>
> I'm in a state of Ape Sensory overload.Rich's Timeline book is
> stunning, the Megos are back, Simian Scrolls #15 is done and there's a
> new movie on the way.And today I had in my Blu Ray box set.I know that
> buying a set you can never play is nerdish to the point of insanity,
> but I just had to have the book.And what a book! This is a lavish,
> sumptuous trip through the five movies, with stills I've never seen and
> glossy ,rich coloured shots that leap off the page.It's worth buying
> for the book alone and I don't remember Apes ever being as hot as it is
> lately.John, Scrolls.
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
>
>
> Don't get your hopes up. From everything that is currently out that
> about this it sounds like a total reboot that has nothing to do with
the
> classic films for even Burton's remake.

I would still suggest that you not get your hopes up. It sounds more like another total reboot than a continuation of the classic films.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "ronnie2467" <ronnie2467@...> wrote:
>
> I am hoping that this new apes movie or trilogy would deal with the original story
> line and go from there.
> Ron
>
>
>
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
>
>
> Brent heard Cornelius and Zira call her Nova.
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "branchbrood" <branchbrood@> wrote:
> >
> > >Or How Brent knew Nova's Name WAS NOVA!?! or hee heee What happened
> > to the Apes' Extra Toe? just Kidding on the toe thing
> > John
> >
>

On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 9:25 PM, peter_karsten63 <peter_karsten63@...> wrote:

Hi There,

Just had a look on Hunter's website and found a Blu-ray timeline from
their release of the movies.

I just can't believe it when I saw 3955 as the year that Taylor
landed, or are eyes deceiving me, everybody knows it's 3978 and the
earth blew up in 3979, mean to say, has'it 20th century fox and those
people responsible for the DVD release got it right yet! What is their
problem?

Peter.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
>
>
> I would still suggest that you not get your hopes up. It sounds more
> like another total reboot than a continuation of the classic films.
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "ronnie2467" <ronnie2467@> wrote:
> >
> > I am hoping that this new apes movie or trilogy would deal with
the
> original story
> > line and go from there.
> > Ron
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Yes but only the first half. The rest hadn't been added yet.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@...> wrote:
>
> EXCUSE ME,
>
> Does Caesar do a speech in the end of the Director's Cut CONQUEST??? If
> that is the case, what did he say to contradict BATTLE so much?
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Tuxen" <20thctryfox@...> wrote:
>
> I don't have the the blu-rays yet but that date discrepency was a
gooch made
> by the filmmakers. We never saw a date meter in "Beneath" but Brent
tells
> Skipper that the year is 3955. That date is confirmed in "Escape"
by the
> apes and the scientists that went over Taylor's ship
with "microscopic
> scrutiny".
>
> The timeline was probably created the way it was in order to not
confuse the
> unassuming viewer. The whole thing could have been solved if they
just
> digitally changed the date meter in "Planet" to 395-something
instead of
> 3978. Why did they change the date, who knows? Maybe 3955 rolls off
the
> tongue better that 3978.
>
> Those of us who know these films know of the discrepency in the
first place.
> Its nothing to get bent out of shape about.
>
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 9:25 PM, peter_karsten63 <
> peter_karsten63@...> wrote:
>
> > Hi There,
> >
> > Just had a look on Hunter's website and found a Blu-ray timeline
from
> > their release of the movies.
> >
> > I just can't believe it when I saw 3955 as the year that Taylor
> > landed, or are eyes deceiving me, everybody knows it's 3978 and
the
> > earth blew up in 3979, mean to say, has'it 20th century fox and
those
> > people responsible for the DVD release got it right yet! What is
their
> > problem?
> >
> > Peter.
> >
> >
> >
>

You mean like this:

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Tuxen" <20thctryfox@...> wrote:
>
> The timeline was probably created the way it was in order to not confuse the
> unassuming viewer. The whole thing could have been solved if they just
> digitally changed the date meter in "Planet" to 395-something instead of
> 3978.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
>
>
> Yes but only the first half. The rest hadn't been added yet.
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@> wrote:
> >
> > EXCUSE ME,
> >
> > Does Caesar do a speech in the end of the Director's Cut CONQUEST???
> If
> > that is the case, what did he say to contradict BATTLE so much?
> >
>

>

> No WAIT, you're all talking like the Director's Cut is the
> NEW 'Conquest'.
>
> At this point, since it contradicts BATTLE... it can't be!
>
>
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@> wrote:
> >
> > Or Kolp may have just assumed that Breck was killed by the bomb.
> > --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, scott bosco <digitalcinema@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Having Governor Breck killed goes against the line of dialog in
> BATTLE
> > that mentions he died from the bomb. Now, I suppose it might

> > be possible he survived the pummeling at the end of

> > cut", perhaps as a veggie, but I doubt it. Then again, it's no
> worse
> > than Taylor's ship being used by the apes, , hell, even Nova
> actually
> > remembering how to go across the wasteland to Ape city like she's
> done
> > it numerous times. Not to mention how she knew where Cornelius &
> > Zira lived. But hell, that's entertainment.
> > > - Scott
> > >
> > > --- On Thu, 12/4/08, apecalypsenow apecalypsenow@ wrote:
> > >
> > > From: apecalypsenow apecalypsenow@
> > > Subject: [pota] Director's Cut CONQUEST: new "continuity"?
> > > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > > Date: Thursday, December 4, 2008, 10:11 AM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Essentially. .. what discrepancies does the Director's
> Cut 'CONQUEST'
> > > create? What differences plot-wise? I'm puzzled.
> > >
> > > Thanks...
> > >
> > > Tiziano Caliendo.
> > >
> >
>

