> Good for you. Nothing wrong with that.
> I welcome any and all discussions based on facts.

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 6:09 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Chimpettes

I didn't mean it to be a name for all of female chimpdom.  Blame Pentaclese for that.  I was describing one female chimp, who was being very coquettish.  But that aside, the suffix is simply a diminutive.  Just as Suzette is a diminutive of Suzanne or Janet is a diminutive of Jane. If I call Mike, Mikey -- I may not mean it to be derogatory -- if he takes it that way, that's up to him. 


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kassidy Rae" <valwp@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Chimpettes


> > Good for you. Nothing wrong with that.
> > I welcome any and all discussions based on facts.
>
> ++You're about to drive me crazy, T.... don't ask me why.
> Kass
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kassidy Rae" <valwp@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:01 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: new DVD


> I'd love to see such a project underway. Did you see on the other
> group, there was a message from Libraryape about how some of the
> movie producers were courting the fans, trying to get input? Flying
> them out to screen new movies and such? Hey I've got a website.
> Maybe they'll fly me out to see the next POTA? Yeah buddy.
>
> Seriously, maybe Fox is ready to pull their head out of the sand and
> give POTA another try?
>
>
> Kass
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Kassidy Rae <valwp@y...> wrote:
>
> Let's see. We're on the no-holds barred group, right. I've been
bored out of my skull over this horse shit. By the fucking way, I'm
a Democrat, a Liberal, and a feminist. Take that and stuff it.
> Kassidy
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, <veetus@e...> wrote:
> Anthony at POTADG was contacted by a production company doing
extras for a "35th Anniversary" DVD of the first film. Just thought
I'd let you guys know something's up. - - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: LordTZer0@A...
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 6:09 PM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Chimpettes
>
>
> I didn't mean it to be a name for all of female chimpdom. Blame
Pentaclese for that. I was describing one female chimp, who was
being very coquettish. But that aside, the suffix is simply a
diminutive. Just as Suzette is a diminutive of Suzanne or Janet is a
diminutive of Jane. If I call Mike, Mikey -- I may not mean it to be
derogatory -- if he takes it that way, that's up to him.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, <veetus@e...> wrote:
> If this is in the works they may have decided to go for a new
movie. Maybe
> because of the "King Kong" thing. Just a few months ago they said
they
> weren't going to do a new DVD. - - - Jeff
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kassidy Rae" <valwp@y...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:01 PM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: new DVD
>
>
> > I'd love to see such a project underway. Did you see on the other
> > group, there was a message from Libraryape about how some of the
> > movie producers were courting the fans, trying to get input?
Flying
> > them out to screen new movies and such? Hey I've got a website.
> > Maybe they'll fly me out to see the next POTA? Yeah buddy.
> >
> > Seriously, maybe Fox is ready to pull their head out of the sand
and
> > give POTA another try?
> >
> >
> > Kass
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >

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

From: Kassidy Rae

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 4:02 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] new DVD

Who the heck are they? Who's their contact at Fox?  Is it just for the original movie and or all of them?  What all are they planning to put on this dvd?  Any more projects they've heard of?

Kass

---

> In a message dated 6/28/03 11:26:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Taylor401306@c... writes:
>
>
> > WB is also doing a "Tarzan" TV series this fall with Australian

----- Original Message -----
From: <veetus@...>
To: <PotaDG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [PotaDG] Re: Age Comment


> I'm not saying as a kid I was going, " Note how this parallels our
> involvement in Vietnam, here. Superb". But even then I knew it was
> portraying the way people treat each other, treat animals, the way people
> can be "mean". Don't get me wrong, the apes looked cool and were the
> highlight. I wasn't going to those movies as a news program. But I got
some
> of that, and especially "Escape" hit me hard.
> But as an adult I just can't grasp the idea that people can watch at
least
> the first one and not see something more. The Statue of Liberty ending is
> just a cool surprise (as Richard Zanuck considered it), huh? To each his
> own. - - - Jeff
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@...>
> To: <PotaDG@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 5:44 AM
> Subject: [PotaDG] Re: Age Comment
>
>
> > I saw Beneath when I was in grade school, but obviously older than
> > some of you all. It seems to me that Nixon had just become
> > president. There was a lot of talk during the campaign that he
> > would be the one to set off nuclear bombs that would destroy the
> > world. The bomb stuff was all too real to me and very scary. There
> > were kids in vietnam. I had friends who had sisters waiting for
> > their boyfriends/husbands to return. I loved the Apes, but Beneath
> > was WAY TOO DEEP for me! I was already plenty frightened.
> >
> > For those who thought Escape was too "sweet"... I really appreciate
> > that they made that movie.
> >
> > I assume that an Apes movie made today would contain elements of
> > world economics, random terrorism, references to the environment,
> > endangered species, ethical dilemmas concerning genetic manipulation
> > and medical discoveries, global instability, and social problems. I
> > would like to think that there would be less of a racial bent and
> > more of a [world-wide] "political groups" concern. And I would hope
> > that the kids wouldn't see that stuff in the story.
> >
> > --Helen
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, "John O." <jspy@w...> wrote:
> > Does everyone else view the movies with the human
> > > parallels in mind, or do they just see apes?
> > >
> > > John O.
> > >
> > > --- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, <veetus@e...> wrote:
> > > Maybe the originals are too "preachy" for this Brittany Spears
> > > world. - - - Jeff
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > PotaDG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PotaDG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

