That's a Roman Polanski classic!

Haristas@... wrote:

 

 

In a message dated 3/12/2008 2:10:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, blackaciddevil01@ yahoo.com writes:

I don't know why but the
series has always fascinated me, just like Godzilla movies, Comic book
movies and Vampire movies-lol.

Tom, one of my favorite vampire films is THE FEARLESS VAMPIRE KILLERS.  What do you think of that movie?  It won't bother me if you don't like it.

 

-- Rory

---

It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance.

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:36 PM, <stenosaurus@...> wrote:

I read it in eighth grade (about 1974) for a book report. While it was very different from the film I still found it enjoyable. Maybe I should buy a "reading copy" and do it again to see if it stands up 30 years later.

Bruce

-----Original Message-----
From: Luiz Saulo Adami <apedami@...>
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:00 am
Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)

Right, Rory!

The Boulle's novel is a great book!

Luiz Saulo Adami
Adami of the Apes
From Brazil

Haristas@... escreveu:

Actually, when I finally read the entire novel cover to cover (had to wait a few years until I was old enough to get into it -- I may not of "officially" read it until I was fourteen), I thought it was superior to the film based on it.  I still do think the Boulle novel is much more sophisticated than the film.

 

-- Rory

 

In a message dated 3/10/2008 9:08:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, aboro3085@... writes:

Haristas@... wrote:

 

 Sometime after that I bought the paperback Signet novel, but I didn't actually read the entire book until I was around 12 years old.

*** What did you think of the novel after seeing the superior film adaption of the material a few times? ***

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

---

It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance.

---

Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail, o único sem limite de espaço para armazenamento!

---

Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser.

Roman Polanski & Sharon Tate met and fell in love on that movie set.
I liked the alternate title, "Pardon Me, But Your Teeth Are In My
Neck".

Jeff (RedSpy)

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Shane Miller <masonverger12@...> wrote:
>
> That's a Roman Polanski classic!
>
> Haristas@... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 3/12/2008 2:10:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
blackaciddevil01@... writes:
> I don't know why but the
> series has always fascinated me, just like Godzilla movies, Comic
book
> movies and Vampire movies-lol. Tom, one of my favorite vampire
films is THE FEARLESS VAMPIRE KILLERS. What do you think of that
movie? It won't bother me if you don't like it.
>
> -- Rory
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>

My cousin bought it for me from her school book club when I was in
the fourth grade, but was so disappointed that it wasn't the film
version, that I didn't finish reading it until I was in high school.
I can still remember the moment I read "both endings"... The hairs on
my neck still stand when I think about it...

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "jessica rotich" <jessicarotich@...>
wrote:

>
> I read the book in highschool 20 years ago. I was very

disappointed, being

> such a hardcore fan of the movie. I'm sure if I read it now after

I have

> "matured," I will have a different opinion of it.
>
> Jessica.
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:36 PM, <stenosaurus@...> wrote:
>
> > I read it in eighth grade (about 1974) for a book report. While

it was

> > very different from the film I still found it enjoyable. Maybe I

should buy

> > a "reading copy" and do it again to see if it stands up 30 years

later.

> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Luiz Saulo Adami <apedami@...>
> > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:00 am
> > Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)
> >
> > Right, Rory!
> >
> > The Boulle's novel is a great book!
> >
> > Luiz Saulo Adami
> > Adami of the Apes
> > From Brazil
> >
> > *Haristas@...* escreveu:
> >
> > Actually, when I finally read the entire novel cover to cover

(had to

> > wait a few years until I was old enough to get into it -- I may

not of

> > "officially" read it until I was fourteen), I thought it was

superior to the

> > film based on it. I still do think the Boulle novel is much more
> > sophisticated than the film.
> >
> > -- Rory
> >
> > In a message dated 3/10/2008 9:08:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> > aboro3085@... writes:
> >
> >
> >
> > *Haristas@...* wrote:
> >
> > Sometime after that I bought the paperback Signet novel, but I

didn't

> > actually read the entire book until I was around 12 years old.
> >
> > **** What did you think of the novel after seeing the superior

film

> > adaption of the material a few times? ****
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo!

Mobile. Try it

> >

now.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=A
hu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ>

> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money

Finance.<http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001>

> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Abra sua conta no Yahoo!

Mail<http://br.rd.yahoo.com/mail/taglines/mail/*http://br.mail.yahoo.c
om/>,

> > o único sem limite de espaço para armazenamento!
> > ------------------------------
> > Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM

toolbar<http://download.aim.com/client/aimtoolbar?
NCID=aolcmp00300000002586>for your browser.

> >
> >
> >
>

.html

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

From: Dave B

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:31 AM

Subject: Re: [pota] First merchandise

--- In pota@yahoogroups. com, scott walsh <cobaltcamouflage62 @...> wrote:
>
> My first POTA was the model kit of cornelius. I think a company
called Aurora made it.

That was ADDAR, Scott, a company that was formed by ex-employees of
Aurora.

You can view most of the ADDAR range here:

<http://geminibuildu pstudios. com/_wsn/ page11.html">

I remember when they first appeared in the UK I bought all six in one
go. That was a memorable bus ride home!

Dave

<.html

Attachments :

zasco1957 <Zasco1957@...> wrote:

The novel was okay, but there was a world of difference (please pardon the pun) between Pierre Boulle's novel and the superb film.   *** I agree with you here, the Boulle novel was okay for what it is, and what it is to me is just a good idea/basis  for a movie, as the two really aren't the same. Yes, some scenes are the same, as in there's a hunt, etc. but the movie handles it so much better. I prefer the "organic" look of the film as opposed to what the novel was (higher tech, human like cities, etc.)   And, as far as your pun, that's no biggie. I'm just glad that you know they are two different worlds (POTA "is" Earth, whereas MONKEY PLANET is a totally foreign planet, the planet Soror.) The only reason I say that I'm glad you know this is because an author of a certain "fan made" creation said to me that in MONKEY PLANET, Merou is on Earth the whole time as Taylor was in the film. I told him that wasn't the case at all, that Merou and crew were on a totally different planet, and at the end of the book Merou, Nova, and Sirius returned to Earth to find it too has become ruled by apes. His response: "Oh, that's an interesting concept", said in a VERY condescending way. There was no getting thru to him, even though others sided with me that Soror was NOT Earth, etc. ***

 

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Attachments :

.html

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

From: Tim "apefan"

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:34 AM

Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [pota] First merchandise

cool! I have never seen this before.....great ...something else to look for! Do you own this Jeff?

Tim

Jeff <skintricks@cox. net> wrote:

Is this what you're remembering?

 

Jeff B

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

From: zasco1957

To: pota@yahoogroups. com

Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 3:49 PM

Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [pota] First merchandise

Let's see...my first APES merchandise was the Gold Key comic of BENEATH.  Michael Avallone's novelization followed...I think my next item was the Cornelius figure, where he's standing on the steps of the Stock Exchange building's remains.  This was the assemble-and- paint set.   Can anyone else verify seeing this:  There was a balloon set of some of the APES characters, one in particular stands out in my memory:  It seemed as if it were from the old Power Records series--you know, the comic book/45 rpm record set--and this had Dr. Zaius standing almost in front of the silhouette of the Statue of Liberty, as I recall, this was the same drawing of the Statue that was featured on the very last page of the PLANET Power Records adaptation.. .let me scan it and include it in this message:     I saw it at an old Woolworth's Department Store bargain basement...has anyone else seen it?   Zach    -------Original Message----- --   From: HollowedOut Date: 03/11/08 02:46:32 To: pota@yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [pota] First merchandise   Ahhhhhhhhhhh. .. Christmas morning of '78. The POTA Mego tree house with Zaius, two soldier apes, Urko and Galen. That absolutely was the best Christmas ever!!!!!!!! !! Oh yea... we also got the trashcan that year too!!! Cooooooooooooooool! !!   -Chris PofTAfan@aol. com wrote: Then after that I went to the Cleveland Auto Show and got the two autographs from "Zira" and "Cornelius" (Bill Blake and Paula Crist). And I still have the two photos (33 years later) Kevin -----Original Message----- From: stenosaurus@ aol.com To: pota@yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 9:56 pm Subject: Re: [pota] First merchandise I found the Beneath LP soundtrack in the 99 cent record bin at John's Bargain Stores (anyone remember them?). Little chunk missing from the edge of the cover but I think it still plays. Bruce -----Original Message----- From: PofTAfan@aol. com To: pota@yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 7:09 pm Subject: Re: [pota] First merchandise I think mine was the 1968 "Planet of the apes" soundtrack that I found in a record store. Kevin -----Original Message----- From: stenosaurus@ aol.com To: pota@yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [pota] First merchandise Mine was the POTA trading cards in 1969. We flipped them in school (I was 8). I still have that whole set-certainly not mint but worth a mint to me. Bruce -----Original Message----- From: Dave B <smugster2000@ yahoo.com> To: pota@yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 10:23 am Subject: [pota] First merchandise Does anyone remember the first item of APE related memorabilia they ever bought? For me I think it might have been issue 1 of the UK Marvel comic. I'd known about APES for years before that but can't recall any associated merchandise. I clearly remember the movie trading cards but they belonged to my elder brother. Dave Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

<.html

LordTZer0@... wrote:

In a message dated 3/11/2008 7:41:50 P.M. Central Daylight Time, aboro3085@... writes:

*** I'm pretty sure that is not supposed to be ape fur on the scarecrows.

 

Nope. It's ape fur.

*** Says who? And if it is, what is the purpose of it?

I mean I know they kill heretics, but I cannot see them going as far as skinning them. ***

---

It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance.

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Meg Griffin <splotchypigg@...> wrote:

I'd like to think that as we become stooped with age that we will grow in wisdom like Dr. Zaius.

*** Yeah, Zaius is a smart one, but as far as growing in wisdom, I don't know about that... More like he grew in bigotry, psuedo-science, religious fanaticism, etc. ***

Do You Yahoo!?

James ---your forum is busy, detailed, interesting and a complete
delight!

Keep up the good work.

Respect,

MT-B

Thanks but the credit belongs to the group's members who have come here to contribute and celebrate their love of POTA.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "sparkytb2005" <sparkytb@...> wrote:
>
> James ---your forum is busy, detailed, interesting and a complete
> delight!
>
> Keep up the good work.
>
> Respect,
>
> MT-B
>

Hmmm, I'm leaning toward ape fur but remain undecided.

I figure the scarecrows are there 1: to discourage humans from
entering ape territory and 2: to discourage apes from entering the
forbidden zone (I guess that's why there are none in the cornfield?)

It could be ape fur, after all you don't have to execute and skin a
human in order to make a wig and the purpose of using ape fur would be
to make the scarecrows look and smell like apes - two senses I imagine
the humans of 3978 would use the most to identify threats.

But... Bear fur would sure have the same effect. Was there any
evidence of the existence of bears on the POTA? Do we see one in their
museum?

Dave

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> LordTZer0@... wrote: In a message dated 3/11/2008 7:41:50
P.M. Central Daylight Time, aboro3085@... writes:
> *** I'm pretty sure that is not supposed to be ape fur on the
scarecrows.
>
>
> Nope. It's ape fur.
>
>
> *** Says who? And if it is, what is the purpose of it?
> I mean I know they kill heretics, but I cannot see them going as
far as skinning them. ***
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
>
>
>

.html

In a message dated 3/13/2008 2:23:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time, smugster2000@... writes:

Hmmm, I'm leaning toward ape fur but remain undecided.

 

I'm not sure what the point of a bear scarecrow would be.

Who says it's bears?  Believe what ever you want.

It's fake anyway.  But for me the scarecrows are

only scary if they're covered with the skins of

apostates who have fled into the Forbidden

Zone.  That way in not only scares the

humans, but the apes as well!

 

 

<.html

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

> Who says it's bears?

I believe Arboro suggested it.

>Believe what ever you want.

Thanks, I will.

>But for me the scarecrows are
> only scary if they're covered with the skins of
> apostates who have fled into the Forbidden
> Zone. That way in not only scares the
> humans, but the apes as well!

Good point! It seems a little extreme though? The apes were
technologically primitive but they weren't savages - which brings me
back to the possibility of 'wigs' or bear pelts.

Dave

.html

In a message dated 3/12/2008 1:08:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, sand_hill_school@... writes:

That was perfect. It looks like T was right about the "Orang Orange."

Thank you!

Interesting article.

Helen

 

Anyone remember Otter Pops?

Alexander The Grape?

Anyone?

Bueller?

 

<.html

The idea of a scarecrow is to 'Scare?'
In this instance they basically replace the Radiation Symbol we are
all used to seeing. You see that symbol and you are very wary about
entering the area.
The Apes have a certain level of civilisation, guns, cameras and
writing for example, but they also display some level of
primitiveness with their superstitions, even though this is often
considered part of their religious beliefs. ( yes, I think humans
have similar propensities with their beliefs)

The Forbidden Zone is, well, forbidden. So instead of the radiation
symbol, they use a scarecrow.

I like the idea that it could be apostate, Ape fur. It is consistent
with the religious power, held by the State.Yet we also know they
treat their dead with respect, funeral service in the first movie.
I do not believe that they use Fake Fur since this level of industry
is not evident.

Other animals, yes, quite possible. Bears I would imagine could
still exist since Horse somehow made it through the Apocalypse, so
perhaps other large mammals did as well. (Specially if there are
still British Grenadier Guards needing Hats in the future!)

So-called Primitive cultures have used their own as scarecrows.
Bones,particularly skulls,(if you belive all the old movies) are
used to mark sacred burial or taboo areas.

Also, Humans have manufactured Leather and Fur Clothes so that the
American Mid West did not have to see naked people running around.
What kind of pelt did they use? Ape? doubtfull.

So,I like the idea that maybe, the Dead criminals, homeless,
heretics, political prisoners etc were recycled as scarecrows as
these kind of people in all civilised societies are never treated
with respect in life or death...

Brendan.

