>
>
> In a message dated 12/28/2005 5:38:48 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> apefan23@y... writes:
>
> Try GORILLA GLUE!!!!!
>
>
>
> Good point!
> It's not only ape-ropriate
> it's tougher then anything out there.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> OK, who's going to fork over the $$ for this? How big a fan of the
original
> are you?
>
> http://www.sideshowtoy.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?item=7181
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, pota@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> This email message is a notification to let you know that
> a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the pota
> group.
>
> File : /ResinUrsus/Ursus 03.jpg
> Uploaded by : jamesa1102 <JamesA1102@a...>
> Description :
>
> You can access this file at the URL:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/ResinUrsus/Ursus%2003.jpg
>
> To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
> http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files
>
> Regards,
>
> jamesa1102 <JamesA1102@a...>
>

Resin!!
   Mired to a broken piece of the past...
   Face it.
   If it's broken, half of its worth is  also...
    Wish I still had my models from the 70's...
    Here's my butt... Somebody kick it...
    That's hindsight for ya!
    I had (YES, HAD) Cornelius, Caesar, and Zaius originally from
the drug store down the street (in the 70's) along with the comic
books...
   Hey, I was just a kid! Now I just cry like one...
   I had a poster of Zira standing before Taylor's cage; it was done
in a muted brown & beige...
   Whatever happened to it? Beats me!
    Come to think of it, I even had a model of (who was it in
Battle...?) the gorilla general. Sorry,I'm a little tired and my
memory lags here...
     Speaking of General's, did you know Thade was originally
supposed to be a silverback?
     Yes... He was cast as a gorilla in the draft. But, after
considering the docility of the gorilla compared to the fierocity of
a chimp, they opted for the latter.
     Gorilla's are herbivores. Chimpanzees are omnivores. Thus
evolves Thade; Thee ultimate chimpanzee...The ultimate leader...
     Until he fell to Leo.
     Why did that human have to come into the picture?!
    Why did Thade's father hold the truth until his dying day?
     I know...
     At least in theory...
     I cast many shadows upon the faces of those who look for a
prophet. I hold no keys. yet I open the doors for those willing to
look for them. Riddles!, you scoff... we need restitution!
     It will rest in the hands of the wise, my friends...
     Patience is a virtue.
      Fools rush in where angels fear to tread...
     I study this ape named Thade. Indeed,I agree, he is but a child
with foolish ideals. He is soft...Easy to manipulate once you get
beyond his obsessions...
      It is a matter of time before his true leadership evolves.
Then, and only then, will he stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Caesar.

  Casting a chimp as the antagonist was the correct thing to do. We now know how aggressive chimps can be. Gorillas are mostly peaceful except when defending their young or the troop. Elaine

------------------------ --------------------~-->
Know an art & music fan? Make a donation in their honor this holiday season!
Click Here!
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Be sure to visit the Group's Internal Website http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/MainPage.htm for Original pota One Sheets & Lobby Cards, Trailers & Rare Videos, Trading Cards and much, much more...
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/

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

<*>
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, LordTZer0@A... wrote:
>
> The refugees from Gilligan's Island never should have
> been in these movies. Not only don't they match
> up with either evolved apes or real apes, but they
> seem to transform when they put on jumpsuits.
> They should have either used real apes as
> real apes, or had them look like the others
> only more primitive. It's just not believable.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "hotscheetz" <HotScheetz@a...> wrote:
>
> I have to agree with this...It was bad enough that the gorilla in
> EFTPOTA looked like something out of an Abbott and Costello movie,
but
> the "morphing" orangs in COTPOTA really disappoint me...
>
> G
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, LordTZer0@A... wrote:
> >
> > The refugees from Gilligan's Island never should have
> > been in these movies. Not only don't they match
> > up with either evolved apes or real apes, but they
> > seem to transform when they put on jumpsuits.
> > They should have either used real apes as
> > real apes, or had them look like the others
> > only more primitive. It's just not believable.
> >
>

In a message dated 12/30/05 4:28:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

Casting a chimp as the antagonist was the correct thing to do. We now know how aggressive chimps can be. Gorillas are mostly peaceful except when defending their young or the troop. Elaine

If I were doing a faithful film adaptation of Boulle's novel, one of the few things I'd break faith with is that I'd change Zira and Cornelius to gorillas.  Chimps in real life are killers for meat and murder and make war.

-- Rory

---

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

•  Visit your group "pota" on the web.
   
•  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   mailto:pota-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe
   
•  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
  

  ---

In a message dated 12/30/2005 5:16:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

In a message dated 12/30/05 4:28:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

Casting a chimp as the antagonist was the correct thing to do. We now know how aggressive chimps can be. Gorillas are mostly peaceful except when defending their young or the troop. Elaine

If I were doing a faithful film adaptation of Boulle's novel, one of the few things I'd break faith with is that I'd change Zira and Cornelius to gorillas.  Chimps in real life are killers for meat and murder and make war.

