.html

In a message dated 1/2/2006 10:34:56 P.M. Central Standard Time, PofTAfan@... writes:

You're forgetting Cuba and North Korea which the latter is totally
communist.

 

No.  Totally Totalitarian,

Castro and Kim Jung Il do not practice communism.

They are dictators under the guise of communism,

pure and simple.  Again it's from each according to

more than their ability. To the head guy because he

needs it all.  And if you don't like it, you will be shot.

 

<.html

.html

Ha ha ha ha !  You said "shit"!

Butthead

Whoops, I did say "shit", didn't I? I thought LT was starting a round robin fanfic. Elaine 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

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

  ---

<.html

>>>Here's an example: Rosie O'Donnell is for gun control.  And yet her bodyguards carry firearms.  In other words she wants to >>>have something that she would deny to the average citizen. 

 

That is not hypocrisy that is honest to goodness reality.  That's right,  I want bodyguards and soldiers and police to have guns. In other words people who are not only versed and possess trained skills in handling a weapon but whose occupation actually necessitates these weapons. My goodness, you wouldn't hand an acetylene tank and torch to someone not skilled in welding would you? I do not want you or the average citizen to have a gun.  But if YOU insist on this bogus "right" to bear arms then I want some sort of government control over it.  I don't think any nabob with a thousand dollars in his pocket should be able to buy a gun anonymously! This is a no-brainer.  Every police commissioner of every municipality in America has called out for gun-control-- why is that?

 

Why is OK to have control over who gets to drive in this nation but none exerted on guns?

 

Sasha

Learn more about pitbulls at the official Free Pitbulls, Inc. website:

http://home.earthlink.net/~thepittbull/

 

 

go vegetarian!

---

Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars . Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 3:54:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Milo knows it, Rory, and you'd better wise up and learn it, too!

No way, man!  The future can be changed!

Oh yeah, about the tunnels seen in BENEATH.... you see the same tunnels in CONQUEST!  What mutant built those tunnels, Patrick?  HA!!!  I got you there!  Those tunnels must have been standard issue throughout the future right-wing world seen in CONQUEST, hence them also in New York City.  The mutants just did cosmetic repairs to them over the centuries.

Mutants will industrial tunneling equipment?  You're a freak, Patrick!

-- Rory

<.html<.html

Holy crap! Everyone is getting all deep and politcal. This is a
accident waiting to happen. I love it! Oh, and Satan says its okay to
have whatever political view, and lifestyle you feel is right for
you. Cause he'll take you no matter what. Isn't he swell.

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, "Neet-O-Rama" <neetstuff@m...> wrote:
>
> >>>Here's an example: Rosie O'Donnell is for gun control. And yet
her bodyguards carry firearms. In other words she wants to >>>have
something that she would deny to the average citizen.
>
> That is not hypocrisy that is honest to goodness reality. That's
right, I want bodyguards and soldiers and police to have guns. In
other words people who are not only versed and possess trained skills
in handling a weapon but whose occupation actually necessitates these
weapons. My goodness, you wouldn't hand an acetylene tank and torch
to someone not skilled in welding would you? I do not want you or the
average citizen to have a gun. But if YOU insist on this
bogus "right" to bear arms then I want some sort of government
control over it. I don't think any nabob with a thousand dollars in
his pocket should be able to buy a gun anonymously! This is a no-
brainer. Every police commissioner of every municipality in America
has called out for gun-control-- why is that?
>
> Why is OK to have control over who gets to drive in this nation but
none exerted on guns?
>
> Sasha
>

Guns don't kill people. I KILL PEOPLE!! oh, wait. Pretend you didn't
hear that. Oh, no. Now Satan is all mad at me again. I promised I'd
be smarter about all this if he got me out of all that trouble in
Miami. Dammit. Nobody else read this.

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, LordTZer0@A... wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 1/2/2006 3:23:31 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> neetstuff@m... writes:
>
> That is not hypocrisy that is honest to goodness reality. That's
right, I
> want bodyguards and soldiers and police to have guns.
>
>
>
> I can't afford bodyguards. I have to guard my own body.
> Now if I want a permit to carry in public I have to take
> classes. But just because you're trained doesn't mean
> your judgment is sound. I hear about police officers taking
> the law into their own hands, and even committing murder,
> all the time. But you're never going to get all the guns out
> of the hands of people who should not have them. In fact
> if you try, you end up disarming more the law abiding citizens
> than criminals and lunatics. So as long as they're armed
> I intend to be for my own protection. You may not have
> time for the police to protect you. You may only have
> seconds, not minutes. Ultimately, unless you have
> bodyguards, you are responsible for the safety of
> you and yours. Of course that doesn't mean
> just because you have protection you will be
> safe. Cornelius had a gun, but he wasn't
> security conscious and Zira was killed.
>

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the PotaDG
group.