>Posted by: "m c" aboro3085@... aboro3085
>The only reason I say that I'm glad you know this is because an
>author of a certain "fan made" creation said to me that in MONKEY
>PLANET, Merou is on Earth the whole time as Taylor was in the film.
>I told him that wasn't the case at all, that Merou and crew were on
>a totally different planet, and at the end of the book Merou, Nova,
>and Sirius returned to Earth to find it too has become ruled by
>apes. His response: "Oh, that's an interesting concept", said in a
>VERY condescending way. There was no getting thru to him, even
>though others sided with me that Soror was NOT Earth, etc. ***

Seriously? Someone actually thought Merou was on Earth? How
odd--the book makes it clear he's on another planet, which is why
Burton went in the direction he did with his adaptation. I'm not
sure how anyone could read Boulle's novel and decide he's on
Earth. The whole "still on Earth" twist was added for the
screenplay. I certainly respect their opinion if they think
that...but I don't honestly see it as an overly defensible position.

>Posted by: "Dave B" smugster2000@... smugster2000
>Hmmm, I'm leaning toward ape fur but remain undecided.
>I figure the scarecrows are there 1: to discourage humans from
>entering ape territory and 2: to discourage apes from entering the
>forbidden zone (I guess that's why there are none in the cornfield?)

Yep--Serling's draft of the film script, in fact, explains those as
being the reasons.

>It could be ape fur, after all you don't have to execute and skin a
>human in order to make a wig and the purpose of using ape fur would be
>to make the scarecrows look and smell like apes - two senses I imagine
>the humans of 3978 would use the most to identify threats.

I've always been of the opinion it was ape fur as well, for that very reason.

>Posted by: "LordTZer0@..." LordTZer0@... LordTZer0
>But for me the scarecrows are
>only scary if they're covered with the skins of
>apostates who have fled into the Forbidden
>Zone. That way in not only scares the
>humans, but the apes as well!

Great concept! I like that idea a lot--it not only serves the
purpose of scaring both humans and apes, but it also drives home the
hypocrisy of a culture that sees itself above the violence of man and
yet skins its criminals. Nicely done.

>Posted by: "sparkytb2005" sparkytb@... sparkytb2005
>James ---your forum is busy, detailed, interesting and a complete
>delight! Keep up the good work.

Agreed. This is a great group of people, filled with interesting
conversations and friendly fans who are here purely for the love of
the mythos, rather than to fight or carry on. That seems to be a
rarity in online forums.

Is it possible that the mutants put the scarecrows there....maybe it's actual ape fur from scouts who vanished in the Zone.....Remember the "crucified" gorillas in the desert vision in Beneath......


Tim

brendan486 <nzape@...> wrote:

The idea of a scarecrow is to 'Scare?'
In this instance they basically replace the Radiation Symbol we are
all used to seeing. You see that symbol and you are very wary about
entering the area.
The Apes have a certain level of civilisation, guns, cameras and
writing for example, but they also display some level of
primitiveness with their superstitions, even though this is often
considered part of their religious beliefs. ( yes, I think humans
have similar propensities with their beliefs)

The Forbidden Zone is, well, forbidden. So instead of the radiation
symbol, they use a scarecrow.

I like the idea that it could be apostate, Ape fur. It is consistent
with the religious power, held by the State.Yet we also know they
treat their dead with respect, funeral service in the first movie.
I do not believe that they use Fake Fur since this level of industry
is not evident.

Other animals, yes, quite possible. Bears I would imagine could
still exist since Horse somehow made it through the Apocalypse, so
perhaps other large mammals did as well. (Specially if there are
still British Grenadier Guards needing Hats in the future!)

So-called Primitive cultures have used their own as scarecrows.
Bones,particularly skulls,(if you belive all the old movies) are
used to mark sacred burial or taboo areas.

Also, Humans have manufactured Leather and Fur Clothes so that the
American Mid West did not have to see naked people running around.
What kind of pelt did they use? Ape? doubtfull.

So,I like the idea that maybe, the Dead criminals, homeless,
heretics, political prisoners etc were recycled as scarecrows as
these kind of people in all civilised societies are never treated
with respect in life or death...

Brendan.

---

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Tim \"apefan\"" <apefan23@...> wrote:

>
> Is it possible that the mutants put the scarecrows there....

317 EXT. DRY WASH AND TAMARISKS - FEATURING SCARECROWS - DAY

The caravan is crossing, in a reverse direction, the route taken by
the astronauts on page 17. The three apes are on horseback. Taylor and
Nova follow in the wagon. They are nearing the row of sinister
scarecrows on the bluff above the dry wash.

318 MED. SHOT - THE THREE MOUNTED APES

They halt briefly and look up at the crosses. Lucius is impressed.

LUCIUS
Who put them up?

ZIRA
The Hunt Club.

LUCIUS
To scare off humans?

CORNELIUS
To scare us, too. We're entering
the Forbidden Zone.

For anyone who wishes to read the original novel it is available in the files section in various formats: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/Fan%20Fiction/Pierre%20Boulle/

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, stenosaurus@... wrote:
>
>
> Jessica,
>
>    So let's both read it again and see what we think of it now. All members are of course invited to do the same & share their opinions here.
>
> Bruce
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jessica rotich jessicarotich@...
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 9:05 pm
> Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I read the book in highschool 20 years ago.  I was very disappointed, being such a hardcore fan of the movie.  I'm sure if I read it now after I have "matured," I will have a different opinion of it.
>
>  
>
> Jessica.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:36 PM, stenosaurus@... wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I read it in eighth grade (about 1974) for a book report. While it was very different from the film I still found it enjoyable. Maybe I should buy a "reading copy" and do it again to see if it stands up 30 years later.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luiz Saulo Adami apedami@...
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:00 am
> Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Right, Rory!
>
> The Boulle's novel is a great book!
>
> Luiz Saulo Adami
> Adami of the Apes
> From Brazil
>
> Haristas@... escreveu:
>
>
>
>
> Actually, when I finally read the entire novel cover to cover (had to wait a few years until I was old enough to get into it -- I may not of "officially" read it until I was fourteen), I thought it was superior to the film based on it.  I still do think the Boulle novel is much more sophisticated than the film.
>
>  
>
> -- Rory
>
>  
>
>
> In a message dated 3/10/2008 9:08:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, aboro3085@... writes:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Haristas@... wrote:
>
>  
>
>  Sometime after that I bought the paperback Signet novel, but I didn't actually read the entire book until I was around 12 years old.
>
>
> *** What did you think of the novel after seeing the superior film adaption of the material a few times? ***
>
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail, o único sem limite de espaço para armazenamento!
>
>
>
>
>
> Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser.
>

In the original movie, and beneath POTA as well as the T.V. show, a
patch can be seen on the space suit the astronauts are wearing. Up
until recently I never knew what the letters ANSA stood for. I think I
do now...American National Space Administration. Seems back when the
first POTA was being made some higher-up Yahoo at NASA didn't want the
patches to read NASA. From what I understand NASA Officials felt a
movie about intellegent Apes could make their organization look
foolish. Any other thoughts?

You're right; in PLANET, BENEATH, and the TV series, the patches read
ANSA. I read somewhere that NASA would not give permission to use
their logo. What is curious is the fact that in ESCAPE, they state
that "NASA" is examining the spacecraft that returned with the chimps.
And in the animated series and the UbiSoft computer game, they clearly
use the NASA logo on the spacecraft. In the first episode of the
animated series, the NASA logo on the side of the space capsule is the
first thing you see.

Jeff (RedSpy)

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "S.W. Plissken" <cobaltcamouflage62@...>
wrote:

>
> In the original movie, and beneath POTA as well as the T.V. show, a
> patch can be seen on the space suit the astronauts are wearing. Up
> until recently I never knew what the letters ANSA stood for. I think

I

> do now...American National Space Administration. Seems back when the
> first POTA was being made some higher-up Yahoo at NASA didn't want

the

> patches to read NASA. From what I understand NASA Officials felt a
> movie about intellegent Apes could make their organization look
> foolish. Any other thoughts?
>

I've always seen ANSA as a division of NASA with the letters standing for:

Advanced Nuclear Stellar Acceleration project

 

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <RedSpy13@...> wrote:
>
> You're right; in PLANET, BENEATH, and the TV series, the patches read
> ANSA. I read somewhere that NASA would not give permission to use
> their logo. What is curious is the fact that in ESCAPE, they state
> that "NASA" is examining the spacecraft that returned with the chimps.
> And in the animated series and the UbiSoft computer game, they clearly
> use the NASA logo on the spacecraft. In the first episode of the
> animated series, the NASA logo on the side of the space capsule is the
> first thing you see.
>
> Jeff (RedSpy)
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "S.W. Plissken" cobaltcamouflage62@
> wrote:
> >
> > In the original movie, and beneath POTA as well as the T.V. show, a
> > patch can be seen on the space suit the astronauts are wearing. Up
> > until recently I never knew what the letters ANSA stood for. I think
> I
> > do now...American National Space Administration. Seems back when the
> > first POTA was being made some higher-up Yahoo at NASA didn't want
> the
> > patches to read NASA. From what I understand NASA Officials felt a
> > movie about intellegent Apes could make their organization look
> > foolish. Any other thoughts?
> >
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Hunter Goatley <goathunter@...> wrote:

>
> > This story doesn't
> > appear to hold any water. ***
>
> Agreed on all counts. On top of that, I've seen literally dozens of
> various trailers for all the films while working on the Rarities DVDs,
> and I've not seen anything like this. If it really existed, I'm sure
> somebody would have sent it to me by now. (Not to mention that it
> sounds nothing like a scene that would have actually been in the
> movie.)

Nonetheless, since I had not previously seen either trailers or the original movie release
of "Planet of the Apes", I had no impressions of the film to sway me either way. I also very
much doubt I would have been all that intrigued by images of gorillas riding on horseback
if I had seen the regular movie trailer for "Beneath the Planet of the Apes." (The only
regular trailers I saw for "Beneath" were on TV and they were too brief for me to have
gotten any genuine flavor of the content of the movie.)

Again, as a kid, I had prejudicially judged the original "Planet of the Apes" movie by its
very title since I had known it as nothing but a title as I hadn't caught any of its initial
advertising. Moreover, I was away from my rural Louisiana home parish on vacation in
South Louisiana when it was shown at our home-parish cinema during the summer of
1968.

The one thing that I as a kid came away with from having seen the Ursus-shoots-the-
chimp-protester scene in the advance preview is that the Planet of the Apes was more
down to Earth (pun intended) than I'd ever imagined and it was a world I could halfway
recognize. Even though I was then unaware of the shooting of the student protesters
incident at Kent State University in Ohio in early May 1970, I had seen anti-Vietnam War
protesters on the TV news programs many times before. I suppose if I had been aware of
the then-recent Kent State incident, that scene would have then struck all the more
profoundly. And I suppose if I had been an adult at the time who was aware of the Kent
State incident, my sensibilites might have been shocked all the moreso to have seen such
a scene in a film that seemed so obliquely, if not directly, evocative of recent real-world
incidents.

I do wonder, however, if what I had seen at my home-parish cinema might have been
part of the Robbins Nest sneak previews series of short films about forthcoming movies
that were sometimes shown as fillers after shorter-running movies on CBS on their movie
nights. I certainly don't recall seeing the Robbins Nest logo that usually accompanied the
opening titles of their series of films (as shown on CBS), but I suppose it's not out of the
question. After all, extended advance preview trailers and promo films alike were not usual
during the 1960s. Some of the special features on DVDs today hail from that period. If
memory serves, I believe "2001: A Space Odyssey" has an advance preview trailer or short
film on it as one of its special features.

If somebody has a VHS videotape or DVD of all the trailers and previews for "Beneath
the Planet of the Apes" that appeared during both before and during its initial 1970 run, I
will be only too happy to view them all to see if I can perhaps find one among them that
even halfway comes close to what I saw.

On 3/13/08, James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

For anyone who wishes to read the original novel it is available in the files section in various formats: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/Fan%20Fiction/Pierre%20Boulle/

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, stenosaurus@... wrote:
>
>
> Jessica,
>
>    So let's both read it again and see what we think of it now. All members are of course invited to do the same & share their opinions here.
>
> Bruce
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jessica rotich jessicarotich@...
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 9:05 pm
> Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I read the book in highschool 20 years ago.  I was very disappointed, being such a hardcore fan of the movie.  I'm sure if I read it now after I have "matured," I will have a different opinion of it.
>
>  
>
> Jessica.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:36 PM, stenosaurus@... wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I read it in eighth grade (about 1974) for a book report. While it was very different from the film I still found it enjoyable. Maybe I should buy a "reading copy" and do it again to see if it stands up 30 years later.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luiz Saulo Adami apedami@...
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:00 am
> Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Right, Rory!
>
> The Boulle's novel is a great book!
>
> Luiz Saulo Adami
> Adami of the Apes
> From Brazil
>
> Haristas@... escreveu:
>
>
>
>
> Actually, when I finally read the entire novel cover to cover (had to wait a few years until I was old enough to get into it -- I may not of "officially" read it until I was fourteen), I thought it was superior to the film based on it.  I still do think the Boulle novel is much more sophisticated than the film.
>
>  
>
> -- Rory
>
>  
>
>
> In a message dated 3/10/2008 9:08:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, aboro3085@... writes:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Haristas@... wrote:
>
>  
>
>  Sometime after that I bought the paperback Signet novel, but I didn't actually read the entire book until I was around 12 years old.
>
>
> *** What did you think of the novel after seeing the superior film adaption of the material a few times? ***
>
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail, o único sem limite de espaço para armazenamento!
>
>
>
>
>
> Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser.
>

The NATO preview film for Beneath can be downloaded from the Group Website: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/Misc./Stuff/Downloads.htm

The theatrical Trailer is also available for viewing: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/Misc./Stuff/BeneathTrailer.htm