-- Rory 

   That is an interesting idea for a fanfic, Zira and Cornelius as gorillas. How do you think it would change the story if it would change the story. Elaine

---

>From: "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@...>
>1- In PLANET, Taylor told something along these lines: "a planet where
>apes EVOLVED *FROM* men". Maybe did Taylor think that a branch of
>Humans turned into Humanoid APES or - since he believed to have landed
>on an alien planet in the first place - did he just assume that some
>Humans diverged from their race and turned into H. APES in two or
>three million of years?

>However, in ESCAPE nobody was surprised that the APES were taller
>and 'humanoid-like', they just appeared *SHOCKED* that Cornelius, Zira
>and Milo could actually TALK!

>I also remember that someone in the
>movie referred to the Ape-O-Nauts as 'Primitive Apes', so figure that
>out! If you pair all this to the UNDENIABLE fact that neither Taylor,
>or Brent, or Virdon, or Burke, expressed themselves in amazement terms
>when they watched the Humanoid Apes for the very first time in their
>lives...

>Well, I have mixed feelings (and theories) about this.
>What's in your mind? In mine the H. Apes were always present on PLANET
>EARTH (SIMUS SAPIENS a-la Boulle) but they were just one of
>those 'hidden' races, like the Bigfoots and the Sasquatchs. But that
>doesn't explain the reactions in ESCAPE at all !!!!!!!!!

>(and pleeease I don't think the APES were meant to be 'ORDINARY' apes
>which JUST evolved and learnt to TALK in the intentions of Arthur P.
>Jacobs and everyone involved in the FIRST MOVIE!)

>Can you tell me something MORE about MENDEZ the FIRST (the one with
>the moustache)? I need more details. Is HIM showed during BENEATH in
>some way? Who was him anyway? Please, no screenplay, I only consider
>the MOVIES (and TV series) as being POTA *CANON* and unfortunately I
>don't get a DVD copy of BENEATH.
>(the MENDEZ in BATTLE is a different breed. I don't think as him
>like 'Mendez the first').

>3- That's not really a question, but a thought. IF the war really
>happened in the end of the 20th Century why should the APES write the
>SCROLLS in the 2755/2778 A.C.? SO LATELY ?????? WTF.
>And the whole historical account of CORNELIUS comes from the 'SECRET
>SCROLLS' and can't be denied, but taken as undeniable truth ---------
>5 CENTURIES OF HISTORY!
>The timeline was undoubtely altered, and in the original timeline the
>war happened somewhere in 2500!

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Chris Hight <snickertown@y...> wrote:
>
> I'm happy to have purchased a new POTA comic and will gladly
support it, but I am not feeling that artwork. The gang at Mr. Comics
needs to hire Neil Foster. The artwork from "Within" POTA is far
superior to this comic.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Photos
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events,
holidays, whatever.
>

>
> Hi guys,
>
> Yes I know you already hate me for this (LOL!), but I HAVE to make
> some 're-touches' to my hyperbolic scenario in order to spend a

> holyday this week!
>
> I have THREE IMPORTANT questions to you all:
>
> 1- In PLANET, Taylor told something along these lines: "a planet

> apes EVOLVED *FROM* men". Maybe did Taylor think that a branch of
> Humans turned into Humanoid APES or - since he believed to have

> on an alien planet in the first place - did he just assume that

> Humans diverged from their race and turned into H. APES in two or
> three million of years?
>
> However, in ESCAPE nobody was surprised that the APES were taller
> and 'humanoid-like', they just appeared *SHOCKED* that Cornelius,

> and Milo could actually TALK! I also remember that someone in the
> movie referred to the Ape-O-Nauts as 'Primitive Apes', so figure

> out! If you pair all this to the UNDENIABLE fact that neither

> or Brent, or Virdon, or Burke, expressed themselves in amazement

> when they watched the Humanoid Apes for the very first time in

> lives...
> Well, I have mixed feelings (and theories) about this.
> What's in your mind? In mine the H. Apes were always present on

> EARTH (SIMUS SAPIENS a-la Boulle) but they were just one of
> those 'hidden' races, like the Bigfoots and the Sasquatchs. But

> doesn't explain the reactions in ESCAPE at all !!!!!!!!!
>
> (and pleeease I don't think the APES were meant to be 'ORDINARY'

> which JUST evolved and learnt to TALK in the intentions of Arthur

> Jacobs and everyone involved in the FIRST MOVIE!)
>
> 2- Since in my ORIGINAL TIMELINE scenario the war happened in the

> beginning of the 26th century, the 'GESALT MIND' MUTANTS began to
> PROPERLY develop in the 2600 A.C. thanks to heavy genetic

