the "numbers" of humans small is to periodically reduce it--by
> > > > killing them. Zaius would prefer to have them exterminated,
but
> > > > evidently that is out of the question; humans, after all,
> > are "among
> > > > God's primates". That is, they were one of the species which
were
> > > > the "highest order of mammals" (according to my Oxford
> > dictionary);
> > > > if the simian "God" didn't want any humans around, then He
either
> > > > made a mistake in creating them in the first place (and
a "god"
> > isn't
> > > > a god if He makes mistakes, after all), or He should have
ordered
> > the
> > > > Apes to exterminate the Humans. What might the orthodox
religion
> > of
> > > > the Apes think was God's purpose in creating Man? Why did the
god
> > of
> > > > the Bible create Serpents? According to the later
interpretations
> > of
> > > > Genesis, God had to test Adam's obedience... which required a
> > Devil
> > > > to do the dirty work of Temptation. And the Devil, in order to
> > pull
> > > > off the scheme, had to disguise himself... which required
another
> > > > creature in which to conceal himself and through whose mouth
his
> > > > deceitful lies could emerge. Perhaps the Ape theologians
believe
> > that
> > > > God created Humans so that the Devil could have a vessel
through
> > > > which he could test Simian obedience to God's Will.
> > > >
> > > > Since God "created" Humans (as far as Ape religion goes),
then it
> > > > would be a sin to "un-create" them, barring any explicit
command
> > from
> > > > God to do so. Yet humans would have to be dealt with on a
regular
> > > > basis. They had to be kept to a minimal population size ("let
him
> > not
> > > > breed in great numbers"), which would require periodic acts of
> > > > organized killing: the Hunts. They had to be shunned. They
had to
> > be
> > > > driven away from Simian civilization, back into the jungle to
> > live as
> > > > savages--ever fearful of hearing that shofar-like hunting horn
> > sound
> > > > prior to the onslaught of a gorilla attack. The Lawgiver, who
gave
> > > > these "commandments" to the Apes via his pseudo-scripture,
knew
> > the
> > > > REAL reason that Humans had to be treated in such a horrific
> > manner:
> > > > the Humans "deserved" such treatment because of how they had
> > abused
> > > > their Intelligence, through creating weapons of mass
> > destruction...
> > > > and then USING them. Their actions had proven their Nature
as "a
> > > > warlike creature who gives battle to everything around him...
even
> > > > himself". So... they deserve to be mistreated by the Apes.
But it
> > > > wouldn't do for the simian Masses to know this real reason, or
> > else
> > > > the "bleeding hearts" amongst the "liberal" faction (the
Chimps)
> > > > would protest the treatment of intelligent creatures as mere
> > animals.
> > > > In order to successfully foist this conspiracy on Ape
society, it
> > > > required the creation of a religion--a set of dogmatic beliefs
> > > > (a "credo", like the "Apostle's Creed", which Honorius
> > > > calls "Articles of Faith") which tells a mythic tale of
Beginnings
> > > > which the very writer KNOWS is not true, yet must be told to
serve
> > > > a "higher purpose". And this religious Orthodoxy requires that
> > > > everyone in the society tow-the-line and Believe the
doctrines and
> > > > Obey the "authority" of the Priesthood. What happens to those
who
> > > > renounce their beliefs, who "apostacize"? Zaius says
that "only an
> > > > apostate would flee to the Forbidden Zone." He says it as if
IT'S
> > > > HAPPENED BEFORE. When the Lawgiver (and his faction of
pretend-
> > > > believers who conspired to subjugate Man) foisted his new
> > religion on
> > > > Apedom, there must have been those who rejected it. And after
the
> > > > Lawgiver's "revelation" had been accepted by the majority
> > (probably
> > > > after pogroms against "heretics"), every so often there must
have
> > > > cropped up individuals who came across traces of evidence
which
> > > > contradicted the official dogmas of "Lawgiverism" and "true
> > > > religion". If that individual persisted in his or
her "heresy",
> > then
> > > > a harsh punishment was inflicted: Beheading. In order to
escape
> > such
> > > > punishment, the only recourse was to flee somewhere where Apes
> > don't
> > > > go: the Forbidden Zone fits the bill, because the Lawgiver
himself
> > > > had declared it off-limits.
> > > >
> > > > And all this happens because the Lawgiver considers Mankind
to be
> > so
> > > > prone to destruction that the situation necessitates the
> > subjugation
> > > > of that species... and the enforced ignorance of the Masses.
> > Humans
> > > > weren't just one of many species of beasts... they were
especially
> > > > dangerous. Metaphorically speaking, the Devil uses them as
pawns
> > in
> > > > his war against God. In private chambers, the Lawgiver--like
> > Zaius,
> > > > centuries later--would "talk heresy" (probably) and admit
that his
> > > > religion is a Lie... but a lie which serves a higher purpose.
It
> > > > would be "justified racism"--justified, at least, in his
view. But
> > > > woe to the poor wretches who are on the receiving end of that
> > harsh
> > > > policy of the pogrom, the "organized massacre" which Humans
had to
> > > > endure for hundreds of years.
> > > >
> > > > Patrick Michael Tilton
> > > > EARTH-TIME 10-16-2002
> > > >
> > > > Postscript: Remember those books with titles like "EVERYTHING
I
> > > > NEEDED TO KNOW I LEARNED FROM WATCHING 'STAR TREK'"? Well,
> > as "PLANET
> > > > OF THE APES" and its sequels were the foremost formative
> > influences
> > > > in my life, everything (at least, 'much' if not 'most') of
what
> > > > I "need" to know--including how to look at the reasons the
world
> > is
> > > > the way it is--I got from soaking in the ambience of
the "world
> > gone
> > > > insane"... the Planet of the Apes. Through satire and
allegory,
> > > > Serling & Wilson & Dehn (etc.) held a funhouse mirror of our
own
> > > > world up for us to see ourselves. Ah, Zanuck... thanks
for "green-
> > > > lighting" the Schaffner flick--but how could you NOT see the
> > deeper
> > > > levels of meaning that were not-so-hidden in this "adventure"
> > film?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >

Don't be a wallflower. We need more women here.

--- In pota@y..., "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@y...> wrote:
> Yup. I tend to be a bit of a wallflower. But I doubt I'm the
only
> one.
>
> --Helen

Alex insists POTA is his favorite franchise and "Terminator" is #2. Maybe
his e-mail is down. But I checked and we haven't heard from him since Aug.
That's a long time for a technical problem. Usually if he's upset about
something he lets us know it. Then again, we haven't heard from Helen
since... - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Whitty" <whitty@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 1:56 AM
Subject: RE: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex


> I got the impression he was more interested in associating himself with a
> website dedicated to a movie that was popular.
>
> He fought so hard to convince himself and others that POTA 2001 was great,
> then he realised and jumped ship. Here's hoping T3 is a success.
>
> Michael
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: veetus@... [veetus@...]
> > Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2002 9:30
> > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> >
> >
> > I just checked Alex's "Terminator" site, www.skynetsite.com .
> > It's updated
> > through Oct. 19 (hey, that's today!). I guess he's around. Maybe
> > he feels he
> > let us down or is just too busy doing the site to check in. But
> > an educated
> > guess is he's still alive. - - - Jeff
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <veetus@...>
> > To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 3:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> >
> >
> > > Usually I get Alex when I e-mail him privately. He's not around.
Maybe
> > > somethink major happened to his computer. Last I heard, the DVD
> > offer was
> > > history. - - - Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <kidro85@...>
> > > To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:24 PM
> > > Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> > >
> > >
> > > > Has anybody had contact with Alex lately? Is he still in the
> > group? are
> > > his
> > > > free Dvd offers a thing of the past? Or is he possibly chilling in
the
> > > > forbidden Zone?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >

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

I hear "T3" will be great, and also "X-Men 2". X-Men", like POTA2001 was a
no frills Fox production supervised by Ralph Winter. Bryan Singer said Fox
wanted him to put on screen only what was necessary. Thus it was kind of a
nothing movie. Like POTA it was profitable but not nearly as successful as
it would have been if Fox didn't emasculate it. Fox is apparently learning
the downfall of corporate art and "X2" is reportedly darker and has a great
script and enough time to do it right. Her's hoping the same courtesy will
be extended to "Apes 2". By the way, what would it be called? "A2"?
"POTA2"? - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Whitty" <whitty@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 1:56 AM
Subject: RE: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex


> I got the impression he was more interested in associating himself with a
> website dedicated to a movie that was popular.
>
> He fought so hard to convince himself and others that POTA 2001 was great,
> then he realised and jumped ship. Here's hoping T3 is a success.
>
> Michael
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: veetus@... [veetus@...]
> > Sent: Sunday, 20 October 2002 9:30
> > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> >
> >
> > I just checked Alex's "Terminator" site, www.skynetsite.com .
> > It's updated
> > through Oct. 19 (hey, that's today!). I guess he's around. Maybe
> > he feels he
> > let us down or is just too busy doing the site to check in. But
> > an educated
> > guess is he's still alive. - - - Jeff
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <veetus@...>
> > To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 3:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> >
> >
> > > Usually I get Alex when I e-mail him privately. He's not around.
Maybe
> > > somethink major happened to his computer. Last I heard, the DVD
> > offer was
> > > history. - - - Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <kidro85@...>
> > > To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:24 PM
> > > Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: where is Mr . Alex
> > >
> > >
> > > > Has anybody had contact with Alex lately? Is he still in the
> > group? are
> > > his
> > > > free Dvd offers a thing of the past? Or is he possibly chilling in
the
> > > > forbidden Zone?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >

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

.html

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

From: Kassidy Rae

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 6:29 AM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Art or not?

The book was great satire, and the original movie was of course more visual and hard-hitting in that respect.  I like the movie best, even though I did appreciate the finer points the book made. 

When Burton tried to make some commentary re: our society with the ape taking the false teeth out, etc. it just looked silly to me.  Didn't work at all.  What do you think?

I believe that art is subjective.  Those who disagree are usually those hard-headed people who believe they know better than everyone else.

Glad we don't have people like that here.

Kass 

---

.html

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

From: Kassidy Rae

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 6:29 AM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Art or not?

The book was great satire, and the original movie was of course more visual and hard-hitting in that respect.  I like the movie best, even though I did appreciate the finer points the book made. 

When Burton tried to make some commentary re: our society with the ape taking the false teeth out, etc. it just looked silly to me.  Didn't work at all.  What do you think?

I believe that art is subjective.  Those who disagree are usually those hard-headed people who believe they know better than everyone else.

Glad we don't have people like that here.

Kass 

---

You can say it about any art form. Every art form has it's "Porky's"
that's out for the dough. Some would say comic books are a bastardization of
drawing or painting (though I say some comic books are art too). Highbrows
would look down on a Broadway musical based on a Disney cartoon. Busts of
popular characters you could buy in comic shops are offshoots of sculpture.
Artists have to eat too. - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Maxwell" <alan@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 6:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] But is it art?


> Rory <Haristas@...> wrote:
> > Movies are art of a certain kind, but not high art. Some, like
> "Citizen
> > Kane," have certainly attained a higher level as art than others,
> but what
> > idiot would argue that because "Citizen Kane" is art and a movie,
> than since
> > "Porky's II" is also a movie, it's art?
>
> Of course nobody would argue that, but what it does suggest is that
> since one movie is recognised as art, it's perfectly acceptable that
> other movies can be art as well. In that respect, there is a case for
> saying that "Porky's II" had the potential to be art. Obviously once
> they've seen the film, nobody in their right mind (perhaps) would
> argue that it actually IS art, but you get my point.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Good point, James. I have a poster of the Museum of Modern Art's
exhibition of Oliver Stone's movies. Maybe soon e-mails will be considered
art. So get that spelling right! - - - Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "james611102" <JamesA1102@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] "Cripple fight!"


> I'm not sure I agree with you here. Boule had to work with editors
> and publishers, as well as printers and book distributors all
> working for a paycheck. So you can hardly say that the book was the
> work of one man or that he wasn't looking for book sales to make a
> profit.
> The Museum of Modern Art here in NY as well as many others regularly
> features films and TV shows, and even commercials sometimes, as art.
>
> --- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> > I know art when I see it! But seriously, art seems to be
> whatever anyone
> > says it is, therefore I say that a novel like "La Planete des
> Singes" is more
> > a piece of art than the 1968 movie based on it. The novel was the
> work of a
> > single man, and written not necessarily with an eye on huge
> profits. The
> > movie was a collaborative effort with all those involved doing so
> for a
> > paycheck. Now if you want to be expansive with your definition of
> art then I
> > guess you can include commercial films as art, but I'm more than a
> little
> > bothered by it. That's not to say I don't appreciate commercial
> films, quite
> > the contrary, I love them, as you all know, but I wouldn't think
> of hanging
> > strips of 35mm copies of POTA in the Louvre.
> >
> > -- Rory
>
>
>
>
>
>

>
>

.html

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 12:51 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] But is it art?