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Hunter Goatley goathunter@ wrote:
> >
> > > This story doesn't
> > > appear to hold any water. ***
> >
> > Agreed on all counts. On top of that, I've seen literally dozens of
> > various trailers for all the films while working on the Rarities DVDs,
> > and I've not seen anything like this. If it really existed, I'm sure
> > somebody would have sent it to me by now. (Not to mention that it
> > sounds nothing like a scene that would have actually been in the
> > movie.)
>
> Nonetheless, since I had not previously seen either trailers or the original movie release
> of "Planet of the Apes", I had no impressions of the film to sway me either way. I also very
> much doubt I would have been all that intrigued by images of gorillas riding on horseback
> if I had seen the regular movie trailer for "Beneath the Planet of the Apes." (The only
> regular trailers I saw for "Beneath" were on TV and they were too brief for me to have
> gotten any genuine flavor of the content of the movie.)
>
> Again, as a kid, I had prejudicially judged the original "Planet of the Apes" movie by its
> very title since I had known it as nothing but a title as I hadn't caught any of its initial
> advertising. Moreover, I was away from my rural Louisiana home parish on vacation in
> South Louisiana when it was shown at our home-parish cinema during the summer of
> 1968.
>
> The one thing that I as a kid came away with from having seen the Ursus-shoots-the-
> chimp-protester scene in the advance preview is that the Planet of the Apes was more
> down to Earth (pun intended) than I'd ever imagined and it was a world I could halfway
> recognize. Even though I was then unaware of the shooting of the student protesters
> incident at Kent State University in Ohio in early May 1970, I had seen anti-Vietnam War
> protesters on the TV news programs many times before. I suppose if I had been aware of
> the then-recent Kent State incident, that scene would have then struck all the more
> profoundly. And I suppose if I had been an adult at the time who was aware of the Kent
> State incident, my sensibilites might have been shocked all the moreso to have seen such
> a scene in a film that seemed so obliquely, if not directly, evocative of recent real-world
> incidents.
>
> I do wonder, however, if what I had seen at my home-parish cinema might have been
> part of the Robbins Nest sneak previews series of short films about forthcoming movies
> that were sometimes shown as fillers after shorter-running movies on CBS on their movie
> nights. I certainly don't recall seeing the Robbins Nest logo that usually accompanied the
> opening titles of their series of films (as shown on CBS), but I suppose it's not out of the
> question. After all, extended advance preview trailers and promo films alike were not usual
> during the 1960s. Some of the special features on DVDs today hail from that period. If
> memory serves, I believe "2001: A Space Odyssey" has an advance preview trailer or short
> film on it as one of its special features.
>
> If somebody has a VHS videotape or DVD of all the trailers and previews for "Beneath
> the Planet of the Apes" that appeared during both before and during its initial 1970 run, I
> will be only too happy to view them all to see if I can perhaps find one among them that
> even halfway comes close to what I saw.
>

Excellent, James!  You just saved me about 5 bucks.

Bruce 


-----Original Message-----
From: James <JamesA1102@...>
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 1:21 pm
Subject: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)

>Posted by: "Rich Handley" handleyr@... rassmguy
> >Posted by: "Dave B" smugster2000@... smugster2000
> >Hmmm, I'm leaning toward ape fur but remain undecided.
> >I figure the scarecrows are there 1: to discourage humans from
> >entering ape territory and 2: to discourage apes from entering the
> >forbidden zone (I guess that's why there are none in the cornfield?)
>Yep--Serling's draft of the film script, in fact, explains those as
>being the reasons.

Correcting myself--not Serling's version. Wilson's.

Me, too. It may take a while but I'll let you know when I'm through.

Bruce


-----Original Message-----
From: jessica rotich <jessicarotich@...>
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 3:11 pm
Subject: Re: [pota] Re: 1968 POTA novel (Was: First merchandise)

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

> The only thing I find incredible about the scene you saw is the fact
> the gorillas seems to be blindly religious in their faith and Ursus
> didn't even want to shoot the crucified gorillas in the Forbidden
> Zone – so as shocking as that scene you saw is – it is a major
> discrepancy in what is written and transpires.

Actually, in proper context, in light of that missing scene, I thought that Zaius' dialogue
to General Ursus upon witnessing the mirage imagery of the gorillas crucified on inverted
crosses in the Forbidden Zone was all the more profound since Ursus hesitated to order
his soldiers to mercy-kill their suffering crucified gorilla brothers in the flames while Ursus
hadn't shown such much reluctance in the city to pull out his pistol (and, as I witnessed in
the extended preview, to shoot the chimp protest leader to boot).

But then again, General Ursus may have only shot the chimp protester in order to
wound him and put him out of commission of protesting further as both a warning and
example to dissuade the rest of the protesters. Even so, from my recollection, Ursus
nonetheless shot in anger because he'd lost his composure after losing the short
philosphical debate with the chimp protest leader.

> As fans we can see into this scene and explain it away as Ursus
> feeling that way "only" towards his own (other gorillas). Perhaps
> for that reason the studio felt most wouldn't look that deep and
> found it easier to simply excise it from the film – to simplify. It
> would be the first time edits were done for that reason either.

In my opionion, I believe if not producer Arthur P. Jacobs himself, then it must have
been more the case of its dawning on some executive at the studio who'd already seen the
near-finished movie that in the wake of the then-very-recent Kent State incident (where
National Guardsmen shot student protesters in early May 1970), the Ursus-shoots-the-
chimp-protester scene might have proven more insensitively inflammatory than intended
and/or might unintentionally smack of cheap exploitation or mocking of a real-life event
to some as well. (Also, consider that the studio later went to the trouble of previewing
"Conquest of the Planet of the Apes" before certain local African-American audiences in
order to not only gauge whether some scenes were too over the top in terms of graphic
violence but also whether some content was too insensitively evocative or exploitative of
then-fairly-recent violence and riots in the African-American communities in the Los
Angeles area.)

If Zira had been somehow involved in the chimp student demonstration, then her
nephew Lucius would have been the most logical candidate as the chimp protest leader.
Which makes me wonder if actor Lou Wagner might hold the answer to this mystery.

Moreover, the omission of the scene seems more apparent from the awkward editing of
that sequence when Ursus confronts the protesting chimps.

I love The Fearless Vampire Killers, it's one of my all-time favorite
Vampire movies. In fact, I love alot of older movies.

I like the older sci-fi and horror movies, too. That's why I love
soundtracks so much. Besides the soundtracks to all the Apes movies, I
have soundtracks to a lot of other older movies, too. They bring back
great memories.

Jeff (RedSpy)

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Tom" <blackaciddevil01@...> wrote:
>
> I love The Fearless Vampire Killers, it's one of my all-time favorite
> Vampire movies. In fact, I love alot of older movies.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> zasco1957 <Zasco1957@...> wrote: v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } v\:*

{ BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } 600782CF-D705-4E67-8D28-F8D7E2EE6192
http://us.f637.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Upload?Data=upl124548904 repeat #ffffff left top
X-ASN,X-ASH,X-AN,X-AP,X-AD ; It's a damned shame that FOX evidently won't
put those deleted scenes on a special section of a future re-release of BENEATH...

>
> You cannot release what you do not have (and you cannot release what
> never existed to begin with.)

I myself might never have ventured to see "Beneath The Planet of the Apes" in the first
place if I hadn't seen its advance preview trailer since I'd never seen the first Apes film and
was somewhat skeptical about it since I'd wholly prejudged it by its title. And since I'd
been out of town when it came to my small rural Louisiana parish cinema in the summer of
1968, to this day, I've never seen the original "Planet of the Apes" movie on the big screen.

As to my existence, I assure you that I'm not a denizen of the Twilight Zone nor did I
take a sojourn through there in May or June 1970. (Nor is the small rural Louisiana town
where I saw called Willoughby. ; )

>> I believe that I too had seen the extended trailer in July 1970, right around
>> the time it premiered here in Topeka.
>
> I find it very hard to believe that a fairly major city like Topeka would not get
> BENEATH (or any major film for that matter) for two months after it's release.
> Plus, why would they show an ADVANCE trailer as he called it if the film was
> already released or just about to be released in Topeka?
>
> An advance trailer is shown well in advance of the film's release, not at the
> time it is or right around the time of it's release. They would not show the
> advance trailer to promote BENEATH by the time it was in theaters anywhere.

I called it an *advance preview trailer.* And the writer needn't have seen it in the same
time frame that I did because I too would have thought Topeka, Kansas in 1970 would
have been considered a major plains-states market and would have premiered "Beneath"
in late May as per the original release date. My guess is that it would have been in
circulation in major-city cinemas some four to six months before "Beneath" premiered in
late May 1970.

Please recall too that advance preview trailers by the end of the '60s must have been
becoming not-so-common filler preview material as before. After all, when I saw
"Conquest of the Planet of the Apes" 3 times in a row in a much larger south Louisiana
parish's cineplex in early summer 1972 (the first city cinema I'd ever been to in my life), I
had to endure watching and re-watching a 30- to 45-minute industry film about oil
pipeline-laying through the South American jungle which was egregriously boring enough
as it was through one sitting of it much less 3 times.

In hindsight, I consider it something of a fluke that my rural Louisiana parish cinema
even got such an advance preview trailer in the first place as I've never seen anything else
since *in cinemas* except the Robbins Nest series of advance-preview films which
featured more extended sequences from upcoming or forthcoming movies as well as
behind-the-making-of-the-film stuff that were occasionally shown at the end of shorter-
running movies on CBS' movie nights. I believe only larger cinemas ran them back then
because I don't recall ever seeing any others which featured such an extended sequence
from a forthcoming film.

Nowdays, you can find the advance preview trailers of many older movies in the special
features sections of DVDs. Turner Classic Movies has also occasionally run some of them,
too.

> Hmmm... I'm beginning to think that maybe this fabulous (and fictional)
> advance trailer for BENEATH not only showed a student executed, but I'll bet
> ya that's where that cool deleted scene of Ursus ordering the soldiers to gun
> down the three mutants came from too.. We really need to get FOX to release
> that trailer, because it sounds like it could be a great film within itself.

Well, I'm of two minds on this issue. Given the conservative bent of its owner, I would
think it unlikely that 20th Century-Fox would be likely to even wanna dig up this material.
But then on the other hand, Rupert Murdoch has demonstrated that he can be more
libertarian business-wise and who knows, might welcome a missing chapter of the making
of "Beneath" for an anniversary edition.

If I'd known how to get directly in touch with film historian Eric Greene, I would have
done so. Indeed, without explaining the content of the missing scene, I did make one
attempt to contact him around 2 years ago via a science fiction author who was an
acquaintance of Greene; however, since I never heard from him, I'd about shrugged it off
and put it on the backburner of my Things To Do list, so to speak, until I discovered this
Yahoo group.


As to missing scenes, I have seen a movie still in an old "Famous Monsters of Filmland"
magazine issue with "Beneath" as its cover story and which had quite a number of "stills"
from it, one of which showed Zaius, Ursus and the orangutang priest canoodling about
some unknown subject. If such a sequence were actually filmed, then it must have either
preceeded or followed the ape priest's blessing of the gorilla army's mission. It looks like
the ape priest was holding forth on some subject matter since Zaius looks on somewhat
more piously compliant as if holding his tongue while Ursus's head is cocked sidewise with
a more puzzled look on his face.

I also wonder if there was more extended bit of dialogue which preceeded Dr. Zaius'
very briefly heard invective against the line of busts of the Mendez Dynasty ("They're
obscene!") when the apes enter the sanctuary of the subterranean mutants.

Has anybody ever composed a missing or lost scenes compendium from each of the
Apes films?

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> James King: "The missing scene may not have lasted longer than 2 or 3 minutes but it

was a stunner not just in terms of action but in terms of dialogue to boot. Apparently,
after Dr. Zaius asked the protesting chimps to move, one of them, a protest leader, steps
forward and defiantly challenges Zaius and Ursus right back. What transpires next is a
philosophical debate of sorts in oneupmanship that grows ever more heated with each
exchange between Ursus and the chimp protest leader as each counters the other's
argument with a counterpoint that bests the previous counterpoint about the need for war,
until the chimp bests Ursus' argument altogether, leaving Ursus speechless, fuming,
visibly flustered but still trying to maintain his composure."

> I for one do not believe this for one minute. It sounds like either a totally false

memory, or just a long winded story. There is no way that such a scene existed. If it did,
tell me, where is the corpse of the dead protestor?

I didn't say that Ursus had killed him outright. Despite his losing his composure, Ursus
was apparently skilled enough as a soldier to have shot the chimp protester at close range
to deliberately wound him and take him out of commission as a protester.

As to false memory, I myself merely speculated how if the identity of the chimp protester
were to have been Lucius, it would have set off Zira to lead some of her older-generation
apes to pick up and carry the downed protest banners and renew the protest. While I
would think a death scene for Lucius would have been the ultimate climax, it would not
have been necessary for Lucius to have been killed outright to have set off Zira in that
direction.

After all, she was pregnant at the time and even Dr. Zaius seems to indirectly
acknowledge that fact by indulging her imputence. It's my theory that Zaius had pulled the
ultimate trump card to shut up Cornelius once and for all by giving Cornelius' sensibilities
a sensory-overload of a different sort, by making available to him the Secret Scrolls (of
which he speaks in "Escape". Why? Because the truth about the secret hidden history of
the apes' rise was so daunting and at such variance with what they'd been taught as
children that even Cornelius might well have reasoned that there was no way to break the
news all at once to the Ape Public at Large without possibly risking a collapse of their
entire society.

In hindsight of the info gleaned from "Escape," though, I infer that Zira and Cornelius
figured the only way to advance their society even incrementally forward toward Truth was
shock and awe of a different sort: dramatically advancing science and technology. And
what better shock and awe would there have been other for Dr. Milo to have hauled in a
still flyable spaceship into Ape City in clear view of the public. Of course, that day wouldn't
come until Milo had actually mastered how to make the craft fly in the first place.

At the same time, Zira and Cornelius were probably both of the same frame of mind
that they had nothing to lose (except their future child, of course) by volunteering for the
trial test flight with Dr. Milo aboard Taylor's recovered craft. But then again, they were
probably of shared mind that they didn't want to continue living in a backward culture
which persecuted them for persuing truth and in essence, wanted to risk their own lives
and the life of their own unborn child in order to hopefully change the prospects for their
society at large so that their child/children would have a future worth living for. it would
have been the ultimate trump card over ignorance.


In one other still from "Beneath" shown in an 1970 feature story in "Famous Monsters of
Filmland", it shows Cornelius acting as some sort of zoological aide of some sort as he's
shown discovering Brent and Nova in one of the enclosures for captured humans. This
signals to me that Cornelius had since "Planet" laid down his archeological shovel
altogether (not that he was given much decision in the matter) and had in the interim been
helping out the zoological division where Zira worked.