> operated by the 'Scientists' (the one you can see in the TV

> Can you tell me something MORE about MENDEZ the FIRST (the one

> the moustache)? I need more details. Is HIM showed during BENEATH

> some way? Who was him anyway? Please, no screenplay, I only

> the MOVIES (and TV series) as being POTA *CANON* and unfortunately

> don't get a DVD copy of BENEATH.
>
> (the MENDEZ in BATTLE is a different breed. I don't think as him
> like 'Mendez the first').
>
> 3- That's not really a question, but a thought. IF the war really
> happened in the end of the 20th Century why should the APES write

> SCROLLS in the 2755/2778 A.C.? SO LATELY ?????? WTF.
> And the whole historical account of CORNELIUS comes from

> SCROLLS' and can't be denied, but taken as undeniable truth -------

> 5 CENTURIES OF HISTORY!
> The timeline was undoubtely altered, and in the original timeline

> war happened somewhere in 2500!
>
> Many thanks in advance, LORDTZERO please be patient.
>
> T.C.
>
> P.s: HAPPY NEW YEAR.
>

> (By the way, a REAL monkey played MILO Jr.).

> however what plane or rocket maker would
> want to call their craft "Icarus"? Kind of a jinx to put on it.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Hunter Goatley <goathunter@g...> wrote:
>
> > (By the way, a REAL monkey played MILO Jr.).
>
> For someone who's so anal about his timeline theories, you're pretty
> loose with your terms. Chimpanzees are not monkeys, they're
apes....
> I thought all Apes fans got that, but apparently not.
>
> Hunter
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/1/06 6:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> smugster2000@y... writes:
>
>
> > My only criticism of this issue was the adoption of the
name 'Icarus'
> > for Taylor's un-named starship. A daft name that IMHO takes away
much
> > of that amazing craft's mystique.
> >
> > Dave B
> >
> The spaceship had no official name, but Icarus certainly makes
sense
> considering what happened to all of them, however what plane or
rocket maker would
> want to call their craft "Icarus"? Kind of a jinx to put on it.
>
> -- Rory
>

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 2:53 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: I need some answers for my POTA scenario - pleas...

In a message dated 1/1/06 4:58:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, apecalypsenow@... writes:

Hey cool out. I'm Italian. This is NOT my mother language.

Anyway, it was a REAL chimp playing baby Milo so what's the deal?

The actor's union in Hollywood at the time wouldn't allow them to glue appilences and hair to a human baby.  They couldn't have even put the makeup on the infant's skin.  John Chambers said it wouldn't harm the infant, but the union wouldn't allow it, so they had to go with a real chimp.

-- Rory

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:

> The actor's union in Hollywood at the time wouldn't allow them to
glue
> appilences and hair to a human baby. They couldn't have even put the
makeup on the
> infant's skin. John Chambers said it wouldn't harm the infant, but
the union
> wouldn't allow it, so they had to go with a real chimp.
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/1/06 7:14:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> HotScheetz@a... writes:
>
>
> > But, they did allow them to put make-up on the baby chimp -- to
make it
> > resemble the make-up of C and Z more...
> >
> > G
> >
>
> Baby Chimps aren't in the actor's union.
>