From: Michael Whitty

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 10:13 PM

Subject: RE: [Planet of the Apes] New DVD

Well done Jeff, but they are wanking themselves if they don’t think they need to see Joe Farrell’s stuff!

 

Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: veetus@... [veetus@...]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:18 PM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com; the gang
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] New DVD

 

  I heard back from Creative Domain, the DVD people. Basically, they said
thanks but no thanks. As I said, my collection is mostly the new stuff and
they said they were looking for the old stuff. They also said they had
enough collectibles without going to my contacts (Eric Greene, Joe Farrell,
etc.). As to my questions, they said they were "not at liberty" to discuss
them. So, fine. As long as they do a good DVD I don't care. At least I got
my comments in, especially that fans want the unused footage (if they care).
Anyway, I was a good soldier. - - - Jeff



----- Original Message -----
From: <veetus@...>
To: <PotaDG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [PotaDG] Re: Age Comment


>   I'm not saying as a kid I was going, " Note how this parallels our
> involvement in Vietnam, here. Superb". But even then I knew it was
> portraying the way people treat each other, treat animals, the way people
> can be "mean". Don't get me wrong, the apes looked cool and were the
> highlight. I wasn't going to those movies as a news program. But I got
some
> of that, and especially "Escape" hit me hard.
>   But as an adult I just can't grasp the idea that people can watch at
least
> the first one and not see something more. The Statue of Liberty ending is
> just a cool surprise (as Richard Zanuck considered it), huh? To each his
> own. - - - Jeff
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sand_hill_school" <sand_hill_school@...>
> To: <PotaDG@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 5:44 AM
> Subject: [PotaDG] Re: Age Comment
>
>
> > I saw Beneath when I was in grade school, but obviously older than
> > some of you all.  It seems to me that Nixon had just become
> > president.  There was a lot of talk during the campaign that he
> > would be the one to set off nuclear bombs that would destroy the
> > world.  The bomb stuff was all too real to me and very scary.  There
> > were kids in vietnam.  I had friends who had sisters waiting for
> > their boyfriends/husbands to return.  I loved the Apes, but Beneath
> > was WAY TOO DEEP for me!  I was already plenty frightened.
> >
> > For those who thought Escape was too "sweet"...  I really appreciate
> > that they made that movie.
> >
> > I assume that an Apes movie made today would contain elements of
> > world economics, random terrorism, references to the environment,
> > endangered species, ethical dilemmas concerning genetic manipulation
> > and medical discoveries, global instability, and social problems.  I
> > would like to think that there would be less of a racial bent and
> > more of a [world-wide] "political groups" concern.  And I would hope
> > that the kids wouldn't see that stuff in the story.
> >
> > --Helen
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, "John O." <jspy@w...> wrote:
> > Does everyone else view the movies with the human
> > > parallels in mind, or do they just see apes?
> > >
> > > John O.
> > >
> > > --- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, <veetus@e...> wrote:
> > >  Maybe the originals are too "preachy" for this Brittany Spears
> > > world. - - - Jeff
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > PotaDG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

> >
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PotaDG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
CyberOne E-Mail Spam and Virus Protection Service and is believed
to be clean from viruses. CyberOne accepts no responsibility for content
of messages in transit through our service.
--
Unsolicited commercial bulk messages (SPAM) have been marked with
a {Spam?} tag in a subject line enabling you to filter them out
by /><.html

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 4:48 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] New DVD

In a message dated 7/1/03 1:22:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time, veetus@... writes:

Actually, they said they are sorting through the collectors they have and if they need more stuff from my collectors they'll get back to me. Once again, though, they don't seem to want input from the fans. - - - Jeff

Well, why don't you give us their e-mail address so we can make sure they hear us anyway?  What have you got to lose?