As to the implied mention of her pregnancy in "Beneath" (when seen in hindsight of the
content of "Escape"), I believe we're meant to take Zira's sudden urge for chocolate as a
sign that she's exhibiting a symptom not unlike pregnant human women who have urges
for food or desserts that they don't commonly eat. And Zira also mentions in Beneath, "At
least when our child is born,..." as opposed to "Whenever we decide to have children..." As
to whether the pregnancy was accident or not, there's much to debate about whether in
the apes' society that Zira or Cornelius would have been unduly prosecuted for heresy if
she were pregnant.

Since Zira was savvy enough to switch babies in "Escape," I would deem her savvy
enough to try to put a different wrinkle on matters by deliberately allowing herself to get
pregnant *if* she thought the ape justice system would be more merciful towards
Cornelius and herself. (But she obviously might have acted thusly moreso to preserve
Cornelius' head as the death penalty was obviously distinguished from murder and killing
in Ape Society since Cornelius raised the possibility of his getting his own head chopped
off by challenging the veracity of the scriptures of the Sacred Scrolls.)

I myself prefer to think Zira's pregnancy was an accident. And what better godsend of
an accident in terms of timing it might have been had it occurred on the evening after
Taylor's trial when they had no one but each other in whom to console themselves after
that grueling day in court.

> Surely if Ursus shot someone down the body would be visible during the
> rest of the scene wouldn't it? Or are you going to say that they reshot the
> whole scene to excise the dead student out altogether?

No, I do not recall a "dead student." I do recall him falling to the ground though and
being supported to a halfway sitting posture by his fellow chips. Notably, though, the part
of the ape-protestors scene in the completed movie in which that sequence occurred came
right before the protesters were hauled off to the paddy wagons. In the entire sequence as
it exists now, where I allege that original Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protest-leader scene,
we see shots which show the protesters from mid-waist on up right before the paddy
wagon sequence. Although the scene was apparently edited out, its very omission
contributed to the awkward editing of that sequence.

Again, the ape protester wasn't killed outright but severely wounded. Credit that to
Ursus' marksmanship. Nonetheless, Ursus *did* risk creating a martyr out of the chimp if
his marksmanship had been off.

> In the actual film, as Ursus is going to go for his pistol, Zaius butts in and
> says "We don't want martyrs do we?" to which Ursus replies "Major, do it
> quietly" and they haul the students off to the cages. If the fictitious scene
> existed, why would Zaius say that to Ursus? Wouldn't he have said "You've
> killed one Ursus, how many more must perish!?!" or something like that...

I do not readily assume that what I saw in the advance preview trailer of "Beneath" in
May or June 1970 was all that there was to that sequence. In fact, the entirety of that
sequence as it might have appeared in the finished film might well have had another
stinger moment to it whereby (and I'm merely extropolating here) the wounded chimp
might still have continued to defiantly goad Ursus by challenging or daring him to take
them (all the chimp protesters) out by shooting them thusly (a semi "I am Spartacus"
moment of unity for the protesters). That would have merited Ziaus' soft-spoken calming
response about not creating martyrs in the process and motivated Ursus to buck up,
expend some manpower (uh, *apepower,* that is) to haul the students off the road and
put them into the paddy wagons, and do it quietly. In essence, Zaius' remark would have
defused Ursus' wounded or bruised pride in order to remind him of a higher sense of
public good and order.

> To say that anyone was killed during the protest scene is purely fictitious.

At least, that much can be said about the protest one sees in the final film. But then
again, I didn't see an outright death scene in the advance-preview trailer.

> If anyone was shot, the whole dynamic of the scene would have been altered,
> altered in such a way that what DID happen in the movie wouldn't make a lot
> of sense.

No, it would NOT have invalidated the rest of the movie. Indeed, not by intention but by
unintended consequences because of the unexpected Kent State Massacre in May 1970,
the Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protester scene would in the immediate wake of the Kent
State Incident have come across as somewhat more shocking than originally intended as a
more immediate cultural reference.

You will recall that there was a space-themed movie called "Space Camp" that came out
not too longer after the Challenge space shuttle explosion in 1986. Imagine the dilemma
of a studio executive if they'd been about to release a space-themed movie in 1986 in
whose storyline a U.S. space shuttle is destroyed, and you may get the thrust of what I'm
talking about.

> I say that because IF the scene you allege was included (and later cut) the
> students would more than likely have been up in arms. They probably would
> have been an out of control mob after that. They wouldn't just be sitting in
> the road if one of their comrades was shot, they'd either be fleeing for their
> own lives or in fisticuffs with the soldiers.

No, Zira emphasized with great fervor that chimpanzees were pacifists and indeed the
chimp protestors use passive resistance all throughout by dead-weighting their bodies in
order to resist cooperating with the gorilla soldiers and in essence having to be physically
picked up and hauled off by the soldiers.

> Plus, not to mention all of the above, an even more important question to
> you is this: Can you provide evidence of it's existence in a script? I know none
> of the drafts that are out there have anything like that. Check Hunter's websight
> if you want to, but I'm sure you will not find anything even remotely close to what
> you're saying here. No script has it, and neither does the MARVEL adaption, and
> I bring that into it because it is said that the adaptions in the APES magazine(s)
> followed an actual draft of the film's script.

Depending on how embarrassing the studio considered the scene in light of the the
then-recent Kent State Incident in early May 1970, I daresay that they may well have
attempted to dispose of anything and everything related to it in order to avoid any whiff of
controversy. After all, the ape-protesters scene in its final state was probably considered
controversial enough as it was for that time since it was so evocative of anti-Vietnam War
protester footage (the hauling of the ape protesters to the paddy wagons).


James King: "It was *this scene* which also blew me away because it was so unexpected. I
couldn't help but laugh and wince at the same time."

> Stories like this are so unexpected to hear, I can't help but laugh and
> wince at the allegations that anything like your scene or the other false
> memory scene of Ursus ordering his troops to shoot down Caspay, The
> Fatman, and the Verger existed in the film originally, and yet after 38
> years, NO evidence has ever come up to show that they did exist. Not a
> script, not a still, nothing.

Since I never saw the first "Planet of the Apes" movie to begin with, I had nothing
remotely to have false memory about. I *do* wanna make absolutely clear that I recall that
I did NOT see the Ursus-Shoots-The-Chimp-Protest-Leader in the final film which I saw a
few months after I saw that advance-preview trailer.

Moreover, that advance-preview trailer caught me unaware because I had dismissively
written off "Planet of the Apes" two years prior by prejudging it by its title as one not worth
going out of my way to see (not on my then Must-See List). And as I've noted elsewhere, I
was out of town when the original "Planet of the Apes" played at my small rural Louisiana
parish cinema during the summer of 1968. (At my home-parish cinema, movies played
only on Thursdays, Fridays, Saturday and Sundays and were usually there for only three to
four days at best.)


James King: "And yet, as the years wore on, I never was able to find any information about
why that scene had been cut from "Beneath the Planet of the Apes." After all, it was
dramatically powerful."

> Believe me, if anything like that ever existed, it would have been mentioned
> in Joe Russo's book. From what I know, he loves BENEATH and I'd guess he
> wouldn't have let a piece like you're talking about go unmentioned in his book.

While I consider Joe Russo's book the ultimate making-of "Planet of the Apes" book ever,
I would not fault him for not knowing of this. Indeed, there was a new (and soon-to-be-
short-lived) science fiction magazine begun during the early '90s that featured a
forthcoming preview from Russo's then-forthcoming book (which did not arrive soon
enough for me and seemed to take a decade before its arrival in 2001). Russo's article
featured the first photograph of the half-human, half-ape child in it. I did try to look up
Mr. Russo at that time as I was wanting to find out if he himself had heard of the Ursus-
shoots-the-chimp-protester sequence excerpt that I saw in the advance-preview trailer in
1970 as by that time, I'd become more knowledgeable about the Kent State Incident and
my curiosity had been peaked by the juxtoposition of the timing of the Kent State
Incident's happening in early May 1970 and "Beneath's" release in late May 1970.

Indeed, I credit the awkward editing of that sequence of the final film to the lack of
adequate time necessary to do it more perfectly. After all, if it hadn't already been left on
the cutting-room floor before that, then the studio would have had to have acted on this
by no later than mid-May 1970 to re-edit the movie to remove it, albeit a bit hurriedly, to
get final prints to cinemas in time for its premiere and national release.

> James King: "Indeed, I've seen some promo photographs of Zira holding one of the

protest banners carried by chimp protesters even though her character wasn't in that
scene. *However,* in hindsight, I have begun to wonder if those promo photographs
weren't also of scenes cut from the film."

> From all I've ever heard, the shots of Zira with the peace sign were just
> promo shots, and they probably did use Kim as an extra in that scene
> (though undistinguishable) because she was already made-up.

Or at least that's the story you heard that would otherwise explain away Zira's presence
there without implying that it was part of a missing scene.

Until I read a confirmed and unimpeachable source, that matter still remains
unconfirmed as far as I'm concerned.

Both the final shooting script and an earlier version of Beneath script are available on Hunter's site: https://pota.goatley.com/scripts.html". Neither version has the "Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protest-leader" scene.

The Beneath NATO preview film has the version of the scene that is in the final film(http://www.potamediaarchive.com/Downloads/BeneathNATO.wmv) despite featuring extended and alternate versions of other scenes in the film.

This is the pic of Zira holding the protest banner.

Note that there are humans in the wagons. If it was a still from the scene in question shouldn't the wagon be empty or at least filled with chimps and not humans?

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:
>
> No, I do not recall a "dead student." I do recall him falling to the ground though and
> being supported to a halfway sitting posture by his fellow chips. Notably, though, the part
> of the ape-protestors scene in the completed movie in which that sequence occurred came
> right before the protesters were hauled off to the paddy wagons. In the entire sequence as
> it exists now, where I allege that original Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protest-leader scene,
> we see shots which show the protesters from mid-waist on up right before the paddy
> wagon sequence. Although the scene was apparently edited out, its very omission
> contributed to the awkward editing of that sequence.
>
> Again, the ape protester wasn't killed outright but severely wounded. Credit that to
> Ursus' marksmanship. Nonetheless, Ursus *did* risk creating a martyr out of the chimp if
> his marksmanship had been off.
>
>
>
> I do not readily assume that what I saw in the advance preview trailer of "Beneath" in
> May or June 1970 was all that there was to that sequence. In fact, the entirety of that
> sequence as it might have appeared in the finished film might well have had another
> stinger moment to it whereby (and I'm merely extropolating here) the wounded chimp
> might still have continued to defiantly goad Ursus by challenging or daring him to take
> them (all the chimp protesters) out by shooting them thusly (a semi "I am Spartacus"
> moment of unity for the protesters). That would have merited Ziaus' soft-spoken calming
> response about not creating martyrs in the process and motivated Ursus to buck up,
> expend some manpower (uh, *apepower,* that is) to haul the students off the road and
> put them into the paddy wagons, and do it quietly. In essence, Zaius' remark would have
> defused Ursus' wounded or bruised pride in order to remind him of a higher sense of
> public good and order.
>
>
>
> At least, that much can be said about the protest one sees in the final film. But then
> again, I didn't see an outright death scene in the advance-preview trailer.
>
>
>
> Or at least that's the story you heard that would otherwise explain away Zira's presence
> there without implying that it was part of a missing scene.
>
> Until I read a confirmed and unimpeachable source, that matter still remains
> unconfirmed as far as I'm concerned.
>

James King: "The missing scene [where General Ursus confronts the chimp protest leader
in a mini philosophical debate about war] may not have lasted longer than 2 or 3 minutes
but it was a stunner."

> *** Let me ask you one more thing regarding this: Name me one APES
> related "advance trailer" that has ANY scene that lasts a total of
> three solid minutes. Off the top of my head, I do not believe that
> either one of the NATO presentations (PLANET or BENEATH) have any one
> scene that goes a solid three minutes. I don't even think either has
> any one scene that goes two solid minutes.

From my perspective as a 12-year-old, the scene seemed like 2 to 3 minutes when it
may in fact have been only 1 to 2 minutes at best. By the same token, I as a 12-year-old
would have been ultimately surprised to have learned that Warner Brothers Looney Toon
cartoons averaged only 5 to 6 minutes long. (I would have thought them more like 8 to 10
minutes long.)

> The theater owners who seen the NATO presentations probably seen them
> before the public even seen any type of trailer. Now why would the mini-
> films NOT contain such a long scene, but a trailer that was supposedly
> shown in theaters, to the public, would? If anything, a trailer shown
> in theaters would have even less footage in it. This story doesn't
> appear to hold any water. ***

And yet, that was *my experience* just the same. And again, I reiterate: I had not seen
the original "Planet of the Apes" movie nor had I any distinct idea exactly what flavor of
storyline the Apes films had until seeing that advance-preview trailer.

Nowe, I've just viewed the NATO trailer and it is not the advance-preview trailer that I
saw in May or June 1970. After all, the one that I saw had a narrator and it was not
comprised of a collection of edited-together extended scenes like the NATO one.
Moreover, the one I saw featured only one extended scene, that of Ursus' confrontation
with the chimp protest leader. Otherwise, the one I saw also had other fleeting images of
the ape-army marching among others. However, anybody who hadn't seen the original
"Planet of the Apes" would have been hard-pressed to finesse or make much contextual
sense of those fleeting images [as to what the exact storyline was about].

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

> Just because someone doesn't respond to something right away doesn't
> they made something up. They could just be remembering incorrectly.
> Let's face it, the films came out over 35 years ago. Memories can become
> a bit muddled in that span of time.

I'm sorry, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. This is not a case of memory lapse as I
recalled wondering (albeit briefly) after first seeing "Beneath" what had happened to that
Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protest-leader scene. But since I was then ignorant about the
May 1970 Kent State Incident, I had no reason to question it further.