File : /Within the Planet of the Apes/WPOTA 62.gif
Uploaded by : munkeyman63au <nfoster@...>
Description :

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PotaDG/files/Within%20the%20Planet%20of%20the%20Apes/WPOTA%2062.gif

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

munkeyman63au <nfoster@...>

Attachments :

.html <.html

.html <.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 4:16:20 P.M. Central Standard Time, DrZaiusDavis@... writes:

I love it!

 

So . . . It was you Dr. Zaius!

You bloody Baboon!

 

<.html

.html <.html

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

> Oh yeah, about the tunnels seen in BENEATH.... you see the same

tunnels in CONQUEST! What mutant built those tunnels, Patrick?
HA!!! I got you there! Those tunnels must have been standard issue
throughout the future right-wing world seen in CONQUEST, hence them
also in New York City.

-- And therefore, whoever constructed those tunnels could have also
constructed transportation tunnels that criss crossed the whole of the
country couldn't they?

Just how are large missiles and bombs transported around the country
these days anyway? They are certainly not built on site are they?

Neil

Attachments :

.html.htmlWhat is this chimp calling a monstrosity?  The spaceships?

<.html<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 6:37:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, nfoster@... writes:

-- And therefore, whoever constructed those tunnels could have also
constructed transportation tunnels that criss crossed the whole of the
country couldn't they?

Just how are large missiles and bombs transported around the country
these days anyway? They are certainly not built on site are they?

Neil

If you want to propose that there's a tunnel system across the U.S. prior to the nuclear war, I have no problem with that, but Patrick is proposing that tunnels were built by mutants long after Armageddon.  I can only wonder how he thinks they fueled their tunneling machinery?  Perhaps with fuel acquired by the Humongous and his gang?

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 6:47:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, neetstuff@... writes:

--Cornelius (Roddy McDowell)
"Planet of the Apes"

That should read Roddy McDowall.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html

Neil, you big jerk! Stop being rational and call Rory some kind
of "schoolyard kid" name and join in the fun. You adults are no fun
at all. Stop growing up and regress with the rest of us. You big
hippy doo doo head.

 

 I am not sure I approve of you calling our favorite artist a "hippy doo doo head".

Elaine

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 7:12:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

In a message dated 1/1/2006 6:51:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, DrZaiusDavis@... writes:

Neil, you big jerk! Stop being rational and call Rory some kind
of "schoolyard kid" name and join in the fun. You adults are no fun
at all. Stop growing up and regress with the rest of us. You big
hippy doo doo head.

I am not sure I approve of you calling our favorite artist a "hippy doo doo head".
Elaine


This DrZaiusDavis guy is about to get called names by me!

-- Rory<.html <.html

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com , taebokitti@a... wrote:

> I am not sure I approve of you calling our favorite artist a "hippy

doo doo head".

-- Yes how dare he! Everyone knows I am a Hippy Dick Head!! ;-)

Neil

.html

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, taebokitti@a... wrote:
> I am not sure I approve of you calling our favorite artist a "hippy
doo doo  head".

-- Yes how dare he! Everyone knows I am a Hippy Dick Head!! ;-)

Neil

How about just a "happy hippy ape artist who lives down under?"

Elaine

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

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

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

<.html

.html.html I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:

Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be included in any discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original (such as the inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?  Does the 1968 film exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel it must be looked as part of a five-film saga?

I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel the original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you don't.

-- Rory<.html<.html

.html <.html

.html Despite the fact, I enjoy the sequels, I feel the original movie is way above anything that came after it. Hollywood has a sequel fetish and almost any movie that makes money, a sequel is made. I would have done the sequels differently and stayed on pota, going back to the original movie and avoided the whole bomb/mutant theme. There are so many stories that can be told, it wasn't necessary to go in the direction that the sequels went. Elaine<.html

Yes I do......to me they are just movies.....I tried
to stop making sense of them long ago....