Take a look at the script on Hunter's site: https://pota.goatley.com/scripts/pota_conquest_finalshooting.pdf 

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@...> wrote:
>
> So? Is there a transcript of BOTH the versions? HUGE thanks.
>
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" JamesA1102@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yes but only the first half. The rest hadn't been added yet.
> >
> > --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@> wrote:
> > >
> > > EXCUSE ME,
> > >
> > > Does Caesar do a speech in the end of the Director's Cut CONQUEST???
> > If
> > > that is the case, what did he say to contradict BATTLE so much?
> > >
> >
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
>
>
> Take a look at the script on Hunter's site:
> https://pota.goatley.com/scripts/pota_conquest_finalshooting.pdf
> <https://pota.goatley.com/scripts/pota_conquest_finalshooting.pdf>
>
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@> wrote:
> >
> > So? Is there a transcript of BOTH the versions? HUGE thanks.
> >
> >
> > --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" JamesA1102@ wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes but only the first half. The rest hadn't been added yet.
> > >
> > > --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "apecalypsenow" <apecalypsenow@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > EXCUSE ME,
> > > >
> > > > Does Caesar do a speech in the end of the Director's Cut
> CONQUEST???
> > > If
> > > > that is the case, what did he say to contradict BATTLE so
much?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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

From: Chris Lawless

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 1:57 PM

Subject: [pota] Forrest J Ackerman: 1916-2008

http://news. yahoo.com/ s/ap/20081205/ ap_en_ce/ obit_ackerman

Sad, but what a great legacy to have and to leave behind.

Chris L.
____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
Free information on becoming a Graphic Designer. Click Now!
http://thirdpartyof fers.juno. com/TGL2141/ fc/PnY6rw3huHzYi NAxuPnMkJfFTbpHJ 1NeJM46nFoNGOJxC hpPqI20O/

>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081205/ap_en_ce/obit_ackerman
>
> Sad, but what a great legacy to have and to leave behind.
>
>
> Chris L.
>

Having Governor Breck killed goes against the line of dialog in BATTLE that mentions he died from the bomb. Now, I suppose it might MIGHT be possible he survived the pummeling at the end of the "director's cut", perhaps as a veggie, but I doubt it. Then again, it's no worse than Taylor's ship being used by the apes, , hell, even Nova actually remembering how to go across the wasteland to Ape city like she's done it numerous times. Not to mention how she knew where Cornelius & Zira lived. But hell, that's entertainment.

- Scott

I also love it in BENEATH when Taylor suddenly has his dog tags, and Brent, with the help of Nova, hangs on to his. Why? What the hell did they need them for?

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

Anyone here not seen this one?

http://cinefantastiqueonline.com/2008/03/21/film-review-planet-of-the-vampires-1965/

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

Do you know how much any POTA movie costed at the time of their
release? I know POTA '68 didn't cost THAT much, after all... not the
cheapest of the films, but neither an expensive kolossal.

I'm wondering if the original STAR WARS (New Hope) costed more, taking
in account inflation. That's because the original SW movie is often
addressed as a "b-movie" in terms of budget... ???

I think STAR WARS had a budget of around $10 Million.

PLANET's was $5.8 Million, which back in 1967 probably equalled a little less than the $10 Million did in 1977.

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

That's exactly what I'm hoping for. Total Reboot.

Hey.... I wonder if it'll still say "Based on a Novel by Pierre Boulle"?

If it don't, is it APES?

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

>"But it sounds like this new Caesar film is a good
>idea and will loosely tie into both the original
>Planet of the Apes and the Burton remake (showing
>how apes now rule earth by the time Mark Walburg
>arrives back on earth)."

Rory,

Cinifantastic always had a somewhat negative view of ALIEN. I remember when they first reviewed ALIEN the title of the review was, "IT THE TERROR, FROM BEYOND THE PLANET OF THE VAMPIRES"

I still have that, along with all my issues, they're all packed away.

- Scott B

One of the things I'll always remember Cinefantastique for is that they were also rather negative about STAR WARS, recognizing right away that it was bad science fiction, which I saw as well and was disgusted with how almost everyone gushed over what a "great" SF film it was. STAR WARS was a disaster for the genre and we're still living with it.

It was unfortunate what happened to that magazine and its publisher. I got pretty sick of the mag by the mid eighties. In order to sell they had to cover in excruciating detail the making of every SF film that came out, whether good or bad, interesting or not. I remember a time where I wrote a letter to them saying that "if it appeared on the cover of Cinefantastique -- don't go see it!" They didn't publish the letter. This was when things like Tobe Hooper's dreadful remake of INVADERS FROM MARS made the cover. The retrospective articles on classic SF films, or things like the art of movie posters, where what made the mag great.