And it did not recur to mind until 1993 after I'd spoken with a campus radio department
head who had attended Kent State in the early '70s and who'd filled me in about its [the
Kent State Massacre's] historical significance.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

> Both the final shooting script and an earlier version of Beneath script
> are available on Hunter's site: https://pota.goatley.com/scripts.html"
> <https://pota.goatley.com/scripts.html"> . Neither version has the
> "Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protest-leader" scene.

Do you recall reading mention in Aljean Harmetz's exhaustive "Making of 'The Wizard of
Oz'" book about a planned sequence that would have shown an African-American baby in
a wash tub as one of the images that Dorothy sees suspended and floating within the
tornado in one of the next-to-last versions of the script?

Do you recall reading mention in Aljean Harmetz's exhaustive "Making of 'The Wizard of
Oz'" book about the Wizard posing as a boot black (shoeshine boy) in black face yet as one
of the workers in the Brush-Up sequence prior to Dorothy & Crew's meeting with the great
and powerful Oz in one of the next-to-last versions of the script?

That information didn't come to light until more than a decade after Harmetz's great
book (some 60 years after the film's release) and it was shown in the "The Wizardry of Oz"
book which concentrated more on the special effects of "The Wizard of Oz."

Why were those proposed sequences removed from the final script? Because with
Hitler's rise in Europe, they were soon seen more and more in terms of a combination of
bad taste and much too evocative of Naziism's racist aims espoused in their Germany's
own Nazi propaganda films.

> The Beneath NATO preview film has the version of the scene that is in
> the final film(http://www.potamediaarchive.com/Downloads/BeneathNATO.wmv
> <http://www.potamediaarchive.com/Downloads/BeneathNATO.wmv> ) despite
> featuring extended and alternate versions of other scenes in the film.

And it's all the more notable that U.S. films were seen in Europe and abroad usually 4 to
5 months later after their U.S. run back then. So the NATO preview could have been still
been in the editing process even while the U.S. advance-preview trailer was in U.S.
cinemas (most likely though in larger cities).

> This is the pic of Zira holding the protest banner.
>
> Note that there are humans in the wagons. If it was a still from the
> scene in question shouldn't the wagon be empty or at least filled with
> chimps and not humans?

Only if there had been one wagon depicted in the entire plaza would that have made
sense. But there wasn't just one such wagon seen or depicted.

Putting the chimp protestors in the paddy wagons usually reserved for captured humans
was also a great put-down in terms of the cynical sarcasm underlying that scene.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> James <JamesA1102@...> wrote: Since we are talking about missing scenes
>
> *** And since we're talking about missing scenes, the fact that the guy
> who started this thread never responded to anything that shot his story
> down just proves that the entire thing was made up from that start. The
> guy is probably not even a real member.

Sorry to dash your expectations, but I do have other interests besides Planet of the Apes
as my user name implies.

I'm even trying to design a "Planet of the Apes" strategy board game.

So I'll post as promptly and often as my availability affords me to do so.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

>
> Hunter Goatley <goathunter@...> wrote:
>
> Not to mention that it sounds nothing like a scene that would have actually been in the

movie.

>
> As you can tell from my other posts, I agree with you on this one.
>
> All I can say is that thankfully he didn't go as far as saying that the
> protesting chimps put flowers in the barrels of the soldiers rifles.

Since I hadn't seen such to begin with, I'd naturally have no reason to report such things.

*However,* I AM surprised that screenwriter Paul Dehn didn't script something for the
chimpanzees to chant other "Peace and Freedom!" After all, since we didn't get to hear the
depiction of the mutant children singing his satirical nuclear take on "Ring a Round The
Rosies" ("A fission! A fission! We all fall down!"), it would have been nice if he'd also
composed something special and meaningful for the chimpanzees to both sing and chant.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Dave B" <smugster2000@...> wrote:

>
> Hmmm, I'm leaning toward ape fur but remain undecided.
>
> I figure the scarecrows are there 1: to discourage humans from
> entering ape territory and 2: to discourage apes from entering the
> forbidden zone (I guess that's why there are none in the cornfield?)
>
> It could be ape fur, after all you don't have to execute and skin a
> human in order to make a wig and the purpose of using ape fur would be
> to make the scarecrows look and smell like apes - two senses I imagine
> the humans of 3978 would use the most to identify threats.

I agree, although I'd never considered the scarecrows before as a two-in-one warning
system.

you know I should really watch this movie occasionally! Thanks Dave!!!

Tim

Dave B <smugster2000@...> wrote:

--- In pota@yahoogroups. com, "Tim \"apefan\"" <apefan23@.. .> wrote:
>
> Is it possible that the mutants put the scarecrows there....

317 EXT. DRY WASH AND TAMARISKS - FEATURING SCARECROWS - DAY

The caravan is crossing, in a reverse direction, the route taken by
the astronauts on page 17. The three apes are on horseback. Taylor and
Nova follow in the wagon. They are nearing the row of sinister
scarecrows on the bluff above the dry wash.

318 MED. SHOT - THE THREE MOUNTED APES

They halt briefly and look up at the crosses. Lucius is impressed.

LUCIUS
Who put them up?

ZIRA
The Hunt Club.

LUCIUS
To scare off humans?

CORNELIUS
To scare us, too. We're entering
the Forbidden Zone.

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

There are two versions on Hunter's site the final shooting script and an earlier version. Neither has the scene you describe. What happened with 'The Wizard of Oz' has nothing to do with Beneath. Different era, different studio, different people.

And NATO stands for National Organization of Theater Owners, so when the film was released in Europe also has nothing to do with it. The NATO preview films (there's one for Planet too) where shown to Theater Owners in advance to get them to book the film. And the version that's in the preview is the same version that is in the film.

Sorry but you're making a claim that has no evidence to support it and all the available evidence disputes it.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" JamesA1102@ wrote:
>
> > Both the final shooting script and an earlier version of Beneath script
> > are available on Hunter's site: https://pota.goatley.com/scripts.htmlbr>> > <https://pota.goatley.com/scripts.htmlgt; . Neither version has the
> > "Ursus-shoots-the-chimp-protest-leader" scene.
>
> Do you recall reading mention in Aljean Harmetz's exhaustive "Making of 'The Wizard of
> Oz'" book about a planned sequence that would have shown an African-American baby in
> a wash tub as one of the images that Dorothy sees suspended and floating within the
> tornado in one of the next-to-last versions of the script?
>
> Do you recall reading mention in Aljean Harmetz's exhaustive "Making of 'The Wizard of
> Oz'" book about the Wizard posing as a boot black (shoeshine boy) in black face yet as one
> of the workers in the Brush-Up sequence prior to Dorothy & Crew's meeting with the great
> and powerful Oz in one of the next-to-last versions of the script?
>
> That information didn't come to light until more than a decade after Harmetz's great
> book (some 60 years after the film's release) and it was shown in the "The Wizardry of Oz"
> book which concentrated more on the special effects of "The Wizard of Oz."
>
> Why were those proposed sequences removed from the final script? Because with
> Hitler's rise in Europe, they were soon seen more and more in terms of a combination of
> bad taste and much too evocative of Naziism's racist aims espoused in their Germany's
> own Nazi propaganda films.
>
>
> > The Beneath NATO preview film has the version of the scene that is in
> > the final film(http://www.potamediaarchive.com/Downloads/BeneathNATO.wmv
> > <http://www.potamediaarchive.com/Downloads/BeneathNATO.wmv> ) despite
> > featuring extended and alternate versions of other scenes in the film.
>
> And it's all the more notable that U.S. films were seen in Europe and abroad usually 4 to
> 5 months later after their U.S. run back then. So the NATO preview could have been still
> been in the editing process even while the U.S. advance-preview trailer was in U.S.
> cinemas (most likely though in larger cities).
>
>
> > This is the pic of Zira holding the protest banner.
> >
> > Note that there are humans in the wagons. If it was a still from the
> > scene in question shouldn't the wagon be empty or at least filled with
> > chimps and not humans?
>
> Only if there had been one wagon depicted in the entire plaza would that have made
> sense. But there wasn't just one such wagon seen or depicted.
>
> Putting the chimp protestors in the paddy wagons usually reserved for captured humans
> was also a great put-down in terms of the cynical sarcasm underlying that scene.
>

Rich Handley <handleyr@...> wrote:

>Posted by: "m c" aboro3085@... aboro3085
>The only reason I say that I'm glad you know this is because an
>author of a certain "fan made" creation said to me that in MONKEY
>PLANET, Merou is on Earth the whole time as Taylor was in the film.
>I told him that wasn't the case at all, that Merou and crew were on
>a totally different planet, and at the end of the book Merou, Nova,
>and Sirius returned to Earth to find it too has become ruled by
>apes. His response: "Oh, that's an interesting concept", said in a
>VERY condescending way. There was no getting thru to him, even
>though others sided with me that Soror was NOT Earth, etc. ***

Seriously? Someone actually thought Merou was on Earth? How
odd--the book makes it clear he's on another planet, which is why
Burton went in the direction he did with his adaptation. I'm not
sure how anyone could read Boulle's novel and decide he's on
Earth. The whole "still on Earth" twist was added for the
screenplay. I certainly respect their opinion if they think
that...but I don't honestly see it as an overly defensible position.

*** Yes sir, they seemed to think that alright. They were doing a fan project that was an adaption of the classic film, and they decided not only to use the excellent movie script as the basis for their story, but they also added in things of their own (which is fine to flesh it out that way as long as it stayed in bounds of "reality" i.e. film canon). In addition to adding their own twist to it, they decided to add MONKEY PLANET into the mix too, since they seemed to think that the Boulle book was future Earth as well... ***

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

"Tim \"apefan\"" <apefan23@...> wrote:

Is it possible that the mutants put the scarecrows there....maybe it's actual ape fur from scouts who vanished in the Zone.....Remember the "crucified" gorillas in the desert vision in Beneath......

*** No they are ape made, that much is certain. In the comic adaption of PLANET (as well as on the back of one of the movie trading cards) it says something to this effect:

 

Lucius: Who put up those scarecrows?

 

Cornelius: The Hunt Club.

 

Lucius: To scare humans?

 

Cornelius: To scare us too. We're entering the Forbidden Zone...

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

*** Dave, ya beat me to it. I knew I should have read all of the posts before replying... ***

Dave B <smugster2000@...> wrote:

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Tim \"apefan\"" wrote:
>
> Is it possible that the mutants put the scarecrows there....

317 EXT. DRY WASH AND TAMARISKS - FEATURING SCARECROWS - DAY

The caravan is crossing, in a reverse direction, the route taken by
the astronauts on page 17. The three apes are on horseback. Taylor and
Nova follow in the wagon. They are nearing the row of sinister
scarecrows on the bluff above the dry wash.

318 MED. SHOT - THE THREE MOUNTED APES

They halt briefly and look up at the crosses. Lucius is impressed.

LUCIUS
Who put them up?

ZIRA
The Hunt Club.

LUCIUS
To scare off humans?

CORNELIUS
To scare us, too. We're entering
the Forbidden Zone.






Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:pota-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:pota-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

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

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

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

Jeff <RedSpy13@...> wrote:

You're right; in PLANET, BENEATH, and the TV series, the patches read
ANSA. I read somewhere that NASA would not give permission to use
their logo. What is curious is the fact that in ESCAPE, they state
that "NASA" is examining the spacecraft that returned with the chimps.

*** I am pretty sure that ESCAPE was able to say NASA because by the time ESCAPE was produced, NASA had their Moon landing, so they must have decided it was okay to let it be said, as they accomplished their goal and nobody would laugh at them.

 

As far as the TV series goes, they never verbally say who sent Virdon, Burke and Jones up into space, but you're correct that we do see the ANSA patches on their suits. the biggest reason for that is: They just reused the costumes from the films, so whatever was on them stayed on them. ***

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

The NATO preview film for Beneath can be downloaded from the Group Website: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/Misc./Stuff/Downloads.htm

The theatrical Trailer is also available for viewing: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/Misc./Stuff/BeneathTrailer.htm

*** And I can guarantee you that neither one of them has anything even remotely close to the made up "Ursus shoots a protestor" scene...

 

And, neither one has any one scene that goes continuosly for 2-3 minutes as he said the Ursus/Student scene goes.

 

The so called deleted scene from BENEATH THE POTA is comparable to 7-UP and caffeine: Both "Never had it, never will." ***

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:

As to missing scenes, I have seen a movie still in an old "Famous Monsters of Filmland" magazine issue with "Beneath" as its cover story and which had quite a number of "stills" from it, one of which showed Zaius, Ursus and the orangutang priest canoodling about some unknown subject. If such a sequence were actually filmed, then it must have either preceeded or followed the ape priest's blessing of the gorilla army's mission. It looks like the ape priest was holding forth on some subject matter since Zaius looks on somewhat more piously compliant as if holding his tongue while Ursus's head is cocked sidewise with a more puzzled look on his face.

*** Yeah, well, ya  know what: This scene you described actually exists in script form and obviously it might have been rehearsed and or filmed because PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence exists along with the SCRIPT.

 

The bit you're describing sounds like the bit where Zaius, Ursus, and the Minister are debating the invasion. This is inno way verbatim, but the dialogue goes something like this:

 

Zaius: Supposing they turn out to be our superiors?

 

Ursus: Their territory is no bigger than our's. We shall not be outnumbered.

 

Zaius: I was talking about their intelligence.

 

Minister (" I think"): Well, then your supposition is blasphemous.

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

> There are two versions on Hunter's site the final shooting script and an
> earlier version. Neither has the scene you describe.

While I'm grateful to find such a site, I am bit more savvy in knowing that not everything
that's filmed is gonna wind up in a final script and vice versa. After all, the classic
sequence at the end of "The Empire Strikes Back" whereby Han gives his famous "I know"
response to Princess Leia's declaration of "I love you" wasn't even in the script. Director
Irwin Kirshner improvised it with the actors along with several other lines. But the "I know"
bit was never in the final script.

> What happened with 'The Wizard of Oz' has nothing to do with
> 'Beneath'. Different era, different studio, different people.