In a message dated 10/19/2002 11:36:12 PM Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

Where's Gene Siskel when we need him?

He's in a grave.
But he's also a Culver man!

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 9:56 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] "Cripple fight!"

In a message dated 10/19/02 7:03:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Here's where I "wow" you with my acumen, Rory, and it involves an explication of
the meanings of the names of the main character (Ulysse) and
his "fallen" comrade (Antelle). Antelle comes from the Greek word "antelios" (from "anti" + "helios"), meaning "opposite the sun" or "against the sun".

The only thing you've "wowed" me with, Patrick, is how much you sound like the father in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"!

The name "Ulysse" is the French form of the Latin form (Ulysses--
actually "Ulixes" in Cassell's dictionary) of the Greek
name "Odysseus" (of Homer's "Odyssey"); the name Odysseus comes from
the Greek word "odyssomai", which means "to be grieved" or "to be
wroth at".

You're a riot, Patrick!  Go see the movie and you'll know what I mean.  By the way, Merou is supposed to mean a grouper, a lowly fish.  What do you make of the juxtaposition of Ulysse with Merou, Patrick?

Ulysse--like Ulysses before him--is the type who would eat the forbidden fruit, acquiring Knowledge EVEN IF IT GETS HIM KICKED OUT OF THE COZY GARDEN/PRISON. Adam was not fully human until he acquired Knowledge, which can ONLY be acquired through rebellion against the dictates of a "master" (God,
in GENESIS, the "Orthodoxy" in the Real World). Do you get it yet, Rory?

Ummmmmm. . . . NO!  What is the point here, Patrick?  Certainly not the one on your head, so what the hell are you talking about?

-- Rory the puzzled

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlWhen Burton tried to make some commentary re: our society with the ape taking the false teeth out, etc. it just looked silly to me.  Didn't work at all.  What do you think?

I have to wonder if Burton is becoming a hack.  I used to make allowances for him.  But since they decided he was the next boy genius and gave him Batman I just don't know.  Sleepyhollow gave me hope for his ability, but lets face it, as much as I tried not to get my hopes up POTA2K1 was disappointing.  I wonder if Burton has the stones to play with the big boys.  There's a little problem in this neck of the woods.  The owner of the Cowboys is a frustrated coach.  And he hires any old chump to take the heat when his boneheaded plays go awry.  I have to wonder if that's what happened here with Zanyuck.  Then again, maybe Burton got too much of a free hand!<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/2002 10:00:09 AM Central Standard Time, JamesA1102@... writes:

Don't be a wallflower. We need more women here

And what happened to Mez?

<.html

.htmlYou can say it about any art form. Every art form has it's "Porky's" that's out for the dough.

Art is Art.  Even cheap souvenirs in Tijuana or kindergarten finger paintings are art.  Some art pieces are just more appreciated than others.  I'd still rather watch Latitude Zero than Citzen Kane.<.html

Attachments :

.html

Maybe soon e-mails will be considered
art. So get that spelling right!

Arty Enough For You?<.html

Hi gamg.
I haven't been around because all my free time lately has been taken up by
my site and the Terminator Countdown.
My web site is at www.skynetsite.com and my e-mail is there on the front
page for anyone who wishes to contact me.

Sorry again, as for further shipping of Battle DVDs (which is all I have
right now because everything else was lost in the Hard Drive crash I spoke
about before) will be delayed. I knew this would happen so right now I'm
just going to have to bite the bullet on this one.

Best and still on the net.
Alex



_____

Tell them I said "hi" James.

Yes, that's what sometimes bothers the hell out of me - often we
don't really know the intent of the film makers and there is NO WAY
we will ever know for sure.

What's worse is when individuals in this group claim they know the
intention of the film makers - when often the film makers probably
didn't even know (or care) too much about it.

It is good to see different arguments presented, when they are
presented as "I conclude ......... because.......". And then we
often disagree, but that's fine too when a reason is presented.