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@... wrote:
>
>
>
> Do you know how much any POTA movie costed at the time of their
>
> release? I know POTA '68 didn't cost THAT much, after all... not
the
>
> cheapest of the films, but neither an expensive kolossal.
>
>
>
> I'm wondering if the original STAR WARS (New Hope) costed more,
taking
>
> in account inflation. That's because the original SW movie is often
>
> addressed as a "b-movie" in terms of budget... ???
> I think STAR WARS had a budget of around $10 Million.
>
>
>
> PLANET's was $5.8 Million, which back in 1967 probably equalled a
little less than the $10 Million did in 1977.
>
>
>
>
> -- RoryÂ
>

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

From: Brian P

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 1:57 AM

Subject: RE: [pota] Re: 1000 years -from 2009 to the lawgivers speech

I was hoping for a prequel to Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes or a sequel that would explain the ending better.  Though, if you have read the book it isn't really necessary to understand how the apes got back to earth, but having Thade's memorial did confuse things a little for most movie goers unless you notice the pattern shown in the movie of how the wormhole worked and time lines crossed).  But it sounds like this new Caesar film is a good idea and will loosely tie into both the original Planet of the Apes and the Burton remake (showing how apes now rule earth by the time Mark Walburg arrives back on earth).  It also would tie into the original novel more than the original Conquest because the ape takeover was not a result of a time paradox but rather due to evolution.

---

Send e-mail faster without improving your typing skills. Get your Hotmail® account.

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

From: apecalypsenow

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 11:57 AM

Subject: [pota] Re: Budget for any POTA movie

Yeah, sounds reasonable.

--- In pota@yahoogroups. com, Haristas@... wrote:
>
>
>
> Do you know how much any POTA movie costed at the time of their
>
> release? I know POTA '68 didn't cost THAT much, after all... not
the
>
> cheapest of the films, but neither an expensive kolossal.
>
>
>
> I'm wondering if the original STAR WARS (New Hope) costed more,
taking
>
> in account inflation. That's because the original SW movie is often
>
> addressed as a "b-movie" in terms of budget... ???
> I think STAR WARS had a budget of around $10 Million.
>
>
>
> PLANET's was $5.8 Million, which back in 1967 probably equalled a
little less than the $10 Million did in 1977.
>
>
>
>
> -- Rory 
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, scott bosco <digitalcinema@...> wrote:
> They were incredible snobs too. I was in discussion with them to do
a retrospective piece on John Boorman but in the end I had to turn
them down due to the poor pay scale they had - it was a joke. When
FANGORIA paid better then them one has to wonder. They felt even
though the pay was low just the idea of being published in the
magazine was enough. Yes it's nice but, that doesn't mean it easier
to do, and it doesn't put food on my plate.
> - Scott
>
> --- On Sat, 12/6/08, Haristas@... <Haristas@...> wrote:
>
> From: Haristas@... <Haristas@...>
> Subject: [pota] Re: (OT) Planet of the Vampires
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, December 6, 2008, 12:02 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Rory,
> Cinifantastic always had a somewhat negative view of ALIEN. I
remember when they first reviewed ALIEN the title of the review was,
"IT THE TERROR, FROM BEYOND THE PLANET OF THE VAMPIRES"
> I still have that, along with all my issues, they're all packed away.
> - Scott B
> One of the things I'll always remember Cinefantastique for is that
they were also rather negative about STAR WARS, recognizing right away
that it was bad science fiction, which I saw as well and was disgusted
with how almost everyone gushed over what a "great" SF film it was.
STAR WARS was a disaster for the genre and we're still living with it.
>
>
> It was unfortunate what happened to that magazine and its publisher.
I got pretty sick of the mag by the mid eighties. In order to sell
they had to cover in excruciating detail the making of every SF film
that came out, whether good or bad, interesting or not. I remember a
time where I wrote a letter to them saying that "if it appeared on the
cover of Cinefantastique -- don't go see it!" They didn't publish the
letter. This was when things like Tobe Hooper's dreadful remake of
INVADERS FROM MARS made the cover. The retrospective articles on
classic SF films, or things like the art of movie posters, where what
made the mag great.
>
>
> -- Rory
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations – including songs
for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...> wrote:
>
> Now that a new apes saga is coming out. I now, oddly can enjoy Time
Burton's version much better these days. Just knowing that Apes
Classics, Burton's Version and this new Apes Saga now stand alone as
three different and separate entities, it makes it easier to swallow.
And much easier to enjoy as a separate piece of work.
>
> Al
>
>
>
>
>

This was the way it was meant to be.

Before talking about a new "saga", let's see the box office for this
upcoming POTA movie. I think they should spend LESS movie in terms of
budget, and focuse on the story and the make-up.

Let's worry more about who they cast. They'll need a small actor to play Caesar. What will some of you here do if they cast .... SETH GREEN?!!!!

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

> Is this book any good for young adults?

>Are there color photos?

>Like 8-10 year olds? Easy reading?Â

As I recall, POTA wasn't even the most expensive sci-fi movie of the year, since that was the year of "2001". And "2001" did better at the box office and in terms of acclaim. Of all the years for POTA to come out!

Actually PLANET made more money in 1968 than 2001 did, but MGM released 2001 slowly so that it was still playing theatres well into 1969... and beyond!

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...> wrote:
>
> My vote is for Gary Coleman from Diff'rent Strokes? :o)
>
> Al
>
>
>
>
>
> >

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "ronnie2467" <ronnie2467@...> wrote:
> I just want to get the facts.Is the new apes movie going to be in the
> same time/story as the original apes movies,or is it going to be
> different like the 2001 apes film? If not with the old apes films it
> would be dissapointing and confusing.