On the contrary, I wasn't referring to anything so narrow as any one particular decade,
era, movie or event. I was referring to movie studios' proclivity to err in being more
conservative when handling movies whose subject matter contains references (if not
wholly in content) to sensitive issues of the day or historical events in progress. (I've
already cited an even more extreme example of how Warner Brothers studio head Jack
Warner acquiesced and cut an entire musical number, "Cool, Cool Considerate Men" from
the 1972 release of their film adaption of the movie "1776" (which is now restored and
mentions these facts in its audio commentary).

Moreover, as I mentioned before, if in 1986 a studio had had a movie about a space
shuttle blowing up or being destroyed, they would have most likely delayed its release for
several months or possibly even years if not shelved it altogether.

A potentially controversial scene can be snipped out of a film. Likewise an entire
sequence *if* there's enough time to do so. Since the Kent State incident happened in
early May 1970, there would not have been a lot of time for re-editing that sequence
without that scene so that its omission were perfectly seamless.

> And NATO stands for National Organization of Theater Owners, so when the
> film was released in Europe also has nothing to do with it.

I stand corrected on that point then. (On another point, though, I don't capitulate: U.S.
movies were released some 4 to 6 months after their U.S. releases.) Would this be the
same convocation of cinema chain owners and theater exhibitors that still assemble in late
winter/early spring each year in Las Vegas?

> The NATO preview films (there's one for Planet too) where shown to
> Theater Owners in advance to get them to book the film. And the
> version that's in the preview is the same version that is in the film.

While significant in one sense, many of the scenes in it contained edited-down material,
edited-out material, were truncated and/or as in one instance, two scenes were
misleadingly edited together so that one would have inferred that the gorilla army was
barging into a packed St Patrick's Cathedral at the end of the movie.

Moreover, the NATO film utilized Jerry Goldsmith's music from "Planet of the Apes" and
had no narrator, whereas what I viewed had a narrator and may have used Leonard
Rosenman's martial apes march music in it. (It was certainly distinctive and seemed more
similar to the final film than different.) I also recall in the advance preview's opening
imagery more head-on shots of the oncoming gorilla army marching toward the camera
(as in leaving the city, definitely not the desert) and the narrator dramatically capturing a
sense of doom in his delivery. (This would have been the first images of any Apes film that
I'd ever seen.)

It's really too bad we don't know the story of why or how General Ursus is portrayed as
holding his pistol aloft in hand as seen in the still of one the cover photographs on the
1970 paperback novelization of "Beneath."

> Sorry but you're making a claim that has no evidence to support it and
> all the available evidence disputes it.

Sorry, but I've had quite a long time to think back on this and my memory is just fine,
thank you.

James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

This is the pic of Zira holding the protest banner.

Note that there are humans in the wagons. If it was a still from the scene in question shouldn't the wagon be empty or at least filled with chimps and not humans?

*** Excellent call JamesA1102...

 

"Other James" do you have anything to say in your defense?

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:

---It's really too bad we don't know the story of why or how General Ursus is portrayed as holding his pistol aloft in hand as seen in the still of one the cover photographs on the 1970 paperback novelization of "Beneath."

 

*** No story to it. It was a bitchin' publicity shot. Case closed. ***

.Sorry, but I've had quite a long time to think back on this and my memory is just fine, thank you.


*** You yourself said that you never thought anything of anything until your buddy mentioned Kent State to you. I think you just got some crazy ideas crossed and decided to pull an Eric Greene and look for some socio-political thing in the first APES film you seen all those years ago. I'm guessing you read the Green book? I'd guess that his weird ideas got your mind brewing and you remembered something that actually wasn't there to begin with. Couple that with the Kent State talk from your pal and what do you get: A false memory or a totally made up scenario. (And my guess is that it is the latter.) ***

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:pota-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:pota-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

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

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

>
> James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote: As to missing scenes, I have seen a movie

still in an old "Famous Monsters of Filmland" magazine issue with "Beneath" as its cover
story and which had quite a number of "stills" from it, one of which showed Zaius, Ursus
and the orangutang priest canoodling about some unknown subject. If such a sequence
were actually filmed, then it must have either preceeded or followed the ape priest's
blessing of the gorilla army's mission. It looks like the ape priest was holding forth on
some subject matter since Zaius looks on somewhat more piously compliant as if holding
his tongue while Ursus's head is cocked sidewise with a more puzzled look on his face.

>
> *** Yeah, well, ya know what: This scene you described actually exists in
> script form and obviously it might have been rehearsed and or filmed
> because PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence exists along with the SCRIPT.

And yet, if the "Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil and Say No Evil" sequence of the three
orangutangs from Taylor's trial had been cut from the final print of the original "Planet fo
the Apes," we'd possibly have been none the wiser if no cutting-room-floor footage of it
had survived because it too was not in the original script. It was improvised during
shooting as an on-set inspiration of the moment.

> The bit you're describing sounds like the bit where Zaius, Ursus, and the Minister are

debating the invasion. This is inno way verbatim, but the dialogue goes something like
this:

>
> Zaius: Supposing they turn out to be our superiors?
>
> Ursus: Their territory is no bigger than our's. We shall not be outnumbered.
>
> Zaius: I was talking about their intelligence.
>
> Minister (" I think"): Well, then your supposition is blasphemous.

No wonder Zaisu looks so chastened! Touche!, Minister Ape!

It looks like I've got a lot of reading ahead of me indeed. I'm very grateful to learn about
those scripts and treatments which I've never read before and have only seen excerpts
from.

Dave B <smugster2000@...> wrote:

But... Bear fur would sure have the same effect. Was there any
evidence of the existence of bears on the POTA? Do we see one in their
museum?


*** No, there are none in their museum, but I'd ponder to guess that their might have been. After all, I can't see every piece they had taxidermied being a human. They have zoos and circuses with living creatures in them, I'd guess maybe their museum would have stuffed specimens of a lot of species, not just man.

The only "existence" of a bear isn't even in the PLANET film, but in the TV series episode "The Surgeon". Galen, as "Dr. Adrian" bluffs when asked how Virdon got the gunshot wound he says that they were shooting at a bear and Virdon sustained the wound from being accidentally shot. ***

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c wrote:
>
>
>
> LordTZer0@... wrote: In a message dated 3/11/2008 7:41:50
P.M. Central Daylight Time, aboro3085@... writes:
> *** I'm pretty sure that is not supposed to be ape fur on the
scarecrows.
>
>
> Nope. It's ape fur.
>
>
> *** Says who? And if it is, what is the purpose of it?
> I mean I know they kill heretics, but I cannot see them going as
far as skinning them. ***
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
>
>
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

<.html

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> James <JamesA1102@...> wrote: The NATO preview film for Beneath can be

downloaded from the Group Website: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/
Misc./Stuff/Downloads.htm

> The theatrical Trailer is also available for viewing: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/

pota/files/Misc./Stuff/BeneathTrailer.htm

>
> *** And I can guarantee you that neither one of them has anything even remotely close

to the made up "Ursus shoots a protestor" scene...

>
> And, neither one has any one scene that goes continuosly for 2-3 minutes as he said

the Ursus/Student scene goes.

>
> The so called deleted scene from BENEATH THE POTA is comparable to 7-UP and

caffeine: Both "Never had it, never will." ***


Now that I have viewed both of the cited trailers, I can say that neither of them was the
one that I saw.

Dave B <smugster2000@...> wrote:

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

> Who says it's bears?

I believe Aboro suggested it.

 

*** Yes, it was me who suggested it. I mentioned it because a very knowledgable fan said something about it to me one time, that they used bear fur in the film on the saddles and the scarecrows. ***

>But for me the scarecrows are only scary if they're covered with the skins of

apostates who have fled into the Forbidden Zone. That way in not only scares the humans, but the apes as well! >

 

*** Well, if you believe that, then what do you make of the fur on their saddles? That fur appears to be the same texture/color as what you say is ape fur, so are you suggesting that they are using the fur of apostates as saddle blankets too?!? ***

 The apes were technologically primitive but they weren't savages - which brings me back to the possibility of 'wigs' or bear pelts.

*** Agreed. I am not saying for certain that it is "supposed to be" bear fur in the film, although it certainly wouldn't be unheard of. I was just saying that in reality, I heard it was actually made of bear fur.

 

The Hunt Club kills humans, we know that, but "maybe" they also hunt other nuisance animals at one time or another. There ceratinly are enough different animal pelts around, especially in the TV series, to show that they are skinning animals for rugs. In addition to "wild game",  they must skin their dead horses and cattle to obtain the leather for their clothing or are you going to say all rugs, and leather wear is also made from dead traitors? ***

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

No one is disputing that scenes are cut out of films or that improvisations are made on set. As far as the examples you've cited, there is evidence that they exist. However, there is no evidence that the scene in Beneath you describe ever existed.

It is not in any version of the script so it is hard to believe that it was improvised on set. Two to three minutes scenes requiring an additional speaking role are not improvised at the last minute.

It has never been mentioned by any of the film makers associated with Beneath in interviews for any of the several excellent books about the making of the films. Joe Russo's book discusses this sequence extensively because it was the cause of friction between Ted Post and Mort Abrams, yet no one said a word about the scene you describe.

Beneath premiered on May 26th. The Kent State shootings took place on May 4th. But the NATO preview film was produced well before that. Since the NATO film's version is the same version in the final film then your assertion that is was cut in response to the Kent State shooting is not valid since it hadn't happened yet.

Now I believe that you believe that you saw this but it is simply a false memory.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" JamesA1102@ wrote:
>
> > There are two versions on Hunter's site the final shooting script and an
> > earlier version. Neither has the scene you describe.
>
> While I'm grateful to find such a site, I am bit more savvy in knowing that not everything
> that's filmed is gonna wind up in a final script and vice versa. After all, the classic
> sequence at the end of "The Empire Strikes Back" whereby Han gives his famous "I know"
> response to Princess Leia's declaration of "I love you" wasn't even in the script. Director
> Irwin Kirshner improvised it with the actors along with several other lines. But the "I know"
> bit was never in the final script.
>
>
> > What happened with 'The Wizard of Oz' has nothing to do with
> > 'Beneath'. Different era, different studio, different people.
>
> On the contrary, I wasn't referring to anything so narrow as any one particular decade,
> era, movie or event. I was referring to movie studios' proclivity to err in being more
> conservative when handling movies whose subject matter contains references (if not
> wholly in content) to sensitive issues of the day or historical events in progress. (I've
> already cited an even more extreme example of how Warner Brothers studio head Jack
> Warner acquiesced and cut an entire musical number, "Cool, Cool Considerate Men" from
> the 1972 release of their film adaption of the movie "1776" (which is now restored and
> mentions these facts in its audio commentary).
>
> Moreover, as I mentioned before, if in 1986 a studio had had a movie about a space
> shuttle blowing up or being destroyed, they would have most likely delayed its release for
> several months or possibly even years if not shelved it altogether.
>
> A potentially controversial scene can be snipped out of a film. Likewise an entire
> sequence *if* there's enough time to do so. Since the Kent State incident happened in
> early May 1970, there would not have been a lot of time for re-editing that sequence
> without that scene so that its omission were perfectly seamless.
>
>
> > And NATO stands for National Organization of Theater Owners, so when the
> > film was released in Europe also has nothing to do with it.
>
> I stand corrected on that point then. (On another point, though, I don't capitulate: U.S.
> movies were released some 4 to 6 months after their U.S. releases.) Would this be the
> same convocation of cinema chain owners and theater exhibitors that still assemble in late
> winter/early spring each year in Las Vegas?
>
>
> > The NATO preview films (there's one for Planet too) where shown to
> > Theater Owners in advance to get them to book the film. And the
> > version that's in the preview is the same version that is in the film.
>
> While significant in one sense, many of the scenes in it contained edited-down material,
> edited-out material, were truncated and/or as in one instance, two scenes were
> misleadingly edited together so that one would have inferred that the gorilla army was
> barging into a packed St Patrick's Cathedral at the end of the movie.
>
> Moreover, the NATO film utilized Jerry Goldsmith's music from "Planet of the Apes" and
> had no narrator, whereas what I viewed had a narrator and may have used Leonard
> Rosenman's martial apes march music in it. (It was certainly distinctive and seemed more
> similar to the final film than different.) I also recall in the advance preview's opening
> imagery more head-on shots of the oncoming gorilla army marching toward the camera
> (as in leaving the city, definitely not the desert) and the narrator dramatically capturing a
> sense of doom in his delivery. (This would have been the first images of any Apes film that
> I'd ever seen.)
>
> It's really too bad we don't know the story of why or how General Ursus is portrayed as
> holding his pistol aloft in hand as seen in the still of one the cover photographs on the
> 1970 paperback novelization of "Beneath."
>
>
> > Sorry but you're making a claim that has no evidence to support it and
> > all the available evidence disputes it.
>
> Sorry, but I've had quite a long time to think back on this and my memory is just fine,
> thank you.
>

That same publicity shot you mentioned is also one of the lobby cards
in the set.
- Scott

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote: ---It's really too bad
we don't know the story of why or how General Ursus is portrayed as
holding his pistol aloft in hand as seen in the still of one the
cover photographs on the 1970 paperback novelization of "Beneath."
>
>
> *** No story to it. It was a bitchin' publicity shot. Case
closed. ***
>
> .Sorry, but I've had quite a long time to think back on this and my
memory is just fine, thank you.
>
>
> *** You yourself said that you never thought anything of anything
until your buddy mentioned Kent State to you. I think you just got
some crazy ideas crossed and decided to pull an Eric Greene and look
for some socio-political thing in the first APES film you seen all
those years ago. I'm guessing you read the Green book? I'd guess that
his weird ideas got your mind brewing and you remembered something
that actually wasn't there to begin with. Couple that with the Kent
State talk from your pal and what do you get: A false memory or a
totally made up scenario. (And my guess is that it is the latter.) ***
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

> No one is disputing that scenes are cut out of films or that
> improvisations are made on set. As far as the examples you've cited,
> there is evidence that they exist. However, there is no evidence that
> the scene in Beneath you describe ever existed.

As of this writing, you could say as much. For now.

> It is not in any version of the script so it is hard to believe that it
> was improvised on set. Two to three minutes scenes requiring an
> additional speaking role are not improvised at the last minute.