> Hey cool out. I'm Italian. This is NOT my mother language.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Rich Handley <handleyr@o...> wrote:
>
>
> >From: "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@y...>
> >1- In PLANET, Taylor told something along these lines: "a planet
where
> >apes EVOLVED *FROM* men". Maybe did Taylor think that a branch of
> >Humans turned into Humanoid APES or - since he believed to have
landed
> >on an alien planet in the first place - did he just assume that
some
> >Humans diverged from their race and turned into H. APES in two or
> >three million of years?
>
> I think you're being too literal here. He was simply referring to
the fact
> that evolution was turned on its head -- civilized apes, brute
humans. I
> doubt he gave as much thought as to their actual origins as you're
> suggesting. He had neither the time nor the personality to sit
around
> pondering how the apes evolved on this particular planet. All he
cared
> about is that he was in a mad house. As a result, he got the
terminology
> wrong -- much like most people do when it comes to evolution.
Most people
> think the theory says we evolved from apes, but that's not the
> case. Humans and apes both evolved from a common ancestor. But
most
> people get that confused. So, apparently, does Taylor. That's
really all
> there is to his statement.
>
> >However, in ESCAPE nobody was surprised that the APES were taller
> >and 'humanoid-like', they just appeared *SHOCKED* that Cornelius,
Zira
> >and Milo could actually TALK!
>
> I'm more shocked by all the words in capitals. No need to
yell. :)
> But seriously -- again, the problem is that you're being too
literal
> here. Unless they cast every ape role with Pygmies, there was no
way to do
> the apes in their normal size. The reason no one on film reacts
to their
> size is that their size isn't an issue. It's just a film
convention, and
> we're meant to pretend they're the right heights. There was no
other way
> to film it.
>
> >I also remember that someone in the
> >movie referred to the Ape-O-Nauts as 'Primitive Apes', so figure
that
> >out! If you pair all this to the UNDENIABLE fact that neither
Taylor,
> >or Brent, or Virdon, or Burke, expressed themselves in amazement
terms
> >when they watched the Humanoid Apes for the very first time in
their
> >lives...
>
> Sure, it's undeniable. It's also pretty irrelevant. There's no
hidden
> meaning here -- the apes were human-sized because human actors
were in the
> suits. That's all there is too it.
>
> >Well, I have mixed feelings (and theories) about this.
> >What's in your mind? In mine the H. Apes were always present on
PLANET
> >EARTH (SIMUS SAPIENS a-la Boulle) but they were just one of
> >those 'hidden' races, like the Bigfoots and the Sasquatchs. But
that
> >doesn't explain the reactions in ESCAPE at all !!!!!!!!!
>
> That's because no explanation is necessary. With all due respect,
you're
> severely over-thinking this. (And I truly mean no disrespect in
saying
> that, by the way.) The apes' height is one of those conventions
that need
> to be ignored -- like why aliens everywhere in science fiction
speak
> English, are DNA-compatible with Earth humans, are generally
Caucasian and
> rarely use contractions when they speak.
>
> >(and pleeease I don't think the APES were meant to be 'ORDINARY'
apes
> >which JUST evolved and learnt to TALK in the intentions of Arthur
P.
> >Jacobs and everyone involved in the FIRST MOVIE!)
>
> Well, that's pretty clearly what the films are implying. There's
no
> evidence in the films of anything else going on. Caesar shows up,
and
> within a generation, all the apes learn to speak. It makes little
sense, I
> agree -- but it's what's on film, so it's what Jacobs intended.
>
> >Can you tell me something MORE about MENDEZ the FIRST (the one
with
> >the moustache)? I need more details. Is HIM showed during BENEATH
in
> >some way? Who was him anyway? Please, no screenplay, I only
consider
> >the MOVIES (and TV series) as being POTA *CANON* and
unfortunately I
> >don't get a DVD copy of BENEATH.
> >(the MENDEZ in BATTLE is a different breed. I don't think as him
> >like 'Mendez the first').
>
> I'm confused by your question (could be all those capitals). The
Mendez in
> Battle is Mendez the First. His descendant, Mendez XXVI, appears
in
> Beneath. Beyond that, I'm not exactly sure what you're asking.
>
> >3- That's not really a question, but a thought. IF the war really
> >happened in the end of the 20th Century why should the APES write
the
> >SCROLLS in the 2755/2778 A.C.? SO LATELY ?????? WTF.
> >And the whole historical account of CORNELIUS comes from
the 'SECRET
> >SCROLLS' and can't be denied, but taken as undeniable truth ------
---
> >5 CENTURIES OF HISTORY!
> >The timeline was undoubtely altered, and in the original timeline
the
> >war happened somewhere in 2500!
>
> With that, you're under a big misconception -- that the scrolls
must
> contain undeniable truth. Why so? They could be wrong. There's
no reason
> they couldn't be. Like all books, they were written by someone,
and that
> someone could have had a personal bias or simply been
misinformed. There's
> no reason to assume that the scrolls must "undeniably" be true.
Quite the
> opposite -- it's easily deniable, given how little we know about
those who
> wrote them.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "hotscheetz" <HotScheetz@a...> wrote:
>
> IMHO, they should have named it "Titanic"...=)
>
> G
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, <veetus@e...> wrote:
>
> H A P P Y N E W Y E A R ! ! !
>
> No better way to start a year than to have an ape revolution.
Hope it's a real revolution and not a skirmish. That depends how
much attention this comic book gets, and it won't be easy. My local
comic shop ordered it for me but they decided not to order any
extras because they didn't think it would sell. Of all things, the
owner is an "Apes" fan. He grew up making the model kits. But he
only orders extras if at least 4 of his subscribers order the book
(one subscriber did). He said he was looking forward to the Tim
Burton movie but it was terrible and killed the franchise (but the
poor sales of the POTA2001 comic didn't seem to weigh in the
decision).
> Well, that's not good. The only way this comic is going to build
is if there's copies in stores for people to see, maybe look at, and
buy. I NEVER buy comic books, except POTA ones. They just don't
interest me. But I do visit comic shops for other things - -
magazines, collectibles. If I wasn't part of these groups I wouldn't
know this comic existed, and I certainly wouldn't know it from
visiting a comic shop. I think this comic's audience is more POTA
fans, movie fans, sci-fi fans, and pop culture fans than comic book
fans (the talk in the shop was the new issue of "Wolverine", go
figure). How to get the word around? And how to get POTA out of the
dumps? Dunno. I'm considering buying some extra issues and just
giving them to the store to display and sell. But that could start a
bad precedent (no George W., I'm not talking about you). Ultimately,