I think it's safe to say the new film will be in its own continuity.
If it takes place in 2009, then it rules out both versions:

I wouldn't be too sure about it taking place in 2009, if it gets made at all.

Now, according to IMDB, CAESAR won't be released until 2011.

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, & news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "rassmguy" <handleyr@...> wrote:
>
> I think it's safe to say the new film will be in its own
continuity.
> If it takes place in 2009, then it rules out both versions:
>
> 1) In the original, the revolution took place in 1991. By 2009,
> Earth was ape-dominated and facing post-nuclear problems. Plus,
this
> Caesar will apparently not have parents from the future.
>
> 2) In the Burton film, no ape revolution had yet taken place as of
> 2029. And even after Thade arrived on Earth, the ape domination was
> complete, not something that would take a thousand years.
>
> So yeah, it's pretty clear that the new film would have to be its
own
> entity, given what little we know of its premise.
>
>
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "ronnie2467" <ronnie2467@> wrote:
> > I just want to get the facts.Is the new apes movie going to be in
the
> > same time/story as the original apes movies,or is it going to be
> > different like the 2001 apes film? If not with the old apes films
it
> > would be dissapointing and confusing.
>

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 6:49 AM

Subject: [pota] Re: new apes film storyline

I think it's safe to say the new film will be in its own continuity.
If it takes place in 2009, then it rules out both versions:

I wouldn't be too sure about it taking place in 2009, if it gets made at all.

Now, according to IMDB, CAESAR won't be released until 2011.

-- Rory

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

I think everyone is getting hung up on the 2009 date and failing to see the forest for the trees. It is obvious that all Rothman meant is that the film would take place in a contemporary setting rather than sometime in the future.

As far as dark being the new light, going darker works for POTA just as going darker has worked for the Bond and Batman franchises. The reason is that it returns each concept to its roots. But the one problem with Hollywood conventional wisdom today is that it may not be conventional wisdom two or three years from now when a film is released. During economic downturns the public tends to go for lighter, more escapist fare. An example of this can be seen currently with "Four Christmases" being the #1 film for 2 weekends in a row, knocking off the darker, much more hyped, film "Twilight".

Now Hollywood may see the originals as old school but that is just their myopia. What they don't get is that the originals are iconic. They are what most people think of when they hear the title 'Planet of the Apes'. Other remakes such as "The Adams Family" and "Charlie's Angels" retained the look and feel of their originals while updating the concept. "Get Smart" retained the theme, catch phrases and certain set pieces from the TV series and even brought back the shoe phone. The new Star Trek movie is bringing back the original uniforms from the TV series. Why? Because those things are iconic and what the public expects. Now it could be a rights and money thing that is the reason for them doing another total POTA reboot. But they might just be going down the same wrong path they went down in 2001.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff K." <veetus@...> wrote:
>
> I don't know how good an idea setting it in 2009 will be, if they are planning a franchise, because it dates it automatically. What they could do is label it "Modern Day" and leave it at that. From what I understand, Scott Frank is writing it now so even he doesn't know what it's going to be yet. IMDB is just guessing with the release date. Fox seems hot to get this done (if it's true they already greenlit it) so I think it could be released in 2010.
> It'll be it's own thing. The originals are considered too old school and Burton's earned a bad reputation (it managed to do good at the box office because of the name before people knew what hit them; so you can be sure they'll work the name POTA into the title).
> "Dark Knight" is the current role model in Hollywood, so that's why they're taking this more serious tone. Even "Superman" is planned to go dark. Dark is the new light. I think "Dark Knight" was a good thing for movies. It'll allow edgier stuff to get made.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Haristas@...
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 6:49 AM
> Subject: [pota] Re: new apes film storyline
>
>
>
> I think it's safe to say the new film will be in its own continuity.
> If it takes place in 2009, then it rules out both versions:
>
> I wouldn't be too sure about it taking place in 2009, if it gets made at all.
>
>
> Now, according to IMDB, CAESAR won't be released until 2011.
>
>
> -- Rory
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations - including songs for the holidays - FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
>
>
> I think everyone is getting hung up on the 2009 date and failing to
see
> the forest for the trees. It is obvious that all Rothman meant is
that
> the film would take place in a contemporary setting rather than
sometime
> in the future.
>
> As far as dark being the new light, going darker works for POTA
just as
> going darker has worked for the Bond and Batman franchises. The
reason
> is that it returns each concept to its roots. But the one problem
with
> Hollywood conventional wisdom today is that it may not be
conventional
> wisdom two or three years from now when a film is released. During
> economic downturns the public tends to go for lighter, more escapist
> fare. An example of this can be seen currently with "Four
Christmases"
> being the #1 film for 2 weekends in a row, knocking off the darker,
much
> more hyped, film "Twilight".
>
> Now Hollywood may see the originals as old school but that is just
their
> myopia. What they don't get is that the originals are iconic. They
are
> what most people think of when they hear the title 'Planet of the
Apes'.
> Other remakes such as "The Adams Family" and "Charlie's Angels"
retained
> the look and feel of their originals while updating the
concept. "Get
> Smart" retained the theme, catch phrases and certain set pieces
from the
> TV series and even brought back the shoe phone. The new Star Trek
movie
> is bringing back the original uniforms from the TV series. Why?
Because
> those things are iconic and what the public expects. Now it could
be a
> rights and money thing that is the reason for them doing another
total
> POTA reboot. But they might just be going down the same wrong path
they
> went down in 2001.
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff K." <veetus@> wrote:
> >
> > I don't know how good an idea setting it in 2009 will be, if they
are
> planning a franchise, because it dates it automatically. What they
could
> do is label it "Modern Day" and leave it at that. From what I
> understand, Scott Frank is writing it now so even he doesn't know
what
> it's going to be yet. IMDB is just guessing with the release date.
Fox
> seems hot to get this done (if it's true they already greenlit it)
so I
> think it could be released in 2010.
> > It'll be it's own thing. The originals are considered too old
school
> and Burton's earned a bad reputation (it managed to do good at the
box
> office because of the name before people knew what hit them; so you
can
> be sure they'll work the name POTA into the title).
> > "Dark Knight" is the current role model in Hollywood, so that's
why
> they're taking this more serious tone. Even "Superman" is planned
to go
> dark. Dark is the new light. I think "Dark Knight" was a good thing
for
> movies. It'll allow edgier stuff to get made.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Haristas@
> > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 6:49 AM
> > Subject: [pota] Re: new apes film storyline
> >
> >
> >
> > I think it's safe to say the new film will be in its own
continuity.
> > If it takes place in 2009, then it rules out both versions:
> >
> > I wouldn't be too sure about it taking place in 2009, if it gets
made
> at all.
> >
> >
> > Now, according to IMDB, CAESAR won't be released until 2011.
> >
> >
> > -- Rory
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----\
> ------
> > Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations - including
songs
> for the holidays - FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!
> >
>