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: kidro85@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 6:55 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] New DVD

I agree , the entire e-group should have this e-mail and let them hear us. Cant hurt, its not like to many e-mails will cause them to stop making this POTA DVD, plus who knows maybe a large amount of e-mails will lead to something else?
Just an idea
Tony
In a message dated 7/1/2003 4:48:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

    Actually, they said they are sorting through the collectors they have and if they

need more stuff from my collectors they'll get back to me. Once again, though, they don't seem to want input from the fans. - - - Jeff

Well, why don't you give us their e-mail address so we can make sure they hear us anyway?  What have you got to lose?

-- Rory

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 10:52 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] New DVD

In a message dated 7/1/03 9:59:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kidro85@... writes:

I agree , the entire e-group should have this e-mail and let them hear us. Cant hurt, its not like to many e-mails will cause them to stop making this POTA DVD, plus who knows maybe a large amount of e-mails will lead to something else?
Just an idea
Tony

Well, it seems like they contacted Krueger and the other by phone.  We need the phone number.  A call to it might yield a e-mail address.

-- Rory

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: Michael Whitty

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:39 PM

Subject: RE: [Planet of the Apes] What a month!.

It just isn’t fair is it?

 

-----Original Message-----
From: LordTZer0@... [LordTZer0@...]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 6:06 AM
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] What a month!.

 

In a message dated 7/1/2003 7:57:42 AM Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Just don’t give it to T….I think he is some kind of stalker in real life.  He keeps writing to the DG saying he is in love with me, then wonders why I have to delete his posts!

See, this is what I'm talking about.  Whitty can fling whatever insult he wants with no problem.  But he deletes whatever I write back.  That is why I double post.  This response will no doubt be deleted as well, for no good reason at all, even though it's no more derogatory or off topic than his own.

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

--

</ font />

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

> In a message dated 7/1/2003 11:41:53 PM Central Standard Time,
> veetus@e... writes:
>
> > Hey you guys, take this private or I'm going to kick you BOTH

> > Jeff
>
> Don't worry . . .
> We did. And it's just getting interesting too.
> Sorry I can't tell you more, but it's private.

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

From: LordTZer0@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:43 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] DVD Spoilers

Has anyone noticed that even the selection menu on the DVD has the final Statue of Liberty scene on it -- so if you have friends who may not have seen it, and you don't show them the cover, they'll still have a nice big spoiler right there on the screen.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 3:49 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Creative Domain and the new DVD

Well, I had a short but sweet conversation with someone at Creative Domain today.  The company does the graphic designs for movie-related websites and DVD menus and that's what they'll be doing for this 35th Anniversary DVD of PLANET.  They don't decide the contents of special features and said Fox has only just begun to gather the materials.  They wanted to see what some local area collectors had only as an aid for their menu designers, just to get ideas, but that's all.

So, it's still Fox that you want to write to, to make what would be your desires for special features heard.  So, if you're a really big APES fans keep writing those letters.  They seem to have an affect on the execs there since we're at least getting this new DVD edition.

-- Rory

Please write to FOX demanding Special Edition DVDs of all the original films. Write your letters and send them to:

Michael Dunn, Exec. VP. Mktg. &; Sales
20th Century Fox Home Entertainment Inc.
2121 Avenue of the Stars, 25th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90067-5010

Peter Staddon
20th Century Fox Home Entertainment Inc.
2121 Avenue of the Stars
Los Angeles, CA 90067-5010




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 6:34 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] What Planet Are We On?

Here's an editoral from the AMC website.  The movie channel is currently showing PLANET -- and they cut it!  Plus it's pan&scan!  Thank the Lawgiver for DVD!

-- Rory

What Planet Are We On?

Why are the Planet of the Apes movies so darned popular still?

By David Rieff 


Taylor and his astronauts get their bearings, Planet of the Apes (1968)

The Planet of the Apes series became a science fiction cult classic from the moment the first of the five films was released in 1968. Charlton Heston's portrayal of a time-traveling U. S. astronaut from the present who arrives in the future to find that the world is now ruled by apes, and that it is the remaining human population that is treated as mute, inferior beasts, was instantly compelling to a '60s audience. Why? Well, Heston finds his whole world has turned upside down and audiences felt much the same way; in their own time and place, all values and certainties had come up for questioning. You'd think, though, that the strong political message of the Apes films might seem hopelessly dated today. And after all, movies with powerful political overtones are like novels with too much contemporary slang; they rarely age well. When they do, it is usually because a new generation of viewers finds an additional message from the one that seemed most obvious before. Nuclear war then, as it were, ethnic and religious strife now.