why should I be doing Fox's job for them? They don't know how to run
their own franchise, they're too busy promoting, well, Wolverine.
> Anyway, on to the comic book. Maybe it's coming at a good time
as Fox releases the sequels on DVD early this year. It picks up
right where "Conquest" left off. In fact there's two separate
stories here, both "Conquest" based. I enjoyed both and I think most
fans will, except for small details that will divide them. Some fans
are already complaining that it sets "Conquest" in San Diego (why?
Don't know. Maybe because it's the home of the Mother of comic cons;
that's one way to score points with the comic book crowd).
The "Conquest" novelization set it in San Fran. Some fans think it
should be set on the East Coast. Personally, I can just go with the
flow.
> Another thing is the creators come down squarely on a "circular"
timeline. I'm with the folks who think "Escape" sets in motion a new
timeline, that things won't go in a circle with things ending up as
they did in the first two movies. Again, I can go with the flow
while enjoying this comic. There's nothing in this issue that
specifically lauds a circle but that's the creators' stated opinion
and it might become more defined later (actually, exploring this
might make a good topic for a comic book story) . I did like that
the issue begins by explaining what happened in the first four
movies to bring newbies up to date, with pictures of Zira and
Taylor's ship to remind us of the iconic value of the story. Also,
Taylor's ship is called the Icarus. I think that's the first time
that name has been used in an "official" story (whether this story
is "canon" is up to each fan but it is official). That's fine,
that's what it's come to be called but it's a controversial name.
Some might notice the comic begins by misquoting Caesar
(inverts "fire" and "smoke" in a famous line; a minor quibble).
> One last thing that might divide fans is the use of "in jokes".
Some feel that detracts from a story; it was a big complaint with
POTA2001. People like Arthur Jacobs, Natalie Trundy, MacDonald actor
Hari Rhodes get tributes here. The President wears the initials
P.O.T.U.S (President of the United States) which reminds of POTA.
And Breck gets a first name that might not be to everyone's tastes
(I don't remember if he had a first name elsewhere). I don't mind
these tributes but there seemed to be too many in one issue.
Ultimately it's the creators' comic and it must be their vision.
We're along for the ride so give them a break.
> The important thing is the main storytelling. Does it hold up?
Hard to tell. It's just getting started. It reminded me a lot of the
Adventure comics (gulp!) in story and artwork. That's not
necessarily a bad thing, there were good Adventure stories too, in
my opinion. They even did a "Conquest" story. It's too soon to tell
where this is going to go, there's just enough time to get us up to
speed on what happened in "Conquest". As a first issue I enjoyed it.
I can see where this could go well with current politics. A
president who has the media under his thumb, who's using his
position to further his own agenda? Couldn't happen. It's just a
start but I'm excited by what a new POTA comic could be. For myself,
the best part was the mysterious nature of new characters like Chris
Leung and Dr. Reich.
> There's also a few pages of a journal by Caesar, my favorite
part of Issue # 1, which brings up the docile nature of gorillas and
how they are different in POTA. There's also a short "back up" story
that's good. I especially enjoyed the unique artwork of this story,
which reminded me of the classic "Dark Knight Returns" (told you my
comic book expertise was limited). I like that the comic is giving a
mix of writers and artists even in one issue. That's a good idea.
> And a little plug for the publisher, Mr. Comics. I enjoyed the
ads for their upcoming titles. I assume their character "Hoverboy"
is new but their ad pretends he's been around a while, even showing
him in a mock up of an old "Gold Key" comic. And they have an
upcoming comic called "Big Max", about a gorilla superhero, it looks
like. Appropriate.
> Finally, they already have a 2 page letter column. Good stuff.
It says Ed Gross wrote a book called "Inside the POTA". Never heard
of it. Is it upcoming?
> I've got my nitpicks like everyone else, but I had a blast with
issue # 1 of "Revolution" and I thank Mr. Comics and Ty for picking
up the 'Apes" ball and running with it. I hope it works out. - - -
Jeff
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, pota@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
> Reminder from the Calendar of pota
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/cal
>
> Jason Evers' Birthday
> Monday January 2, 2006
> All Day
> (This event repeats every year.)
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Dave B" <smugster2000@y...> wrote:
>
> It's January 1st and I'm reading a brand new APES comic. That's a
> great start to a New year by any standards!
>
> The shop I bought it from originally had 5 copies and this was the
> last one - I already have it on standing order from another
supplier
> but couldn't wait.
>
> Impressions... As I've said before it looks, feels and smells like
> classic APES. The story shows tremendous potential and passes the
test
> of any serialized tale - you are left wanting more. The art for the
> main story is very colourful but perhaps a little too saturated
for my
> own personal liking, but it serves the story very well and will,
I'm
> confident, grow on me. I much prefer the look of the back-up
feature
> with its savage, primitive looking, gorillas.
>
> The whole book is full of subtle nods and tributes that the more
> knowledgable will enjoy but, perhaps most importantly, it throws
the
> uninitiated right into the thick of things without the need to have
> seen the movies.
>
> 'Revolution' has raised the bar for an APES comic book. A quality
APES
> product that the fans can actually enjoy and not merely tolerate.
>
> My only criticism of this issue was the adoption of the
name 'Icarus'
> for Taylor's un-named starship. A daft name that IMHO takes away
much
> of that amazing craft's mystique.
>
> Dave B
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "hotscheetz" <HotScheetz@a...> wrote:
>
> Yes, even though some baby chimps are better actors than some people
> in the actor's unions...=)
>
> G
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Chris Hight <snickertown@y...> wrote:
>
> I'm happy to have purchased a new POTA comic and will gladly support
it, but I am not feeling that artwork. The gang at Mr. Comics needs to
hire Neil Foster. The artwork from "Within" POTA is far superior to
this comic.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Photos
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events,
holidays, whatever.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> The Boulle vision of gorillas in APES reflects a more KING KONG view
of them
> than we now know from reality.
>
> -- Rory
>