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

From: ChicagoMel

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 12:39 PM

Subject: [pota] (unknown)

Let's worry more about who they cast.  They'll need a small actor to play Caesar.  What will some of you here do if they cast .... SETH GREEN?!!!!

Probably want to see it more...it's a Buffy fan thing, I'm not sure how many would understand lol

Mel (but the second gen werewolf makeup on Angel was better than Seth's Oz makeup)

>>every apes film with the exception on conquest is of old 2004

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

From: James

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 12:52 PM

Subject: [pota] Re: new apes film storyline

I think everyone is getting hung up on the 2009 date and failing to see the forest for the trees. It is obvious that all Rothman meant is that the film would take place in a contemporary setting rather than sometime in the future.

As far as dark being the new light, going darker works for POTA just as going darker has worked for the Bond and Batman franchises. The reason is that it returns each concept to its roots. But the one problem with Hollywood conventional wisdom today is that it may not be conventional wisdom two or three years from now when a film is released. During economic downturns the public tends to go for lighter, more escapist fare. An example of this can be seen currently with "Four Christmases" being the #1 film for 2 weekends in a row, knocking off the darker, much more hyped, film "Twilight".

Now Hollywood may see the originals as old school but that is just their myopia. What they don't get is that the originals are iconic. They are what most people think of when they hear the title 'Planet of the Apes'. Other remakes such as "The Adams Family" and "Charlie's Angels" retained the look and feel of their originals while updating the concept. "Get Smart" retained the theme, catch phrases and certain set pieces from the TV series and even brought back the shoe phone. The new Star Trek movie is bringing back the original uniforms from the TV series. Why? Because those things are iconic and what the public expects. Now it could be a rights and money thing that is the reason for them doing another total POTA reboot. But they might just be going down the same wrong path they went down in 2001.

--- In pota@yahoogroups. com, "Jeff K." <veetus@...> wrote:
>
> I don't know how good an idea setting it in 2009 will be, if they are planning a franchise, because it dates it automatically. What they could do is label it "Modern Day" and leave it at that. From what I understand, Scott Frank is writing it now so even he doesn't know what it's going to be yet. IMDB is just guessing with the release date. Fox seems hot to get this done (if it's true they already greenlit it) so I think it could be released in 2010.
> It'll be it's own thing. The originals are considered too old school and Burton's earned a bad reputation (it managed to do good at the box office because of the name before people knew what hit them; so you can be sure they'll work the name POTA into the title).
> "Dark Knight" is the current role model in Hollywood, so that's why they're taking this more serious tone. Even "Superman" is planned to go dark. Dark is the new light. I think "Dark Knight" was a good thing for movies. It'll allow edgier stuff to get made.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Haristas@...
> To: pota@yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 6:49 AM
> Subject: [pota] Re: new apes film storyline
>
>
>
> I think it's safe to say the new film will be in its own continuity.
> If it takes place in 2009, then it rules out both versions:
>
> I wouldn't be too sure about it taking place in 2009, if it gets made at all.
>
>
> Now, according to IMDB, CAESAR won't be released until 2011.
>
>
> -- Rory
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
> Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations - including songs for the holidays - FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!
>

You got it.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Chris Lawless <lawford42@...> wrote:
>
> Wanda, from 'The Interrogation'. I didn't realize that she was on 'My
> Three Sons'.
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081207/ap_en_tv/obit_beverly_garland;_ylt=AtWFnJFyOFwxZoIDzzVSFi9xFb8C
>
> James, please fix the link as I'm sure it's going to be broken.
>
>
> Chris L.
> > Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your business.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2USkCXXzaFgoz6RCudRkjhu9GmZ0dLNJMZr2JzsZSiaBLqO/
>

That is the problem with Hollywood's thinking. Just because going darker worked for the Batman franchise doen't mean it will work for all. Instead of doing what is right artistically and creatively, they just look at $ signs and nothing else.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff K." <veetus@...> wrote:
>
> When another movie approaches $1 billion worldwide, "Dark Knight" will be forgotten. Until then, dark is the new light.