The initial picture, Planet of the Apes (1968) was released as the Cold War, Richard Nixon and the anti-Vietnam War movement were nearing their high-water marks. When Charlton Heston demands of one of his ape captors, "How in hell did this upside-down world get started?" he might as well have been a befuddled suburban parent wondering why his kids were burning the flag and smoking pot. And yet the premise of the film is that the old values led to no good, since, as Heston realizes, the reason the apes have come to rule over and passionately hate homo sapiens is that human civilization-not some other alien culture, as he'd assumed-has destroyed itself in a nuclear apocalypse.

In the last, justly-famous scene of Planet of the Apes, Heston discovers mankind's fate. He's made his escape from his simian captors, aided by two non-mainstream, "humane" ape scientists, wonderfully played by Roddy McDowall and Kim Hunter, who are clearly meant to represent our own Sixties counterculture. But as Heston rides into what the apes call "The Forbidden Zone," he comes upon the Statue of Liberty, half-submerged along the shoreline. Falling to his knees, Heston pounds his fist on the damp sand. "You finally really did it!" he cries. "You maniacs! You blew it all to hell!"

Having been hunted and caged by the apes, suddenly their hatred becomes clear to him-and to the audience. The words of Dr. Zaius, the ape scientist, who warned him that if he went into The Forbidden Zone he wouldn't like what he found, now ring true.

We are, however, a long way from the era in which Serling worked and in which Planet of the Apes and its sequels were conceived. Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970), the second installment, ends with nuclear Armageddon. Why, then, particularly since the technology of sci-fi filmmaking has grown much richer over the past thirty-five years, does the Planet of the Apes series continue to seem so compelling and so fresh? There are two reasons, I think. The first is that, in an age of often-upbeat Star Wars-ian science fiction where nobody really dies and the force is always with Luke Skywalker, the pessimism of the Apes films is arresting. Throughout all five, the moral is consistent. The writers seem to agree with the poet W. H. Auden, who said, "we must love one another or die," but they do not seem to be willing to bet all that much that we will make it. In each film, the ability of individuals to get along is swept away by the madness of leaders and mobs.

In the third and fourth films, Escape From the Planet of the Apes (1971) and Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972), where the premise is reversed and two apes travel back in time to the human-dominated earth from which Heston came, this theme is particularly evident. This world, in which very few people can resist the madness of hatred, is not far from Rodney King's Los Angeles, Bosnia, Rwanda, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict-and other depressingly familiar examples of recent all-against-all wars.

Another, related theme which strikes the contemporary viewer is that of ethnic cleansing. For in each of the Apes films, the efforts of humans and simians to coexist is thwarted by those who believe, as the ape minister of science in Planet of the Apes tells Charlton Heston, that "the only good human is a dead human," and that "the sooner he is exterminated the better." Doubtless, the scriptwriters were thinking of Vietnam. But what comes to mind now is Bosnia or Rwanda. Because for all their entertainment value, the Planet of the Apes series shrewdly and bitterly anatomizes the irrationality and fear that in the past decade has led, not once but several times, to genocide.

It would be absurd to suggest that the Planet of the Apes films were great art; due partly to slashed shooting budgets, the effect had begun to pale in the last three entries, particularly the last, Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973). But their combination of appealing Hollywood pop characterization and deep political shrewdness meant that they endured-while other films that seemed far more serious at the time have been long forgotten.









Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

> "The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for

>
> OK, the big movie this weekend is "Terminator 3". I saw it, I

> Of course, this isn't the place for a review (anyone interested

----- Original Message -----
From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 1:06 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: "Terminator 3" timeline and POTA


> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, <veetus@e...> wrote:
> > "The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for
> ourselves". - - - mantra in the "Terminator" films
> >
> > OK, the big movie this weekend is "Terminator 3". I saw it, I
> liked it, though as filmmaking it's not as grand as the first two.
> But with this kind of material, I think James Cameron is a genius so
> that's not a big criticism. "T3" is a lot of fun and POTA fans might
> enjoy it.
> > Of course, this isn't the place for a review (anyone interested
> in my thoughts on the film can catch them at the filmemporium group).
> What I wanted to mention was the ending. POTA fans often debate
> whether there is such a thing as fate, or whether the future can be
> changed. So have the "Terminator" films, such as in the quote above.
> I don't want to give anything away, let's just say the "T3" ending
> plays into the debate. It's a bold move for such an expensive picture
> and I applaud the filmmakers for the way they decided to go. I think
> it's something POTA fans will appreciate, so if you're looking for a
> movie this weekend, why not T3? - - - Jeff
>
> *** Lemme second you on that, Jeff. I, too, thought "T3" was good--
> the ending especially. Even though they never do exactly explain or
> prove WHY it is that a certain future event is "inevitable" (and how
> could Mr. Reprogrammed Obsolete Old-model Terminator KNOW this?),
> it's nice that they're addressing a similar theme that we POTA
> junkies have been debating for 3 decades.
>
> Remember in the film version of "CONTACT" when Jodie Foster's
> character is asked by that Senate panel what question she would ask
> advanced aliens if she got the chance? Her question would be: "How
> did you survive the Nuclear Age?" (or words to that effect). Humanity
> is at that stage in its development where its Science has afforded it
> the ability to destroy itself, yet the moral/ethical maturity of our
> species is still far, far off. How does ANY scientifically advanced
> species (Earthling or other) manage to survive that critical period?
>
> The "TERMINATOR" movies don't really depict the long-range outcome of
> Humanity in its struggle with this. We know there's a big-ass Nuke
> War, caused by an artificial machine intelligence making a split-
> second decision to eradicate its own creators (us, Mankind), followed
> by a protracted war of the remnants of Mankind versus the Machines.
> We also know that the future leader, John Connor, ultimately leads
> Mankind to victory over those machines, and no matter how many bad-
> ass Terminators are sent back through Time to change that outcome, he
> still winds up existing, surviving, and kicking machine ass.
>
> But what about AFTER that moment? We never do get to see a Time
> Traveler from FURTHER down the timeline showing up, just to let
> people know that it all ends up peachy. Perhaps traveling through
> Time is considered so much a part of the problem (of Fate and all
> that) that Mankind bans it--and, perhaps, considers it to be
> inherently worthless, since the 1st movie depicts the Machines trying
> to use Time-Travel to defeat John Connor (by killing him before he's
> ever conceived)... yet it is due to their having sent the 1st Arnold
> Terminator back through Time that prompts John Connor to send Kyle
> Reese back also, in order to safeguard his mom, Sarah... and, of
> course, this eventually leads to Reese impregnating her--thus causing
> the Machines' nemesis (John Connor) to come into being in the first
> place! If the Machines had not sent Arnold back through Time, then
> paradoxically John Connor would never have been conceived by the man
> sent back through Time AFTERWARDS to save her!
>
> What is the "TERMINATOR"-universe like in the farther-off Future,
> after the defeat of the Machines? Does Mankind go back to a pre-
> technological "luddite" way of existing? I could see John Connor's
> people banning advanced Tech, just to prevent another "rise of the
> Machines". Or, it could just be the non-human AI, the machine mind,
> which is banned, just as there are movements to ban human cloning
> (etc) by people concerned with the moral implications of these
> cutting-edge technologies.
>
> POTA, especially the TV series, as I've harped on before, definitely
> promulgates a pro-Science/Technology viewpoint... within limits. In
> episode after episode, Virdon & Burke use their 20th Century know-how
> to better the lives of the peoples (both Ape and Human) they meet,
> yet they fight against the MISUSE of Science--such as the Glider-plus-
> Fragmentation Grenades plot to kill off the High Council, or the use
> of Chemical Weapons by "the Liberator". Interestingly, Virdon & Burke
> aren't above PRETENDING to use a weapon in order to effect an escape
> (as in "THE TYRANT", when Virdon helps Galen & Burke to get away from
> Urko by using an explosive... without its lit fuse connected), but
> they never actually DO use technology to kill any of their
> antagonists.
>
> When the (primarily) U.S. forces did those "surgical" strikes against
> Baghdad a few months ago, rather than just carpet-bombing 'em all
> back to the Stone Age, it somewhat reminded me of the morality
> expressed by Virdon & Burke, who (at least to me) represent the Best
> and the Brightest of what America stands for... or at least is
> SUPPOSED to stand for, even when it falls short of the standard it
> set for itself in its Founding. And now, as our forces are still over
> there, trying to get Iraq back on its feet, they're still enduring
> enemy action--with almost 1 soldier a day getting killed by Baath
> party Saddam loyalists, who also are sabotaging the fix-it-up
> efforts.
>
> Hmm... back to POTA & the TERMINATOR sagas. What with the whining
> over the WMDs that haven't yet been found in Iraq, I'm reminded of
> how in the "TERMINATOR" movies it is the willingness of a certain
> mentality (a "machine-mind") to use Nukes against its perceived enemy
> (i.e. "Man") that is the watershed event in the conflict between Man
> and Machine. Prez Bush's primary motivation for waging "Operation
> Iraqi Freedom" was to prevent Saddam Hussein's regime from either
> using WMDs itself against its enemies (i.e. Israel and the USA), or
> passing along WMDs like a baton in a relay race to a terrorist
> organization (like Al Qaeda or Hamas) so that THEY can use them
> against their common enemy. Does it bother me that we haven't found