The actual reason the natives took the clothing is probably an
afterthought......the script required Taylor to blend in with the
natives so he needed to be in their garb. The easiest way to do this
was to have some natives steal his clothes. It also added to the
suspense and mystery. So for any of us to conclude the intelligence
of the natives from scrutinising this sequence would, I am sure, give
Rod and Arthur a good laugh at the next seance.

Michael

>>I had a seance last night and spoke with Rod Serling & Arthur

Jacobs
and they agree with you Michael.

PS They also told me the map wasn't sideways.

--- In pota@y..., "Michael Whitty" <whitty@c...> wrote:
> I think they stole them because they were shiny and different.
>
> Regardless of what we all think, is there any genuine way to PROVE
this?

It will be entitled "Sorry about the previous attempt".

Michael

>>>>>I hear "T3" will be great, and also "X-Men 2". X-Men", like

POTA2001 was a
no frills Fox production supervised by Ralph Winter. Bryan Singer
said Fox
wanted him to put on screen only what was necessary. Thus it was kind
of a
nothing movie. Like POTA it was profitable but not nearly as
successful as
it would have been if Fox didn't emasculate it. Fox is apparently
learning
the downfall of corporate art and "X2" is reportedly darker and has a
great
script and enough time to do it right. Her's hoping the same courtesy
will
be extended to "Apes 2". By the way, what would it be called? "A2"?
"POTA2"? - - - Jeff

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 9:56 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] "Cripple fight!"

In a message dated 10/19/02 7:03:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Here's where I "wow" you with my acumen, Rory, and it involves an explication of
the meanings of the names of the main character (Ulysse) and
his "fallen" comrade (Antelle). Antelle comes from the Greek word "antelios" (from "anti" + "helios"), meaning "opposite the sun" or "against the sun".

The only thing you've "wowed" me with, Patrick, is how much you sound like the father in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"!

The name "Ulysse" is the French form of the Latin form (Ulysses--
actually "Ulixes" in Cassell's dictionary) of the Greek
name "Odysseus" (of Homer's "Odyssey"); the name Odysseus comes from
the Greek word "odyssomai", which means "to be grieved" or "to be
wroth at".

You're a riot, Patrick!  Go see the movie and you'll know what I mean.  By the way, Merou is supposed to mean a grouper, a lowly fish.  What do you make of the juxtaposition of Ulysse with Merou, Patrick?

Ulysse--like Ulysses before him--is the type who would eat the forbidden fruit, acquiring Knowledge EVEN IF IT GETS HIM KICKED OUT OF THE COZY GARDEN/PRISON. Adam was not fully human until he acquired Knowledge, which can ONLY be acquired through rebellion against the dictates of a "master" (God,
in GENESIS, the "Orthodoxy" in the Real World). Do you get it yet, Rory?

Ummmmmm. . . . NO!  What is the point here, Patrick?  Certainly not the one on your head, so what the hell are you talking about?

-- Rory the puzzled

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

I couldn't open any of the attachments.

That got me thinking how life is such a mystery and everything is a
challenge.

So now you can call it art - because it elicited an emotional
response (although it was not the response intended by the artist).

Michael

--- LordTZer0@... wrote:

>
>
> > Maybe soon e-mails will be considered
> > art. So get that spelling right!
>
> [Unable to display image]
> [Unable to display image][Unable to display image][Unable to display

image][Unable to display image]

> Arty Enough For You?
>

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

> The actual reason the natives took the clothing is probably an
> afterthought......the script required Taylor to blend in with the
> natives so he needed to be in their garb. The easiest way to

do this

> was to have some natives steal his clothes.
>

I think they just grabbed them and ran and inspected them just
as chimps in the wild would play with an unfamiliar object...

tim

.html

The actual reason the natives took the clothing is probably an
afterthought......the script required Taylor to blend in with the
natives so he needed to be in their garb.  The easiest way to do this
was to have some natives steal his clothes.

I'm sure whatever the original reason for suppresion of the power of speech, by then it had degenerated into instinct.  Same with the stealing of clothes, destruction of equipment, etc...  Anyone who has drive through a baboon troop at Lion Country Safari knows that.

<.html

.html

Martin Landau: "He's a visionary, and the things that interest him are things that interest him

Yeah, and I don't like stuff that sucks.