I'm really surprized by this. I expected a more 50/50 result. Of course the choices were very limited. There are really 2 separate "Altered" timeline theories:

• Altered Timeline theory #1: When C&Z came back in time the created a new timeline from the one that led to the events of Planet & Beneath.
• Pros: The 500 year history that C&Z recount to Hasslein with the first ape to speak named Aldo.
• Cons: The 500 year history noted above is hearsay at best. Additionally, it doesn't jibe with what had previously been established:
1. In Planet, the artifacts in the cave established that the human civilization existed 2000 years before Planet, not 1500 years before.
2. In Beneath, all the ruins are from the late 20th/early 21st century. There is nothing to suggest that the nuclear war took place 500 years later. Taylor even refers to the Alpha-Omega bomb as a souvenir from the 20th century.
3. In Escape, Cornelius states that Apes spoke English for nearly 2000 years, not 1500.
• There is very thin evidence for this theory as is. It all relies on C&Z's testimony not on actual on screen events. And the on screen event shown in Conquest & Battle jibe more with what had been established in Planet & Beneath.
• Once you take the contary evidence in to account, as well as the fact that there is not one line of dialogue in the films directly stating this, the theory falls apart.
• Altered Timeline theory #2 : Caesar through his actions in Battle creates a new more hopeful future than the one seen in Planet & Beneath. This is sometimes refered to as the 'loop with an out' theory meaning there is a circular timeline but Ceasar was able to break out of the loop.
• Pros: First and formost to accept this theory, you have to accept that a circular timeline or temporal loop existed in the first place and there is plenty of evidence of that:
• Dr. Milo states: "And the Earth will be destroyed just as we saw it".
• The Lawgiver: "God is his wrath sent the world a saviour, born of two Apes who had descended on Earth from Earth's own future".
• Caesar: "I went looking for my past, but I found our future".
• Additionally, Dr. Hasslein's motivation in Escape is based on his belief that the future C&Z come from will happen unless he changes lanes by killing them and baby Milo. Caesar has the same belief in Battle. He believes the future of Planet & Beneath will come to pass unless he makes a change to avoid it.
• Now once you accept that there was a circle in the first place, you have to accept that it was possible to break out of it. Unlike theory #1 there is dialogue and on screen events that directly support this:
• Both Virgil and Hasslein speak of their being more than one possible future.
• The final scene in Battle shows apes & humans living together in peace for at least 600 years.
• Cons: The only real con is the tear on Caesar's statue at the end of Battle. According to the screenwriter Paul Dehn is was meant to tell the audience that Caesar's efforts utimately failed. However, the symbolism is ambiguous enough that it can be left open to interpretation.

Personally, I like theory #2 better. It ends the series on a moral note. If man & ape can continue to live in peace, the future is bright. If not, they will end up destroying the world.  