> any WMDs in Iraq yet? You bet, but not for the same reasons that this
> administration's critics cite; because of the recalcitrance of some
> of our alleged "allies" (i.e. Turkey), we didn't control the entire
> Iraqi border during the war, which means that Saddam might've been
> able to sneak those WMDs across the border into a neighboring
> country, like Syria for instance. And then his loyalists would laugh
> at our failure to find the weapons, pretending that they never
> had 'em in the first place, all the while knowing that their like-
> minded neighbors are keeping 'em on ice until we eventually leave
> Iraq.
>
> In the end, if WMDs ARE used against us, it won't be so different
> from the scenarios we've seen in the POTA and TERMINATOR sagas: it is
> Mankind itself which creates the weapons that are used to destroy us.
> As Arnold said in T2: "It is in your nature to destroy yourselves."
> We POTA fans should also remember Cornelius' line to Zira after Lewis
> Dixon tells her to "Be yourself": "Your BETTER self, Zira!"
>
> Humanity has to learn how to be its "better self". But it's a rivalry
> between a Dark Ages religion-based outlook (militant Islam and the
> like) and an outlook that grew out of the Ages of Enlightenment and
> Reason--the American ideals about a society whose government was
> instituted for several distinct purposes, one of which was "to form a
> MORE PERFECT union". They didn't create a perfect society, but they
> did create a system whereby society could improve itself bit by bit,
> generation after generation, amending its own constitution to better
> fit the needs of a changing world. Not a perfect society, but a
> PERFECTIBLE society.
>
> I don't see ANY religion-based society anywhere in the world
> (especially one based on Islam) that comes anywhere close to
> Perfection. I shudder to think of how much more unlivable the world
> would be if intolerant zealots imposed their authoritarian idea of
> society on freedom-loving peoples. Some pollsters say that Islam
> is "the fastest growing religion" in the world. And look at what a
> great job they've done! Iran... Syria... Lebanon... Afghanistan...
> Sudan...
>
> We don't have to look too far to find the true-life equivalent to the
> Planet of the Apes. For all our faults, America/Americanism is still
> the best hope for Humanity's future. We'll probably never reach
> Perfection, but we've got a system that improves upon itself--at
> least when the informed electorate gets off its collective ass and
> works at it. The POTA saga shows the devastating results of what
> would happen if America LOST its way and betrayed its own founding
> principles (i.e. reinstituting Slavery--120 years after having fought
> a "civil" war that was in part meant to END that institution). In the
> late 1960s, America was in turmoil, with a War in Vietnam that most
> citizens didn't support, with Race riots erupting, showing just how
> separate-yet-unequal our bifurcated society was. It was a time to
> make the RIGHT choices, to make the Future BETTER than the wretched
> Past and the conflicted Present... and "POTA" showed what would
> happen if the WRONG choices were made instead.
>
> When Claire Danes' dad, in "T3", presses the "YES" button to activate
> SKYNET, effectively taking Humanity "out-of-the-loop" as he says, he
> makes the proverbial wrong choice. Before he dies he compares his
> action to Pandora opening that legendary box. Kinda reminds me of
> Taylor pressing down that trigger at the end of "BENEATH".
>
> Patrick
>
> P.S. Hi, Wendy; got your email & thought I'd say "hi" here.
>
> P.P.S. Hey, T, how's this for startin' another POTA-based discussion?
>
> As far as your on-going bitch-slappin' fest with MW, hell, I know
> exactly how you feel. I, too, was told ("warned"?) not to send him
> any emails anymore, as he would consider it "harassment". And, hey,
> it's not as if I haven't "vented" about him/James/POTADG on this site
> either, so I hope you don't think I'm comin' down on you for using
> this POTA site to vent some steam regarding the "soap opera" in
> question. As for that POTADG site, I'd recommend not being a part of
> it if the censorial nature of it rubs you the wrong way. Even though
> I was begrudgingly offered an opportunity to join it, I just couldn't
> bring myself to do so, especially after they booted Rory out--and,
> hey, after all, it was I who was to "blame" for them forming their
> own exclusive POTADG site (supposedly, there were some who couldn't
> stand lil ol' me & they wanted a site of their own where I wouldn't
> be welcome to participate). To its credit, THIS Yahoo POTA site ain't
> never booted anybody out for any reason; some folk've jumped ship cuz
> they didn't dig it, but there's a difference between that and being
> kicked out.
>
> Mike recently joined the "Film Emporium" chat site, and I welcomed
> him there despite our past disagreements, but the recents posts on
> this site have made me sigh yet again: "I'm glad he ain't in control
> of THIS chat site!" Let him play the censor all he wants on his-&-
> James' "splitter"-group. They can't censor you or me or anybody on
> THIS site, no matter how much they'd like to.
>
> Nuff said.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>
> "The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves".=
> - - - mantra in the "Terminator" films
>
> OK, the big movie this weekend is "Terminator 3". I saw it, I liked it, t=
> hough as filmmaking it's not as grand as the first two. But with this kind =
> of material, I think James Cameron is a genius so that's not a big criticis=
> m. "T3" is a lot of fun and POTA fans might enjoy it.
> Of course, this isn't the place for a review (anyone interested in my tho=
> ughts on the film can catch them at the filmemporium group). What I wanted =
> to mention was the ending. POTA fans often debate whether there is such a t=
> hing as fate, or whether the future can be changed. So have the "Terminator=
> " films, such as in the quote above. I don't want to give anything away, le=
> t's just say the "T3" ending plays into the debate. It's a bold move for su=
> ch an expensive picture and I applaud the filmmakers for the way they decid=
> ed to go. I think it's something POTA fans will appreciate, so if you're lo=
> oking for a movie this weekend, why not T3? - - - Jeff
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, LordTZer0@A... wrote:

<<< Has anyone noticed that the mutant with the glasses isn't in the
cathedral scene. I guess it's just too much trouble to take off the
glasses, take off the mask, put the glasses back on.>>>


This is not true.. He IS in that scene... They show him several times
actually... While his glasses may not be on his mask when he's taking
it off, Caspay IS in the Cathederal scene...

>
> I myself was the victim of someone taking out of context quotes from a=20
> private email and maliciously posting them in that group to stir up trouble=
> , so I=20
> know how Michael must feel.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Melkor <melkor@e...> wrote:
>
> I was at the comic shop the other day and I saw that Dark Horse
> has reprinted the entire Marvel run of Star Wars comics in a
> 6 volume graphic novel set. Pretty neat. They already did that
> for the newspaper strips and also colorized them.
>
> Now I am wondering, if they did it for Star Wars why not POTA?
> For starters they could reprint the movie adaptations. Another
> company (Adventure?) has already reprinted the adaptations for
> the first three movies, but we've never seen reprints of the
> adaptations for CONQUEST and BATTLE (which are the most interesting
> in my view). Also, if Dark Horse did them all in color people
> who had the earlier reprints would buy them again. The first two
> adapations were already colorized by Marvel in the comics.
>
> Another thought: How great would it be if someone collected all of
the Marvel
> magazine articles to reprint inside a book. That's a book I would
buy even
> though I have all the magazines.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Melkor <melkor@e...> wrote:
>
> I was at the comic shop the other day and I saw that Dark Horse
> has reprinted the entire Marvel run of Star Wars comics in a
> 6 volume graphic novel set. Pretty neat. They already did that
> for the newspaper strips and also colorized them.
>
> Now I am wondering, if they did it for Star Wars why not POTA?
> For starters they could reprint the movie adaptations. Another
> company (Adventure?) has already reprinted the adaptations for
> the first three movies, but we've never seen reprints of the
> adaptations for CONQUEST and BATTLE (which are the most interesting
> in my view). Also, if Dark Horse did them all in color people
> who had the earlier reprints would buy them again. The first two
> adapations were already colorized by Marvel in the comics.
>
> Another thought: How great would it be if someone collected all of
the Marvel magazine articles to reprint inside a book. That's a book
I would buy even though I have all the magazines.
>
> --
> Get yourself kicked out of the DG group without even posting there
in two easy steps...
>
> Step 1: Quote in this group what the owner posted about Trouble
Makers in order to get put on strict moderation without notice where
posts have taken up to 5 hours to go through.
> Step 2: Report in this group that you were threatened by the owner
and put on strict moderation for Step 1.