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/2002 7:13:30 PM Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

I couldn't open any of the attachments.

Try opening it from the group site.
That's worked for me.

<.html

.html      
The answer to the question is

TMC's Word Of Mouth

That's the filler show that says
"Damned good actress"
in the opening sequence.<.html

Attachments :

.htmlHey, check these out.  They're supposed to be available soon.  I've e-mailed the company already to find out how much they'll be.  If they're cheap enough they might be worth picking up.

-- Rory

Click here: SOTA Products


<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 5:59:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LordTZer0@... writes:

Art is Art.  Even cheap souvenirs in Tijuana or kindergarten finger paintings are art.  Some art pieces are just more appreciated than others.  I'd still rather watch Latitude Zero than Citzen Kane.

I've been thinking some more about this.  Just because something entertains you and you think it's good doesn't mean it's art.  I believe you just can't go around calling everything art, otherwise the term looses all meaning.  I think art has to meet a certain criteria, and I think that criteria has to be set by experts.

-- Rory<.html

Are these from rian at Apemania?

Michael

--- Haristas@... wrote:

> Hey, check these out. They're supposed to be available soon. I've

e-mailed

> the company already to find out how much they'll be. If they're

cheap enough

> they might be worth picking up.
>
> -- Rory
>
> <A HREF="http://www.sotatoys.com/products.html">Click here: SOTA

Products</A>

> [Unable to display image]
> [Unable to display image]
> [Unable to display image]
>

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 3:25:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

Here's hoping the same courtesy will be extended to "Apes 2". By the way, what would it be called? "A2"? "POTA2"? - - - Jeff

I was looking in a toy magazine today and they were reviewing some new Halloween costums.  The first one they show is an Attar one.  Their comment:  "Just when we thought we'd forgotten POTA 2001 comes this.  Better to dress yourself up as Tim Burton and light yourself on fire for having destroyed the franchise."

So, do you think the franchise has been destroyed?  Joe Russo has.  I wonder what Eric Greene thinks.  I still think a POTA 2 is a remote possiblity.  Fox blew it.

-- Rory<.html

People have been debating what constitutes art for thousands of years
and we will hardly solve it here.

It is similar to the question "what is the meaning of life?". There
is no real answer.

Michael

--- Haristas@... wrote:

> In a message dated 10/20/02 5:59:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> LordTZer0@... writes:
>
>
> > Art is Art. Even cheap souvenirs in Tijuana or kindergarten

finger

> > paintings are art. Some art pieces are just more appreciated

than others.

> > I'd still rather watch Latitude Zero than Citzen Kane.
> >
>
> I've been thinking some more about this. Just because something

entertains

> you and you think it's good doesn't mean it's art. I believe you

just can't

> go around calling everything art, otherwise the term looses all

meaning. I

> think art has to meet a certain criteria, and I think that criteria

has to be

> set by experts.
>
> -- Rory
>

Attachments :

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com ; Flunkies@...

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 7:26 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Check these out!

Hey, check these out.  They're supposed to be available soon.  I've e-mailed the company already to find out how much they'll be.  If they're cheap enough they might be worth picking up.

-- Rory

Click here: SOTA Products




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 4:07:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

  Don't know what Gene Siskel thought of the original "Apes".

Siskel liked it!<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 4:07:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

  Are you serious? "Merou" means "grouper"?

Check that book I photocopied for you.  Remember?
<.html

They blew the POTA 2001 franchise.

The original franchise fizzed out long ago and is retained by very
few.

The POTA 2001 movie was instrumental in my decision to stop
collecting so aggressively. It also made collectors and potential
collectors run for cover saying "sell, sell, sell!!!". I look at the
collection now and think "look at all the money I wasted". So much
is now available for next to nothing.

Let's see the sales figures on the Medicoms.

They are an excellent design, they are as affordable as you will ever
get them, so will they sell? I suspect not. I think maybe those who
already own them will buy a set to open, and the rest will rot on the
shelves.

Tey should have paced the movies at 2/3 year intervals and kept up
the momentum, but there was a long dry spell when NOTHING was made.
That was when the franchise died.

Is it recoverable?

Let's see.