--- On Sun, 12/7/08, Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...> wrote:

> From: Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...>
> Subject: [pota] New Videos Online
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 8:24 PM
> Just uploaded Jeff K's CBS PROMO and POTA TV SPOTS.
>
> Here are the links:
>
> www.potacollective.com/tv/cbs_promo.wmv
>
> www.potacollective.com/tv/tv_promos.wmv
>
> Enjoy.
>
> Al
>
> P.S. Not the best quality but still, it's apes, baby.
> :o)

>
>
> THANK YOU FOR POSTING THESE!
> It doesn't matter that the condition isn't the best IT MORE THAN

> - Scott B
>
> --- On Sun, 12/7/08, Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...> wrote:
>
> > From: Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...>
> > Subject: [pota] New Videos Online
> > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 8:24 PM
> > Just uploaded Jeff K's CBS PROMO and POTA TV SPOTS.
> >
> > Here are the links:
> >
> > www.potacollective.com/tv/cbs_promo.wmv
> >
> > www.potacollective.com/tv/tv_promos.wmv
> >
> > Enjoy.
> >
> > Al
> >
> > P.S. Not the best quality but still, it's apes, baby.
> > :o)
>

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

From: shanter2002

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:02 AM

Subject: [pota] Re: New Videos Online

I have been reading the blu ray book---it's a lovely item, but I was
taken aback to see Burke referred to as Kovac.The tv series seems to
be virtually ignored by this release---are there any good bits in the
extras?Wasn' t Booth interviewed? John, Scrolls.
>
>
> THANK YOU FOR POSTING THESE!
> It doesn't matter that the condition isn't the best IT MORE THAN
FOX DID FOR THE BLURAY!
> - Scott B
>
> --- On Sun, 12/7/08, Alex Ruiz <pota1968@.. .> wrote:
>
> > From: Alex Ruiz <pota1968@.. .>
> > Subject: [pota] New Videos Online
> > To: pota@yahoogroups. com
> > Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 8:24 PM
> > Just uploaded Jeff K's CBS PROMO and POTA TV SPOTS.
> >  
> > Here are the links:
> >  
> > www.potacollective. com/tv/cbs_ promo.wmv
> >  
> > www.potacollective. com/tv/tv_ promos.wmv
> >  
> > Enjoy.
> >  
> > Al
> >  
> > P.S. Not the best quality but still, it's apes, baby.
> > :o)
>

----- Original Message -----
From: shanter2002
To: pota@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:02 AM
Subject: [pota] Re: New Videos Online


I have been reading the blu ray book---it's a lovely item, but I was
taken aback to see Burke referred to as Kovac.The tv series seems to
be virtually ignored by this release---are there any good bits in the
extras?Wasn't Booth interviewed? John, Scrolls.
>
>
> THANK YOU FOR POSTING THESE!
> It doesn't matter that the condition isn't the best IT MORE THAN
FOX DID FOR THE BLURAY!
> - Scott B
>
> --- On Sun, 12/7/08, Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...> wrote:
>
> > From: Alex Ruiz <pota1968@...>
> > Subject: [pota] New Videos Online
> > To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 8:24 PM
> > Just uploaded Jeff K's CBS PROMO and POTA TV SPOTS.
> >
> > Here are the links:
> >
> > www.potacollective.com/tv/cbs_promo.wmv
> >
> > www.potacollective.com/tv/tv_promos.wmv
> >
> > Enjoy.
> >
> > Al
> >
> > P.S. Not the best quality but still, it's apes, baby.
> > :o)
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@... wrote:
> I was at a bookstore yesterday and saw the latest issue of Starlog,
with the new James Bond on the cover.? There's an article about APES
in it with a lot of new quotes, mostly from Bobby Porter and others
involved in the TV series, some of it interesting stuff I've never
read before.
>
> -- Rory
>

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM, James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

I just got my copy of Rich Handley's Timeline of the Planet of the Apes and although I had seen proofs in pdf format, I am really impressed by the final printed version. This is a work of immense scholarship encompassing all the various POTA films, TV series and various offshoots like comics, power records and novelizations. The breadth and depth of the book is just staggering. This is the must have reference book for all POTA fans. The cover art gallery alone is worth the cover price.

--
Bill Hollweg
Have Sword...
    Will Slay...
       Barbarian in need of Ale...
Check out my fantasy Audio Drama-
Bill Hollweg
Lord of Design for BrokenSea Audio
www.brokensea.net
The Saga of the Grog and Gryphon @
http://www.brokensea.com and
http://www.westlakefilms.co.uk
Planet of the Apes at
http://www.brokensea.com and
Ulysses-Galactic Guides & Bounty Hunting
http://www.brokensea.com and
CONAN the Audio Book and Audio Drama
http://brokensea.com/conan/

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "James" <JamesA1102@...> wrote:
> I just got my copy of Rich Handley's Timeline of the Planet of the Apes
> and although I had seen proofs in pdf format, I am really impressed by
> the final printed version. This is a work of immense scholarship
> encompassing all the various POTA films, TV series and various offshoots
> like comics, power records and novelizations. The breadth and depth of
> the book is just staggering. This is the must have reference book for
> all POTA fans. The cover art gallery alone is worth the cover price.
>

