The new Ape continuity is slow as molasses so whoever is working on it now will be gone when they "circle back". By the time they connect to the '68 movie, whoever is writing it will be a different breed. I hope a better one (though the current ones are awfully darn good).

True enough, but then why even try to connect them to the original anyway? A rebooted franchise doesn't have to connect to the originals, that's why they're reboots: So they can do their own take on an already existing franchise... To me, these new films have as much to do with the original PLANET than the BATMAN TV series from the 60s has to do with Michael Keaton's 1989 film also called BATMAN... They may be inspired by the same source, even have some things in common, but two different animals...

LOL! It still amazes me how many fans still cling to C&Zs testimony as being totally accurate despite it never being shown on screen, coming from the sacred scrolls which were shown to be distorted in PLANET and being completely inconsistant with everything established in PLANET and BENEATH.

  I agree it's sloppy and having to make excuses isn't a hallmark of good writing, but it works for me. C & Z cut a deal with Zaius that if he'll "come clean" with them they will shut their traps about the talking human. True, he could've just chopped their heads off to keep them quiet. But something happened between POTA and Beneath where Zaius became very friendly toward them (even though they don't really return it). Zaius showed them "history scrolls kept from the masses" and maintained the status quo. If Zaius showed them the scrolls it adds even more credence to the Aldo stuff in "Escape" being a fabrication. Maybe not the intent of "Planet" but it works.

 1. I go by 3955, since it's confirmed by NASA experts in "Escape". Zira sez "3950... something" in "Escape" and they just lopped off the "something" in "Battle".

 

It's impossible to make sense out of all the conflicting time and dates given in the films and adaptations. I say both Taylor's and Brent's spaceships had their clocks messed up, and the actual date lies somewhere in between  3955 and 3978.

Out of anybody on these groups, I would have thought you'd have been against this, maybe even more than I am...

**** What Jeff says does make sense as far as the date thing, but for me personally I go with the 3978 date... It's the date in the original film, and the original film is where it all sprang from... In my eyes, PLANET is "original canon" and it really should have been paid closer attention to... Along these lines, I don't like when people try to alter things from PLANET... One example: I've heard of people saying that when Zaius tells Taylor, "All my life I've awaited your coming and dreaded it, like death itself", they're inferring that Zaius knew Taylor was coming, which is bull#@*%... If PLANET was a stand-alone film, nobody would have said that, because all he meant by it was he dreaded the coming of an intelligent human: He did not "know" Taylor was coming... I've also heard people say that the odd weather during Taylor's Forbidden Zone trek in PLANET was caused by the mutants from BENEATH... Now, I can see people saying that from a BENEATH point of view, but in PLANET, (especially had it been a stand-alone film), it's just strange atmospheric phenomenon and the mutants had nothing to do with it... And mutants in the sequel or not, in PLANET it's still just odd weather, not an illusion... ****

Somebody sent me this quote which I find interesting:

Issue 94 of SciFi Now magazine has an article about Dawn which includes an interview with screenwriter Mark Bomback who says:

"What we are trying to do - and it remains to be seen if we're successful - is find our way back to the world of the 1968 film, not necessarily in its specifics, but in the notion that the apes will evolve to that state of culture and that humans will be subject to them."

So, it sounds like they're going to lead to a time of apes lording over humans, but not necessarily the same way it was portrayed in PLANET...

I think that too much emphasis is placed on Cornelius' explanation to the court of how the revolt started with Aldo. I don't think he ever said Aldo led the revolution. He just said it started with Aldo who was the first to rebel by saying "No". I've always taken that to me it was some sort of spark to a revolution. A "Rosa Parks" moment of defiance.  I should rewatch that scene. Am I the only to interpret it this way?

Dario

Change "sequels" to "reboots" and you got how I feel about the new films...