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

From: Taylor401306@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 5:30 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] CGI vs. Live stunts

In a message dated 7/8/2003 6:31:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, pota@yahoogroups.com writes:

They survived it because they were computer simulations.

Not all of them. I watched the "Making Of T3" feature on E & saw them staging some of the stunts,& the actress who played the new Terminator had the bruises to show it wasn't all CGI.   Live Stunts vs. CGI. The difference between a good action movie & a great one.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

>From: LordTZer0@...
>And I'm 99% certain that this whole thing was cooked up he and Whittless to
>concoct a reason to kick me off. I admit stirring things up when it got
>dull,
>which was quite often, but nothing to get kicked off for. If Mikey got his
>feelings hurt its his own fault. I was just trading a few barbs when he got
>nasty -- nothing that hadn't happened a million times before. I wouldn't
>go back
>now for a lifetime subscription to the Sacred Scrolls! To bad we can't bar
>them from this group. But then again I wouldn't stoop to their level.

> In a message dated 7/6/2003 3:06:38 PM Central Standard Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
> Even though they never do exactly explain or prove WHY it is that a

>
> Actually they did. Skynet was not a single defense computer that

----- Original Message -----
From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:13 PM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: T3 *******SPOILER*******


> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, LordTZer0@A... wrote:
> > In a message dated 7/6/2003 3:06:38 PM Central Standard Time,
> > patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
> >
> > Even though they never do exactly explain or prove WHY it is that a
> certain future event is "inevitable" (and how could Mr. Reprogrammed
> Obsolete Old-model Terminator KNOW this?),
> >
> > Actually they did. Skynet was not a single defense computer that
> could be destroyed to avert Doomsday. It was software that combined
> with the virus to copy itself to computers in offices, schools and
> homes around the globe. There was no way to stop it in time. So
> destroying this chip or that mainframe had no effect except to put
> the date of Doomsday back a bit. At least that's what I got out of
> it.
>
> *** Hmmm... And yet, the Terminatrix DID change the past somewhat by
> successfully murdering some of John Connor's future lieutenants. In
> the original "TERMINATOR", the self-aware SKYNET that causes the up-
> and-coming nuclear war had no need of any computer virus infestation
> to jump-start it. And THAT "judgment day" was cancelled by the
> actions of Sarah & John Connor and the 2nd "good" Arnold Terminator
> in "T2". If the Terminatrix hadn't gone back through Time to unleash
> that computer virus, AND if Claire Danes' dad hadn't also pushed the
> button to activate SKYNET, taking humans "out-of-the-loop" as he
> calls it, then the nukes wouldn't have gone off at the end of "T3".
>
> "Judgment Day" is "inevitable" ONLY if Mr. Button-pusher was
> somehow "fated" to press that button. But he HAD a choice--the
> decision was his to make. Sadly, like Pandora, he made the wrong
> choice. However, the activation of SKYNET that Reese tells Sarah
> about in "T1" was a DIFFERENT activation of a DIFFERENT Skynet,
> without any computer virus in the mix. The computer virus served,
> primarily (and this is what *I* got out of it!), as a means to freak
> out the Defense establishment, since it took all their systems
> offline; the only way to get them all back ON-line was to activate
> Skynet--or so they believed. But it was Skynet itself which
> became "self-aware" and decided Humanity's fate in a microsecond, to
> quote Reese. The hesitancy to activate Skynet was overcome by the
> virus-infestation, which the Military big-wigs thought would give
> them back control over their own Defense systems.
>
> Did the computer virus somehow also give that now-"self aware" Skynet
> its anti-human agenda? Perhaps. Perhaps SKYNET would've decided
> Humanity's nuclear fate regardless. But the Terminatrix would've had
> to know what SKYNET's programming was, in full, before the Future
> machines could tailor-make a computer virus capable of hijacking its
> functioning. I don't see how the Terminatrix could've known this
> beforehand, before she goes back through Time to fulfill her mission.
>
> Man, but these Time-Travel/Paradox stories can run rings around the
> noggin!
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

From: Kassidy Rae

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

Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 7:11 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Fwd: Sci Fi auction - July 31, 2003

Note: forwarded message attached.

---