It is available on Lulu.com: http://www.lulu.com/content/4923702

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Mr Elastic <backwardfeet@...> wrote:
>
> James,
>  
> Where did you purchase the book from? I have tried Amazon.com and Borders, and neither has it or are able to order it.
>  
> Thanks, Moe.
>
>
> --- On Mon, 12/8/08, James JamesA1102@... wrote:
>
> From: James JamesA1102@...
> Subject: [pota] Timeline of the Planet of the Apes
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 4:14 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I just got my copy of Rich Handley's Timeline of the Planet of the Apes and although I had seen proofs in pdf format, I am really impressed by the final printed version. This is a work of immense scholarship encompassing all the various POTA films, TV series and various offshoots like comics, power records and novelizations. The breadth and depth of the book is just staggering. This is the must have reference book for all POTA fans. The cover art gallery alone is worth the cover price.
>

You're welcome.

And no checks. Just send small bills.

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "rassmguy" <handleyr@...> wrote:
>
> <bowing> I'm humbled, sir. Thanks so much.
>
> Now, would you like that made out to "cash?"
>
> :)
>

Well, I tried ordering it from Lulu.com for shipping to Canada.

Price for the book is US$29.95, plus shipping, which is fine.

When I went to check out, Lulu ever so thoughtfully took me straight
to "enter your credit card" information; I had to click on a thingy to
see what shipping charges I was going to be assessed. Holy crap! Lulu
had defaulted to "standard shipping" to Canada, which is US$74.26.
That's nuts for one trade paperback.

Now, yes, I could have chosen other options. Here are the choices Lulu
offers:

* Ground: US$16.43

* Economy: US$29.44 (with a note that "Lulu does not recommend this
shipping method")

* Standard: US$74.26

* Express: US$84.50

* Super Fast - Ships Next Day Overnight Delivery: US$99.26

* Super Mega Fast - Ships Today Overnight Delivery: US$134.50

I canceled my order; oh, perhaps if they'd defaulted to ground
(overpriced but not obscene), maybe I'd have gone through with it. But
this is just freakin' ridiculous.

Too bad. Looks like an interesting book, and I wish Rich the best of
luck with it.

===

ROBERT J. SAWYER, Science Fiction Writer
*** Hugo Award winner for HOMINIDS ***
http://sfwriter. com * sawyer@sfwriter. com

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Robert J. Sawyer" <robertjsawyer@...> wrote:
>
> Well, I tried ordering it from Lulu.com for shipping to Canada.
>
> Price for the book is US$29.95, plus shipping, which is fine.
>
> When I went to check out, Lulu ever so thoughtfully took me straight
> to "enter your credit card" information; I had to click on a thingy to
> see what shipping charges I was going to be assessed. Holy crap! Lulu
> had defaulted to "standard shipping" to Canada, which is US$74.26.
> That's nuts for one trade paperback.
>
> Now, yes, I could have chosen other options. Here are the choices Lulu
> offers:
>
> * Ground: US$16.43
>
> * Economy: US$29.44 (with a note that "Lulu does not recommend this
> shipping method")
>
> * Standard: US$74.26
>
> * Express: US$84.50
>
> * Super Fast - Ships Next Day Overnight Delivery: US$99.26
>
> * Super Mega Fast - Ships Today Overnight Delivery: US$134.50
>
> I canceled my order; oh, perhaps if they'd defaulted to ground
> (overpriced but not obscene), maybe I'd have gone through with it. But
> this is just freakin' ridiculous.
>
> Too bad. Looks like an interesting book, and I wish Rich the best of
> luck with it.
>
> ===
>
> ROBERT J. SAWYER, Science Fiction Writer
> *** Hugo Award winner for HOMINIDS ***
> http://sfwriter.com * sawyer@...
>

>
> Well, I tried ordering it from Lulu.com for shipping to Canada.
>
> Price for the book is US$29.95, plus shipping, which is fine.
>
> When I went to check out, Lulu ever so thoughtfully took me straight
> to "enter your credit card" information; I had to click on a thingy to
> see what shipping charges I was going to be assessed. Holy crap! Lulu
> had defaulted to "standard shipping" to Canada, which is US$74.26.
> That's nuts for one trade paperback.
>
> Now, yes, I could have chosen other options. Here are the choices Lulu
> offers:
>
> * Ground: US$16.43
>
> * Economy: US$29.44 (with a note that "Lulu does not recommend this
> shipping method")
>
> * Standard: US$74.26
>
> * Express: US$84.50
>
> * Super Fast - Ships Next Day Overnight Delivery: US$99.26
>
> * Super Mega Fast - Ships Today Overnight Delivery: US$134.50
>
> I canceled my order; oh, perhaps if they'd defaulted to ground
> (overpriced but not obscene), maybe I'd have gone through with it. But
> this is just freakin' ridiculous.
>
> Too bad. Looks like an interesting book, and I wish Rich the best of
> luck with it.
>
> ===
>
> ROBERT J. SAWYER, Science Fiction Writer
> *** Hugo Award winner for HOMINIDS ***
> http://sfwriter.com * sawyer@...
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Hoknes" <hoknescards@...> wrote:
>
> Lulu is expensive for shipping one copy at a time
> what I actually suggest is we gather a list of people who would like
to order the book in Canada or overseas
> and we get one person to order all the copies to one address
> and that would save a little on shipping that way
>
> It was going to cost me $16.00 for ground for 1 copy
> but I ordered 5 different books through Lulu and picked the lowest
shipping rate and it was only $17.00 for 5 books !!!
>
>
>
>
> Well, I tried ordering it from Lulu.com for shipping to Canada.
>
> Price for the book is US$29.95, plus shipping, which is fine.
>
> When I went to check out, Lulu ever so thoughtfully took me straight
> to "enter your credit card" information; I had to click on a thingy to
> see what shipping charges I was going to be assessed. Holy crap! Lulu
> had defaulted to "standard shipping" to Canada, which is US$74.26.
> That's nuts for one trade paperback.
>
> Now, yes, I could have chosen other options. Here are the choices Lulu
> offers:
>
> * Ground: US$16.43
>
> * Economy: US$29.44 (with a note that "Lulu does not recommend this
> shipping method")
>
> * Standard: US$74.26
>
> * Express: US$84.50
>
> * Super Fast - Ships Next Day Overnight Delivery: US$99.26
>
> * Super Mega Fast - Ships Today Overnight Delivery: US$134.50
>
> I canceled my order; oh, perhaps if they'd defaulted to ground
> (overpriced but not obscene), maybe I'd have gone through with it. But
> this is just freakin' ridiculous.
>
> Too bad. Looks like an interesting book, and I wish Rich the best of
> luck with it.
>
> ===
>
> ROBERT J. SAWYER, Science Fiction Writer
> *** Hugo Award winner for HOMINIDS ***
> http://sfwriter.com * sawyer@...
>