Michael

--- Haristas@... wrote:

> In a Message dated 10/20/02 3:25:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> veetus@... writes:
>
>
> > Here's hoping the same courtesy will be extended to "Apes 2". By

the way,

> > what would it be called? "A2"? "POTA2"? - - - Jeff
> >
> >
> >
>
> I was looking in a toy magazine today and they were reviewing some

new

> Halloween costums. The first one they show is an Attar one. Their

comment:

> "Just when we thought we'd forgotten POTA 2001 comes this. Better

to dress

> yourself up as Tim Burton and light yourself on fire for having

destroyed the

> franchise."
>
> So, do you think the franchise has been destroyed? Joe Russo has.

I wonder

> what Eric Greene thinks. I still think a POTA 2 is a remote

possiblity. Fox

> blew it.
>
> -- Rory
>

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:44:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

  Where have you been? They've been advertising these forever! - - - Jeff

Well why haven't we heard of them before here?!!!  If you knew about them why haven't you said anything?
<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/02 10:46:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, whitty@... writes:

Are these from Brian at Apemania?

Michael

No, check out the link to the site I gave.  If it was Apemania they'd be selling them there and on eBay.<.html

.htmlIn a message dated 10/20/2002 9:46:03 PM Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

 Don't know what Gene Siskel thought of the original "Apes".

Siskel liked it!

Siskel was the cool one of those two....<.html

.htmlHere's the reply I just got back from SOTA about those mini busts that Jeff never thought to tell us about!


The minibusts are $ 44.95 each.  You can purchase them directly through us.  They are currently in transit between China and the States so it will be another 3-4 weeks before we have them in stock.


<.html

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 7:41 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Apes 2?

In a message dated 10/20/02 3:25:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

Here's hoping the same courtesy will be extended to "Apes 2". By the way, what would it be called? "A2"? "POTA2"? - - - Jeff

I was looking in a toy magazine today and they were reviewing some new Halloween costums.  The first one they show is an Attar one.  Their comment:  "Just when we thought we'd forgotten POTA 2001 comes this.  Better to dress yourself up as Tim Burton and light yourself on fire for having destroyed the franchise."

So, do you think the franchise has been destroyed?  Joe Russo has.  I wonder what Eric Greene thinks.  I still think a POTA 2 is a remote possiblity.  Fox blew it.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 7:50 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Check these out!

In a message dated 10/20/02 10:44:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

  Where have you been? They've been advertising these forever! - - - Jeff

Well why haven't we heard of them before here?!!!  If you knew about them why haven't you said anything?


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

<.html

How do you tell if toys are successful, anyway? I see the supposed hot
sellers like "Harry Potter" and "Spiderman" clogging the aisles, too. Is
there a website that has toy sales figures like they do for movies? - - -
Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <whitty@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Apes 2?


> They blew the POTA 2001 franchise.
>
> The original franchise fizzed out long ago and is retained by very
> few.
>
> The POTA 2001 movie was instrumental in my decision to stop
> collecting so aggressively. It also made collectors and potential
> collectors run for cover saying "sell, sell, sell!!!". I look at the
> collection now and think "look at all the money I wasted". So much
> is now available for next to nothing.
>
> Let's see the sales figures on the Medicoms.
>
> They are an excellent design, they are as affordable as you will ever
> get them, so will they sell? I suspect not. I think maybe those who
> already own them will buy a set to open, and the rest will rot on the
> shelves.
>
> Tey should have paced the movies at 2/3 year intervals and kept up
> the momentum, but there was a long dry spell when NOTHING was made.
> That was when the franchise died.
>
> Is it recoverable?
>
> Let's see.
>
> Michael
>
> --- Haristas@... wrote:
> > In a Message dated 10/20/02 3:25:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > veetus@... writes:
> >
> >
> > > Here's hoping the same courtesy will be extended to "Apes 2". By
> the way,
> > > what would it be called? "A2"? "POTA2"? - - - Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I was looking in a toy magazine today and they were reviewing some
> new
> > Halloween costums. The first one they show is an Attar one. Their
> comment:
> > "Just when we thought we'd forgotten POTA 2001 comes this. Better
> to dress
> > yourself up as Tim Burton and light yourself on fire for having
> destroyed the
> > franchise."
> >
> > So, do you think the franchise has been destroyed? Joe Russo has.
> I wonder
> > what Eric Greene thinks. I still think a POTA 2 is a remote
> possiblity. Fox
> > blew it.
> >
> > -- Rory
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>