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, pota@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
>
> The following pota poll is now closed. Here are the
> final results:
>
>
> POLL QUESTION: In the end, 'CIRCULAR' or 'ALTERED' Timeline? This is the biggest question, and we can't escape anymore!
>
> CHOICES AND RESULTS
> - Circular. We can't change past, and I like that the five movies are just ONE unit., 7 votes, 70.00%
> - Altered timeline. I don't like the depressing ending of BENEATH, and Caesar is giving us an HOPE!, 3 votes, 30.00%
> - We don't know for sure., 0 votes, 0.00%
> - I don't care. I just like the Humanoid Apes., 0 votes, 0.00%
>
>
>
> For more information about this group, please visit
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota
>
> For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
> http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "shanter2002" <mail@m...> wrote:
>
> Jeff, excellent overview and thoughts on the new comic.I have a
stack
> ordered, but haven't actually seen it yet.I think the real point
here
> for Apes fans is that we should buy this comic if we want to
support
> our franchise.I know that Fox makes the money, but we own the fun,
> whether in viewing dvds, buying action figures, reading comics or
> arguing on Group about where Conquest is set.From what I've seen
of the
> new comic, it's aim is to be true to the originals but to build on
> them.That simple thought seems never to have arisen on the Burton
> project.If we didn't like Burton's Apes,and if we want classic
Apes,
> one way to send out a message is to buy this new comic in numbers
to
> show that Classic Apes still works and still sells.Whether you are
a
> comic fan or not, a contibution to promoting Apes can be made by
buying
> this comic and spreading the word---just like Jeff has done.I'm a
big
> comics fan and what I've seen so far suggests this comic stands up
as a
> comic in its own right. If we don't use it, we'll lose it, so lets
buy
> this comic, spread the word and make sure we get more series in
the
> future.Movie people look at comics, no question.Lets send them a
> message.John, Scrolls.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Hunter Goatley <goathunter@g...> wrote:
>
> > Hey cool out. I'm Italian. This is NOT my mother language.
>
> My apologies. The fact that I hadn't realized that shows how well
you
> write in English!
>
> Hunter
>

> Not really... I think you're the only one who didn't know.
> It just shows how poorly you read in English.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
>
> When did Cornelius get so stupid in all your eyes? Shame on you
guys,
> insulting poor, dead Cornelius. Shame, shame!
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
>
> It is with great sadness that I report that Mr. Jason Evers died
last March
> 13th of heart failure. He won't be calling anyone a monkey anymore!
>
> James, you need to keep up on these things.
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Hunter Goatley <goathunter@g...> wrote:
>
> > Not really... I think you're the only one who didn't know.
> > It just shows how poorly you read in English.
>
> I've read plenty of posts more poorly-written by native English
> speakers than those posts....
>
> That makes two insults you've thrown my way in two days. You're on a
> roll....
>
> Hunter
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, LordTZer0@A... wrote:
>
> I was pushed into it..
> Someone was inciting people to sling mud.
> Granted, I don't need much encouragement.
> But at the time I couldn't think of anything.
> Maybe I'm overcompensating for a slow start.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:

>
>
> Phooey! Cornelius wasn't mistaken, that's what he read in the scrolls. Now,
> as to the accuracy of the scrolls, I'd take them as literally as I would the
> Bible, but in general the tell the way it happened

And the scrolls do in general tell the way it happened. Only the timeframe is off. The Bible often exaggerated timeframes. The Israelites wandering in the Sini for 40 years is just one example.  The point is that the 500 year timeframe is never seen on screen so evidence of it is purely hearsay.

-- IN THE ORIGINAL
> TIMELINE! Cornelius simply couldn't have read of anything he and Zira had affected by
> returning to the past -- BECAUSE THEY HADN'T DONE IT YET!!!
>
> -- Rory
>
"Doctor, what's past is --"

"-- is very much in the present. Brigadier, you never did understand the interrelation of time." The Brigadier and the Doctor

"One of the more difficult concepts to grasp in temporal mechanics is that effect can precede cause." Captain Kathryn Janeway

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@a...> wrote:
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
> >
> >
> > Phooey! Cornelius wasn't mistaken, that's what he read in the
scrolls. Now,
> > as to the accuracy of the scrolls, I'd take them as literally as
I would the
> > Bible, but in general the tell the way it happened
>
> And the scrolls do in general tell the way it happened. Only the
timeframe is off. And the Bible often exaggerated timeframes. The
Israelites wandering in the Sini for 40 years is just one example.
The point is that the 500 year timeframe is never seen on screen so
evidence of it is purely hearsay.
>
> -- IN THE ORIGINAL
> > TIMELINE! Cornelius simply couldn't have read of anything he and
Zira had affected by
> > returning to the past -- BECAUSE THEY HADN'T DONE IT YET!!!
> >
> > -- Rory
> >
> "Doctor, what's past is --"
>
> "-- is very much in the present. Brigadier, you never did
understand the interrelation of time." The Brigadier and the Doctor
>
> "One of the more difficult concepts to grasp in temporal mechanics
is that effect can precede cause." Captain Kathryn Janeway
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@y...> wrote:

>
> There's an ORIGINAL timeline and an ALTERED timeline, it's
> undeniable.

Definately a possiblity but not undeniable.