As I noted in another message, from my vantage point as a 12-year-old, it seemed like
that extended preview trailer went on that long. That scene may, however, have been only
a minute or two, but it was long enough to have engaged my interest on a level that I
hadn't anticipated. Again, the scene sold me on the notion that the Apes series was just as
much about *ideas* as it was about action/adventure with apes thinly disguised as
humans beset by human nature's worst foibles and highest ideals clashing with each
other.

> It has never been mentioned by any of the film makers associated with
> Beneath in interviews for any of the several excellent books about the
> making of the films. Joe Russo's book discusses this sequence
> extensively because it was the cause of friction between Ted Post and
> Mort Abrams, yet no one said a word about the scene you describe.

Now that's interesting; however, what exactly was the point of contention between Post
and Abrams concerning the scene of the gorilla army confronting the chimpanzee
protesters?

> Beneath premiered on May 26th. The Kent State shootings took place on
> May 4th. But the NATO preview film was produced well before that.

And the NATO film did not include any of Roseman's music, either. That short excerpt
already truncated the protesters sequence from the film considerably.

> Since the NATO film's version is the same version in the final film then your
> assertion that is was cut in response to the Kent State shooting is not
> valid since it hadn't happened yet.

No, the NATO excerpt featured editing that was identical or nearly identical to the
finished scene. But again, the NATO preview trailer was an already-truncated synopsis of
some of the key highlights from a *work in progress.*

> Now I believe that you believe that you saw this but it is simply a
> false memory.

If only it were as simple as false memory. I was beginning to wonder if the advance
preview that I saw had somehow in part been deceptively edited a la the end of the NATO
preview film (where the gorillas appear to be attempting to barge into a packed St.
Patrick's Cathedral) in such a way via the magic of editing to appear as if General Ursus
were arguing a point with a chimpanzee protester (or some other character), but there the
anology falls apart as there wasn't any protest leader seen among the chimps in the final
film (at least not standing).

By the way, I do wanna make one thing very clear: I'd never seen a conventional trailer
for "Beneath" at a theater before seeing it. I'd only seen its TV ads whose juxtoposition of
changing scenes and imagery didn't convey enough of the flavor of the film to the
uninitiated to embrace it as an ideas movie as well. The first time I saw the conventional
trailer for "Beneath" a little over a decade ago, I was a bit underwhelmed. It didn't strike
me as evocative of what I'd seen, nor did it convey that it was a movie about ideas as much
as action.

To go to the theater that I attended, my parents either had to drive me 21 miles to get
there or I had to go stay the weekend with my grandparents because the Strand Theater
was located in the parish seat of Jena, Louisiana. (Yes, *that* Jena you've read and heard
so much about over the past year.) My own home town didn't have a cinema. (It had closed
some 5 years prior.) I more often went to the movies when I spent the weekend with my
grandparents who lived near Jena.

James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:

And yet, if the "Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil and Say No Evil" sequence of the three orangutans from Taylor's trial had been cut from the final print of the original "Planet of the Apes," we'd possibly have been none the wiser if no cutting-room-floor footage of it had survived because it too was not in the original script. It was improvised during shooting as an on-set inspiration of the moment.

*** True, but the fact of the matter is that at least it is/was scripted that they were in the courtroom examining Taylor (and Zira and Cornelius). It's not like they just off the cuff said "Let's do a scene so we can do the "Hear No, Speak No, Say No Evil" bit.

 

Sure that bit was "spur of the moment", but you have to also remember that it was within the confines of what was scripted.

 

And speaking of that bit, I wish they had excised it, it's really pretty stupid. I can see why Kim and Roddy didn't like it and thought it cheapened the material. ***

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

It's a false memory. Accept it and move on.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...> wrote:
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" JamesA1102@ wrote:
>
> > No one is disputing that scenes are cut out of films or that
> > improvisations are made on set. As far as the examples you've cited,
> > there is evidence that they exist. However, there is no evidence that
> > the scene in Beneath you describe ever existed.
>
> As of this writing, you could say as much. For now.
>
>
> > It is not in any version of the script so it is hard to believe that it
> > was improvised on set. Two to three minutes scenes requiring an
> > additional speaking role are not improvised at the last minute.
>
> As I noted in another message, from my vantage point as a 12-year-old, it seemed like
> that extended preview trailer went on that long. That scene may, however, have been only
> a minute or two, but it was long enough to have engaged my interest on a level that I
> hadn't anticipated. Again, the scene sold me on the notion that the Apes series was just as
> much about *ideas* as it was about action/adventure with apes thinly disguised as
> humans beset by human nature's worst foibles and highest ideals clashing with each
> other.
>
>
> > It has never been mentioned by any of the film makers associated with
> > Beneath in interviews for any of the several excellent books about the
> > making of the films. Joe Russo's book discusses this sequence
> > extensively because it was the cause of friction between Ted Post and
> > Mort Abrams, yet no one said a word about the scene you describe.
>
> Now that's interesting; however, what exactly was the point of contention between Post
> and Abrams concerning the scene of the gorilla army confronting the chimpanzee
> protesters?
>
>
> > Beneath premiered on May 26th. The Kent State shootings took place on
> > May 4th. But the NATO preview film was produced well before that.
>
> And the NATO film did not include any of Roseman's music, either. That short excerpt
> already truncated the protesters sequence from the film considerably.
>
>
> > Since the NATO film's version is the same version in the final film then your
> > assertion that is was cut in response to the Kent State shooting is not
> > valid since it hadn't happened yet.
>
> No, the NATO excerpt featured editing that was identical or nearly identical to the
> finished scene. But again, the NATO preview trailer was an already-truncated synopsis of
> some of the key highlights from a *work in progress.*
>
>
> > Now I believe that you believe that you saw this but it is simply a
> > false memory.
>
> If only it were as simple as false memory. I was beginning to wonder if the advance
> preview that I saw had somehow in part been deceptively edited a la the end of the NATO
> preview film (where the gorillas appear to be attempting to barge into a packed St.
> Patrick's Cathedral) in such a way via the magic of editing to appear as if General Ursus
> were arguing a point with a chimpanzee protester (or some other character), but there the
> anology falls apart as there wasn't any protest leader seen among the chimps in the final
> film (at least not standing).
>
> By the way, I do wanna make one thing very clear: I'd never seen a conventional trailer
> for "Beneath" at a theater before seeing it. I'd only seen its TV ads whose juxtoposition of
> changing scenes and imagery didn't convey enough of the flavor of the film to the
> uninitiated to embrace it as an ideas movie as well. The first time I saw the conventional
> trailer for "Beneath" a little over a decade ago, I was a bit underwhelmed. It didn't strike
> me as evocative of what I'd seen, nor did it convey that it was a movie about ideas as much
> as action.
>
> To go to the theater that I attended, my parents either had to drive me 21 miles to get
> there or I had to go stay the weekend with my grandparents because the Strand Theater
> was located in the parish seat of Jena, Louisiana. (Yes, *that* Jena you've read and heard
> so much about over the past year.) My own home town didn't have a cinema. (It had closed
> some 5 years prior.) I more often went to the movies when I spent the weekend with my
> grandparents who lived near Jena.
>

> James King wrote:
> Until I read a confirmed and unimpeachable source, that matter Still remains
> unconfirmed as far as I'm concerned.

*** Well, you're on to something there. However, until I actually see/read the false scene from a "confirmed and unimpeachable source", it's not going to stay unconfirmed with me. It is going to stay in my "There's another pile of s**t" list.

 

You can "Kent State" all you want, it does nothing to prove a scene existed. And, btw, even if you didn't say Ursus "killed" the student, you surely must have implied it by comparing the "scene" to what happened at Kent State. Kent State is the college that CSN&Y sang about in the song OHIO isn't it? "Four dead in Ohio..."

You can say that FOX was so embarassed by it that they "buried it".

You can say that you seen it at a local parish theater until you're blue in the face, because you've yet to give any PROOF that anything like it ever existed.

You don't even have an answer as to how come the NATO mini-movies
for PLANET and BENEATH don't have one scene that goes a minute solid,
and yet, this magical mystery scene of your's ran close to 2 or 3
minutes solid. (Or it seemed like it did in your mind at that time.)

When you're asked to give solid proof, your posts often ramble on as lengthy musings that veer off into no-mans-land. Thousands of words saying something thatcould be said in a paragraph or two. Lengthy "term paper" length posts that by the time you're done reading them, you forget what you were reading about.

 If you or anyone on this message board truly believe without a shadow of doubt that this alleged scene ever really was, well then I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you. ***

---

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

It's a false memory. Accept it and move on.

*** The vision was false."- Dr. Zaius upon proving the falling Lawgiver was a hoax. From Beneath the Planet of the Apes.

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote: ---It's really too bad we don't know the

story of why or how General Ursus is portrayed as holding his pistol aloft in hand as seen
in the still of one the cover photographs on the 1970 paperback novelization of "Beneath."

> *** No story to it. It was a bitchin' publicity shot. Case closed. ***

Source?


James King: "Sorry, but I've had quite a long time to think back on this and my memory is
just fine, thank you."

> You yourself said that you never thought anything of anything until
> your buddy mentioned Kent State to you.

First of all, he wasn't my buddy; he was the head of a college campus radio station and
radio/TV/film advisor. I was covering some news stories about the station and asking
about his own background. (This occurred in 1993, twenty-three years *after* I first saw
"Beneath.") And no, I'd never realized exactly when Kent State had occurred datewise.

Second, it was the college radio station administrator who brought up the matter of
Kent State (his alma mater) to me. I told him that even though I did watch evening
network news back then, I as a 12-year-old didn't recall the Kent State Incident and only
had a fuzzy notion of what had transpired there. He filled in the gaps of my knowledge
and it was shortly thereafter that it just sort of dawned on me one day when I was
reflecting back on "Beneath": The Kent State Incident occurred on May 4, 1970 and
"Beneath" was released in late May 1970. Maybe *that's* why the Ursus-shoots-the-
chimpanzee-protester scene never made the final print: The studio probably edited it out
but didn't have enough time to make its editing as seamless as it might otherwise could
have been if they'd had more time.

> I think you just got some crazy ideas crossed and decided to pull an
> Eric Greene and look for some socio-political thing in the first APES
> film you seen all those years ago.

Since the chimpanzee protesters that I saw in the extended advance-preview trailer
were analagous to the human anti-Vietnam War protesters that I'd seen in TV news
footage, I'd say I made the right connection between the two. It's certainly not lost on me
that the scenes shot herky-jerky style of the gorillas rounding up the chimpanzee
protesters and putting them into the paddy wagons was QUITE evocative of TV news
footage of police confronting peace demonstrators taken by TV cameramen in the midst of
the chaos.

> I'm guessing you read the Green book?

Indeed, I have, and he was right on the money for the most part. His perspective is quite
unique since he as a bi-racial youth had seen the latter Apes films during his formative
years and naturally identified with certain characters in the films in ways that non-biracial
people simply cannot.

Do you actually consider Green's bi-racial perspective to be "weird"? After all, he set
forth in the forward to his book that his perspective had been influenced by his growing
up and bridging two divergent cultures.

> I'd guess that his weird ideas got your mind brewing and you
> remembered something that actually wasn't there to begin with.

In my opinion, there was nothing remotely "weird" about Greene's ideas. I challenge you
to qualify what exactly you're referring to as his "weird ideas.'

Indeed, there's nothing "weird" about the human condition that satire hadn't already
addressed in similar ways before, such as the way the evolved equines in "Gulliver's
Travels" judged Gulliver as a human and how the animals (except the pigs) in George
Orwell's "Animal Farm" eschewed all things human.

> Couple that with the Kent State talk from your pal and what do you
> get: A false memory or a totally made up scenario. (And my guess is
> that it is the latter.)

And your guess is wrong.

But I will tell you something that may sound weird to you that made me consider some
of the other notions put forth by "Beneath" to have more present-day veracity in the late
1960s.

I recall my father telling me sometime around 1968-69 that the U.S. had a doomsday
bomb on the drawing board and the parts from which to construct it with; but that the
government was too afraid to construct it for it was so powerful that it would destroy the
entire world. (I don't know where he heard or read this. He simply brought it up one day
while we were talking and huddlng around a wall heater after returning home from
somewhere.) I recalled his telling me that because it was such startling news to hear.

In the novelization of "Escape" (based on Dehn's script), there was a reference to what
had become of the African-American population as until the stuffed exhibit of the black
astronaut Dodge appeared in their museum, neither Zira nor Cornelius (nor any other apes
for that matter) had ever seen a human before with black skin, and they didn't know what
had become of darker-skin humans.

In the early '70s, I remember my grandmother telling me that she had seen some expert
(probably a futurist of some sort) expounding on the idea that one not-too-distant future
day, the notion of different races would melt away and that humankind would eventually
be one golden race.

It is my supposition that the dumb humans seen in "Planet" and "Beneath" were of multi-
racial origin whose racial differences over the centuries had become less obvious. So they
weren't white or Hispanic or Asian or African-American -- they were in essence all the
above, the culmination of centuries of both interbreeding, under-nutrition and
conditioning to remain silent and not speak.

Regretfully, this notion was and has been fuel for the fire for racists who since the
1980s have used the term "Planet of the Apes" as a racist code word to denote that the
humans in "Planet" and "Beneath" were the way they are solely because of interbreeding,
that is, producing a dumb-down mutt of a human species, a fate which they fear-monger
will befall Anglo Americans with the passage of time if racial separation weren't enforced.

If you were to travel to the future of a still-existent America of 2108, I daresay you
would find a much darker-skinned population, the result of human migration and inter-
marriage. In fact, that's what futurists have already predicted for the U.S. (Same for most
of Europe too as people of Arab descent will eventually comprise the majority of the
population in their respective European countries.)

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

> That same publicity shot [of General Ursus with the upraised pistol in
> hand that] you mentioned is also one of the lobby cards in the set.

Thanks, Scott, that's all the more intriguing since as far as I can recall them, lobby cards
were generally reflective of the actual content and storylines of their respective films'
theatrical versions.