--- In pota@yahoogroups.com, "Robert J. Sawyer" <robertjsawyer@...> wrote:
>
> Well, I tried ordering it from Lulu.com for shipping to Canada.
>
> Price for the book is US$29.95, plus shipping, which is fine.
>
> When I went to check out, Lulu ever so thoughtfully took me straight
> to "enter your credit card" information; I had to click on a thingy to
> see what shipping charges I was going to be assessed. Holy crap! Lulu
> had defaulted to "standard shipping" to Canada, which is US$74.26.
> That's nuts for one trade paperback.
>
> Now, yes, I could have chosen other options. Here are the choices Lulu
> offers:
>
> * Ground: US$16.43
>
> * Economy: US$29.44 (with a note that "Lulu does not recommend this
> shipping method")
>
> * Standard: US$74.26
>
> * Express: US$84.50
>
> * Super Fast - Ships Next Day Overnight Delivery: US$99.26
>
> * Super Mega Fast - Ships Today Overnight Delivery: US$134.50
>
> I canceled my order; oh, perhaps if they'd defaulted to ground
> (overpriced but not obscene), maybe I'd have gone through with it. But
> this is just freakin' ridiculous.
>
> Too bad. Looks like an interesting book, and I wish Rich the best of
> luck with it.
>
> ===
>
> ROBERT J. SAWYER, Science Fiction Writer
> *** Hugo Award winner for HOMINIDS ***
> http://sfwriter.com * sawyer@...
>

--- On Mon, 12/8/08, James <JamesA1102@...> wrote:

> From: James <JamesA1102@...>
> Subject: [pota] Timeline of the Planet of the Apes
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 4:14 PM
> I just got my copy of Rich Handley's Timeline of the
> Planet of the Apes
> and although I had seen proofs in pdf format, I am really
> impressed by
> the final printed version. This is a work of immense
> scholarship
> encompassing all the various POTA films, TV series and
> various offshoots
> like comics, power records and novelizations. The breadth
> and depth of
> the book is just staggering. This is the must have
> reference book for
> all POTA fans. The cover art gallery alone is worth the
> cover price.

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 6:20 PM

Subject: [pota] Re: POTA blueray extras

Sounds like you just need a firmware upgrade.  What brand and model is your player?

-- Rory


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff <skintricks@cox. net>
To: pota@yahoogroups. com; PotaDG@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 10:23 am
Subject: [pota] POTA blueray extras

I just popped my Blu Ray POTA disc in.  I can watch the movie and play the game, but I can't access any of the other special features.  Did anyone else have this problem or is it just me?

 

Jeff B

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

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

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 6:20 PM

Subject: [pota] Re: POTA blueray extras

Sounds like you just need a firmware upgrade.  What brand and model is your player?

-- Rory


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff <skintricks@cox. net>
To: pota@yahoogroups. com; PotaDG@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 10:23 am
Subject: [pota] POTA blueray extras

I just popped my Blu Ray POTA disc in.  I can watch the movie and play the game, but I can't access any of the other special features.  Did anyone else have this problem or is it just me?

 

Jeff B

---

Listen to 350+ music, sports, news radio stations – including songs for the holidays – FREE while you browse. Start Listening Now!

>
>
> You got it.
>
> --- In pota@yahoogroups.com, Chris Lawless <lawford42@> wrote:
> >
> > Wanda, from 'The Interrogation'. I didn't realize that she was

> > Three Sons'.
> >
> >
>

> tWFnJFyOFwxZoIDzzVSFi9xFb8C
>

> AtWFnJFyOFwxZoIDzzVSFi9xFb8C>
> >
> > James, please fix the link as I'm sure it's going to be broken.
> >
> >
> > Chris L.
> >

>
> Did anyone else see this listing on History Channel's Ancient

>
> Coincidence? Did the writers know? Hhhmm...
>
>
> Jeff B
>