>
> Why should the HUMANOID APES bother to write the scrolls in 2778
> A.C. if their CIVILIZATION really began to exist in 2020 or so? It's
> TOO LATE!
>
> So please be realist. In the ORIGINAL timeline they wrote
> the 'official' scrolls in 2778 A.C. because the Nuclear War happened
> somewhere in the 26th Century and they wouldn't be in charge 'til
> 2600 A.C. (the SECRET SCROLLS).
>

There may have been many versions written over the centuries before the Lawgiver wrote what became the 'official' version. The same was true of the Bible. There were many versions written until a point in time when one was pronounced as the official version.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/2/06 8:10:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> JamesA1102@a... writes:
>
>
> > I don't think anyone is calling Cornelius stupid. Even the best
> > scientists make mistakes sometimes.
> >
>
> Phooey! Cornelius wasn't mistaken, that's what he read in the
scrolls. Now,
> as to the accuracy of the scrolls, I'd take them as literally as I
would the
> Bible, but in general the tell the way it happened -- IN THE
ORIGINAL
> TIMELINE! Cornelius simply couldn't have read of anything he and
Zira had affected by
> returning to the past -- BECAUSE THEY HADN'T DONE IT YET!!!
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:
>
> Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to
exist
> independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be
included in any
> discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original
(such as the
> inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?
Does the 1968 film
> exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel
it must be
> looked as part of a five-film saga?
>
> I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel
the
> original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you
don't.
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:
>
> Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to
exist
> independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be
included in any
> discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original
(such as the
> inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?
Does the 1968 film
> exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel it
must be
> looked as part of a five-film saga?
>
> I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel
the
> original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you
don't.
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:
>
> Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to
exist
> independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be
included in any
> discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original
(such as the
> inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?
Does the 1968 film
> exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel
it must be
> looked as part of a five-film saga?
>
> I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel
the
> original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you
don't.
>
> -- Rory
>

>
> I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:
>
> Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist
> independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be included in any
> discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original (such as the
> inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)? Does the 1968 film
> exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel it must be
> looked as part of a five-film saga?
>
> I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel the
> original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you don't.
>
> -- Rory
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Greg Plonowski <urko3085@s...> wrote:
>
> Happy New Year everyone. You can see by the cover on this week's
issue that our gorilla friends, decked out as they are in red and
green, are a little late for the holidays, but please, no teasing
them about their tardiness. They have guns, after all.
>
> With the New Year comes a new URL. Hunter has set up a new URL
for his site:
>
> https://pota.goatley.com/
>
> The old URL will still direct you to the site, but now the
person who refused to visit Hunter's site because it would mess up
his browser's ability to get him to Google with only two keystrokes
can now go to Hunter's site without screwing up his browser's
history cache.
>
> This week's issue continues the adaptation of Conquest. Bonus
features include not just one but two photos from the movie. You
also get a letter column.
>
> Greg
>

>
> Happy New Year everyone. You can see by the cover on this week's

> > Greg
>

> The old URL will still direct you to the site, but now the person who refused to visit Hunter's site because it would mess up his browser's ability to get him to Google with only two keystrokes can now go to Hunter's site without screwing up his browser'
> s history cache.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@a...> wrote:
>
> Yes, of course it does. The original film was conceived and
produced
> as a stand alone. It should be judged from that perspective. The
> sequels are merely spin-offs from the original.
>
> Furthermore, Planet is about Taylor and his journey. The sequels
are
> about the planet and the story-arc of the sequels are seperate from
> the original.
>
> BTW I created a group poll based on this question. I think it will
> be interesting to see what most people think.
>
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
> >
> > I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:
> >
> > Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to
> exist
> > independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be
> included in any
> > discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original
> (such as the
> > inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?
> Does the 1968 film
> > exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel
> it must be
> > looked as part of a five-film saga?
> >
> > I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you
feel
> the
> > original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you
> don't.
> >
> > -- Rory
> >
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "John" <DrZaiusDavis@a...> wrote:
>
> I've tried to sign this several times and keep getting a "566
Response
> HTTP Version Unsupported" message. Ayone else having problems?
> Suggestions to fix?
>

>From: "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@...>
>Subject: Re: Digest Number 2453
>There's an ORIGINAL timeline and an ALTERED timeline, it's
>undeniable.
>Why should the HUMANOID APES bother to write the scrolls in 2778
>A.C. if their CIVILIZATION really began to exist in 2020 or so? It's
>TOO LATE!
>So please be realist. In the ORIGINAL timeline they wrote
>the 'official' scrolls in 2778 A.C. because the Nuclear War happened
>somewhere in the 26th Century and they wouldn't be in charge 'til
>2600 A.C. (the SECRET SCROLLS).

>From: Haristas@...
>Subject: A question
>I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:
>Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist
>independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be included in any
>discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original (such as the
>inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)? Does the
>1968 film
>exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel it must be
>looked as part of a five-film saga?