In 1973, I received an entire set of color lobby cards for "Battle for the Planet of the
Apes" from 20th-Century Fox, one of which featured Kolp showing Alma the Alpha-
Omega bomb. Although that scene regretfully didn't show up in the final film, it
nonetheless had been filmed as depicted in the lobby card. And thanks to David Gerrold's
novelization, I realized all the moreso what scene it was depicting content-wise as well.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
> This is the pic of Zira holding the protest banner. Note that there are
> humans in the wagons.

Make that *wagon* (singular). Moreover, the notion of a wagon or some wagons filled
with captured humans wouldn't have been unusual.

Having some humans in a wagon or wagons alongside or near the wagons filled with
the chimipanzee protesters again would have been intended as a very disillusioning but
deliberate put-down of sorts. Why, the chimpanzee protesters might well have fumed that
they'd been treated no better than humans by the gorillas. (Gorilla brutality!)

> If it was a still from the scene in question shouldn't the wagon be empty
> or at least filled with chimps and not humans?

No, that one wagon wasn't the sole wagon present in the plaza of the Ape City.
Moreover, you have yet to qualify in credible terms your simplistic notion why the wagons
had to contain either all humans or all apes (and/or that humans couldn't be present in
some of the wagons).

The scenes with Kolp showing Alma the Alpha-Omega bomb are included
in the Extended Edition of BATTLE.

Jeff (RedSpy)


--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "digitalcinema" <digitalcinema@> wrote:
>
> > That same publicity shot [of General Ursus with the upraised

pistol in

> > hand that] you mentioned is also one of the lobby cards in the

set.

>
> Thanks, Scott, that's all the more intriguing since as far as I

can recall them, lobby cards

> were generally reflective of the actual content and storylines of

their respective films'

> theatrical versions.
>
> In 1973, I received an entire set of color lobby cards

for "Battle for the Planet of the

> Apes" from 20th-Century Fox, one of which featured Kolp showing

Alma the Alpha-

> Omega bomb. Although that scene regretfully didn't show up in the

final film, it

> nonetheless had been filmed as depicted in the lobby card. And

thanks to David Gerrold's

> novelization, I realized all the moreso what scene it was depicting

content-wise as well.

>

HI Everyone

Thanks to everyone who answered my last post. I'm still looking for
POTA authentic costume stuff, particularly weapons and boots. I've been
searching on google but a lot of the links seem to be dead, even for
the replica stuff. Any help anyone can offer for anything would be
appreicated.

Cheers

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> > James King wrote:
> > Until I read a confirmed and unimpeachable source, that matter Still remains
> > unconfirmed as far as I'm concerned.
>
> Well, you're on to something there. However, until I actually see/read the false scene

from a "confirmed and unimpeachable source", it's not going to stay unconfirmed with me.
It is going to stay in my "There's another pile of s**t" list.

>
> You can "Kent State" all you want, it does nothing to prove a scene existed.
> And, btw, even if you didn't say Ursus "killed" the student, you surely must
> have implied it by comparing the "scene" to what happened at Kent State.
> Kent State is the college that CSN&Y sang about in the song OHIO isn't it?
> "Four dead in Ohio..."

While you focused solely upon the four students killed at Kent State, you've overlooked
the big picture of all the other students who were brutalized, hurt and harmed in that
incident. Just because they weren't killed doesn't mean that the other students received
kid-glove treatment by the National Guardsmen. Including the entire body of student
protesters assembled at Kent State, it not only marked the first time that government
soldiers had knowingly shot at student protesters, it also marked the first time that
soldiers of any service branch had knowingly intended to target and hit a student
protester.

In proper comparative context of "Beneath," General Ursus was most certainly a soldier
as were his army who rounded up the chimp protesters.

> You can say that FOX was so embarassed by it that they "buried it".
>
> You can say that you seen it at a local parish theater until you're blue in the face,

because you've yet to give any PROOF that anything like it ever existed.

>
> You don't even have an answer as to how come the NATO mini-movies
> for PLANET and BENEATH don't have one scene that goes a minute solid,
> and yet, this magical mystery scene of your's ran close to 2 or 3
> minutes solid. (Or it seemed like it did in your mind at that time.)
>
> When you're asked to give solid proof, your posts often ramble on as lengthy musings

that veer off into no-mans-land. Thousands of words saying something thatcould be said
in a paragraph or two. Lengthy "term paper" length posts that by the time you're done
reading them, you forget what you were reading about.

>
> If you or anyone on this message board truly believe without a shadow of doubt that

this alleged scene ever really was, well then I have some ocean front property in Arizona to
sell you. ***

If only you'd only said lake-front property instead and mentioned Groom Lake, you
*might* very well have attracted interest.

However, unless otherwise stated or corrected by myself, I stand by everything I've
written -- period.

But I wholly reject your statements in the biased spirit in which they were phrased and
written.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, m c <aboro3085@...> wrote:

> James King <shrstrategygames@...> wrote: And yet, if the "Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil

and Say No Evil" sequence of the three orangutans from Taylor's trial had been cut from
the final print of the original "Planet of the Apes," we'd possibly have been none the wiser
if no cutting-room-floor footage of it had survived because it too was not in the original
script. It was improvised during shooting as an on-set inspiration of the moment.

> *** True, but the fact of the matter is that at least it is/was scripted that
> they were in the courtroom examining Taylor (and Zira and Cornelius).
> It's not like they just off the cuff said "Let's do a scene so we can do the
> "Hear No, Speak No, Say No Evil" bit.

Which in no way invalidates my own observation just the same.

> Sure that bit was "spur of the moment", but you have to also remember
> that it was within the confines of what was scripted.

Comparatively speaking, for all we know, the exchange that I saw between General
Ursus and the chimp protest leader might also have been improvised on the spur of the
moment. After all, the gorilla army's confrontation with the protesters had been scripted
to some degree as well. Such a scene would have resonated uncomfortably too close to
home for many and bit too familiar for comfort with most movie audiences of 1970.

In dramatic terms, I can well understand why somebody may have thought that there
ought to have been some sort of last stand by the chimp protesters to block the army's
way. And since the chimps were pacifistic, they could only have used words, ideas and
passive resistance, not bullets and brute force. Nonetheless, the only way to have
effectively and ultimately blocked the apes' march to war would not have been merely to
engage in blocking the army's path but also to have convinced General Ursus that his
course of action was wrong.

So blocking the army's march could have served as another purpose altogether: to gain
access to speak with General Ursus one on one.

> And speaking of that ["Hear No, Speak No, Say No Evil"] bit., I wish
> they had excised it, it's really pretty stupid. I can see why Kim and
> Roddy didn't like it and thought it cheapened the material.

I disagree. I think it was the only way such a satirical gag could have been incorporated
into the movie in a logical context that fit the circumstances. It was worth the effort.
However, I do sympathize with Roddy McDowall and Kim Hunter from an acting point of
view because it occurs during the sequence when their Cornelius and Zira characters are
making their most ardent appeals for openness, objective truth-seeking and want to be
heard, not tuned out. And yet, that one snicker of recognition about that age-old ""Hear
No, Speak No, Say No Evil" bit didn't detract entirely from the emotional impact of the
scene.

In the first POTA Taylor never questions why the Apes are speaking
English. Up until the end of movie, he thinks he is on alien world.
Now what are the chances of two completely different worlds evolving,
and creating the same langauge? Even towards the end of POTA when
Taylor looks at the relics in the cave, Heart valve, eye glasses,
speaking doll, etc he still doesn't seem to make a connection. I think
I would have been giving it some thought long before I saw the Statue
of Liberty. It wasn't even brought up until in Escape that DR.
Hasslein asks Cornelius, Where did you learn to speak English?

The latest entry of CORNELIUS' JOURNAL is now available. 

To read the JOURNAL entry either click the banner on the Yahoo home page or use this link: http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/pota/files/CJ.htm

Have a great weekend everybody!

Visit all the Group's special features including:

• The Group Website  - Original POTA One Sheets & Lobby Cards, Trailers & Rare Videos, Trading Cards and much, much more.
• POTA Locations  - The places where the POTA films were shot.
• Lessons from the Lawgiver – Words of wisdom from the Greatest Ape of All.
• The Art Gallery  - Works of POTA Art by our members.
• The Database Section  - POTA info ranging from Characters to Comics.
• The Photos Section  - POTA pics contributed by members.

Personally, I think the whole language thing has to be viewed as a
cinematic convention, an artistic conceit, as otherwise you've got to
waste time with languages/sub titles and that just gets in the way of
the plot.Boulle's book was able to handle it quickly in print, but film
would be much more difficult.John, Scrolls,

>
> In the first POTA Taylor never questions why the Apes are speaking
> English. Up until the end of movie, he thinks he is on alien world.
> Now what are the chances of two completely different worlds evolving,
> and creating the same langauge? Even towards the end of POTA when
> Taylor looks at the relics in the cave, Heart valve, eye glasses,
> speaking doll, etc he still doesn't seem to make a connection. I

think

> I would have been giving it some thought long before I saw the Statue
> of Liberty. It wasn't even brought up until in Escape that DR.
> Hasslein asks Cornelius, Where did you learn to speak English?
>

I always wondered about the language spoken by the apes, as well. For
example, what do the heiroglyphs on the chest and cuffs of the chimp
outfits mean? They look as though they have a strange looking E at the
beginning and a 2 or Z at the end, yet Zira is instantly able to read
Taylor's note about his name, written in English. The strange
heiroglyphs are on all the chimp and orangutan outfits, yet they all
seem to be able to read English. But then you have to remember to tell
yourself, "It's only a movie", and certain dramatic license was taken
for dramatical purposes. Every film has its own continuity and logic
errors, meant for pure fantasy entertainment.

Jeff (RedSpy)


--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "S.W. Plissken" <cobaltcamouflage62@...>
wrote:

>
> In the first POTA Taylor never questions why the Apes are speaking
> English. Up until the end of movie, he thinks he is on alien world.
> Now what are the chances of two completely different worlds evolving,
> and creating the same langauge? Even towards the end of POTA when
> Taylor looks at the relics in the cave, Heart valve, eye glasses,
> speaking doll, etc he still doesn't seem to make a connection. I

think

> I would have been giving it some thought long before I saw the Statue
> of Liberty. It wasn't even brought up until in Escape that DR.
> Hasslein asks Cornelius, Where did you learn to speak English?
>

-----Original Message-----
From: James King <shrstrategygames@...>
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 1:27 am
Subject: [pota] Re: Search for Missing Scene from "Beneath the Planet of the Apes"

I've read the producers discussed it, along with, how come the humans
wear clothes? My particular favorite is, why is there a rubber dinghy
stashed under the control panels of a spaceship?

In the end they just cross their fingers and hoped audiences will run
with it.

Dave

.html

The Ziegfeld Theatre in NYC (141 West 54th Street) is now a revival house, and during the week of March 28 to April 3rd, there will be 40th Anniversary showings of the PLANET OF THE APES films.  The web page for it (http://www.clearviewcinemas.com/ziegfeld/ziegfeld-comingsoon.html") doesn't have the show times yet, but I'm sure James will now check this out thoroughly.

 

Man, do I wish I was in or near NYC now!  Damn it all to hell!

 

-- Rory

<.html

I don't know if you're aware of it but PLANET also has a strange
photo as part of the lobby card set depicting Taylor and Nova in
scene not in the film. I don't know if this even from an actual
scene or merely a publicity pic, but it's there never the less.
- Scott


--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James King" <shrstrategygames@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "digitalcinema" <digitalcinema@> wrote:
>
> > That same publicity shot [of General Ursus with the upraised

pistol in

> > hand that] you mentioned is also one of the lobby cards in the

set.

>
> Thanks, Scott, that's all the more intriguing since as far as I

can recall them, lobby cards

> were generally reflective of the actual content and storylines of

their respective films'

> theatrical versions.
>
> In 1973, I received an entire set of color lobby cards

for "Battle for the Planet of the

> Apes" from 20th-Century Fox, one of which featured Kolp showing

Alma the Alpha-

> Omega bomb. Although that scene regretfully didn't show up in the

final film, it

> nonetheless had been filmed as depicted in the lobby card. And

thanks to David Gerrold's

> novelization, I realized all the moreso what scene it was depicting

content-wise as well.

>

And why bother bringing a Geiger Counter if it doesn't tell you an
atom bomb went off a mile or so away? Suppose when Zira heard Taylor
speak she'd exclaimed 'Thank Christ for that--the last guy was
French!'.We can't be too picky over Apes--there has to be a bit of
concession by the audience as that favour is very amply rewarded in
return.John.

>
> I've read the producers discussed it, along with, how come the humans
> wear clothes? My particular favorite is, why is there a rubber dinghy
> stashed under the control panels of a spaceship?
>
> In the end they just cross their fingers and hoped audiences will run
> with it.
>
> Dave
>

I believe the heiroglyphs were instructions for front and back in case
some idiot was left to figure it out for themselves as seen recently
on ebay.
Unfortunately, although Apes can read English, Humans can't read Ape
heiroglyphs....
Brendan.

>
> I always wondered about the language spoken by the apes, as well.

For

> example, what do the heiroglyphs on the chest and cuffs of the chimp
> outfits mean? They look as though they have a strange looking E at

the

> beginning and a 2 or Z at the end, yet Zira is instantly able to

read

> Taylor's note about his name, written in English. The strange
> heiroglyphs are on all the chimp and orangutan outfits, yet they all
> seem to be able to read English.

Thanks for this info--Frank and I will be going--or
I'll go myself--I haven't seem them theatrically since
1974!! They BETTER be decent prints!
--- Haristas@... wrote:

> The Ziegfeld Theatre in NYC (141 West 54th Street)
> is now a revival house,
> and during the week of March 28 to April 3rd, there
> will be 40th Anniversary
> showings of the PLANET OF THE APES films. The web
> page for it
>

(_http://www.clearviewcinemas.com/ziegfeld/ziegfeld-comingsoon.html

>
>

(http://www.clearviewcinemas.com/ziegfeld/ziegfeld-comingsoon.html

> ) doesn't have the show times yet,
> but I'm sure James will now check this out
> thoroughly.
>
> Man, do I wish I was in or near NYC now! Damn it
> all to hell!
>
> -- Rory
>
>
>
> **************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and
> advice on AOL Money &
> Finance.
> (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
>

________________________