Tim

--- Haristas@... wrote:

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

__________________________________________

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 7:38:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

Now that gun control, communism, capitalism, Christianity, and calling Neil names have all been fully discussed, I saw "The Chronicles of Narnia" the other day and thought I saw a gorilla in the crowd(in the movie, not the theater). I also found it interesting that all the animals had British accents except for the wolves. Elaine

I saw the gorilla too and wish there was more.

-- Rory<.html <.html

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

>Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to

exist independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be
included in any discussion of the original, or any presentation of the
original (such as the inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD
of PLANET, etc.)? Does the 1968 film exist in the universe as a
separate piece of art, or do you feel it must be looked as part of a
five-film saga?

I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel the
original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you don't.

-- No.

Happy hippy ape artist who lives down under

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 7:44:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

Despite the fact, I enjoy the sequels, I feel the original movie is way above anything that came after it. Hollywood has a sequel fetish and almost any movie that makes money, a sequel is made. I would have done the sequels differently and stayed on pota, going back to the original movie and avoided the whole bomb/mutant theme. There are so many stories that can be told, it wasn't necessary to go in the direction that the sequels went. Elaine

Thanks, Elaine.  That means you answer "yes," that PLANET has a right to exist independently of the sequels?

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html <.html

.html Hi,

I believe that the sequals created one possible timeline for the ape series. I think that a movie or series of movies exploring a different timeline would be nice about now.

Red.


Haristas@... wrote:

In a message dated 1/3/06 7:44:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

Despite the fact, I enjoy the sequels, I feel the original movie is way above anything that came after it. Hollywood has a sequel fetish and almost any movie that makes money, a sequel is made. I would have done the sequels differently and stayed on pota, going back to the original movie and avoided the whole bomb/mutant theme. There are so many stories that can be told, it wasn't necessary to go in the direction that the sequels went. Elaine

Thanks, Elaine.  That means you answer "yes," that PLANET has a right to exist independently of the sequels?

-- Rory

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 7:53:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, wasitchu@... writes:

Hi,

I believe that the sequels created one possible timeline for the ape series. I think that a movie or series of movies exploring a different timeline would be nice about now.

Red.

I'm not sure you understand the question, but I'll take it as a "yes."

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 7:49:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, nfoster@... writes:

-- No.

Three for yes, one for no... so far.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 7:46:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, apefan23@... writes:

Yes I do......to me they are just movies.....I tried
to stop making sense of them long ago....

Tim

So far two for "yes."  That means there are at least three of us.

I just want to find out what the majority thinks, especially Patrick.

This will take a few days for everyone to answer.  I'll be grouping all the numbers from both groups.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/06 7:44:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

Despite the fact, I enjoy the sequels, I feel the original movie is way above anything that came after it. Hollywood has a sequel fetish and almost any movie that makes money, a sequel is made. I would have done the sequels differently and stayed on pota, going back to the original movie and avoided the whole bomb/mutant theme. There are so many stories that can be told, it wasn't necessary to go in the direction that the sequels went. Elaine

Thanks, Elaine.  That means you answer "yes," that PLANET has a right to exist independently of the sequels?

-- Rory

  Yes, I am agreeing with you. Planet is a great movie and the sequels just don't live up to it.

  I enjoy the sequels because I like movies with talking apes in them. When I think of pota, the original comes to mind first and so does Zira. Elaine

---

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

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

  ---

<.html

The first movie is so, so much better than all of the sequels, it is a different animal entirely.

HOWEVER, I'm such a sucker for the sequels, all of them except Battle, that I am thrilled they were made.  None of them are as sublime, as clever, as memorable as the original, but the sequels are all guilty pleasures.  It's almost the same as the Star Wars franchise...the original is a great movie, EVERY one of the sequels is a disappointment. 

Ty the Guy.  Still a huge fan of Conquest and Beneath, against all the odds.

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 8:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, tybunny@... writes:

The first movie is so, so much better than all of the sequels, it is a different animal entirely.

HOWEVER, I'm such a sucker for the sequels, all of them except Battle, that I am thrilled they were made.  None of them are as sublime, as clever, as memorable as the original, but the sequels are all guilty pleasures.  It's almost the same as the Star Wars franchise...the original is a great movie, EVERY one of the sequels is a disappointment. 

Ty the Guy.  Still a huge fan of Conquest and Beneath, against all the odds.

Yes, but what I'm sort of asking is do you feel it's necessary that PLANET can only totally be enjoyed if you also watch all the sequels and then the TV show, etc.?  Would you say to a stranger, "You want to know PLANET OF THE APES?  Then, you gotta watch all these movies."  Or is it enough that they just watch the original?

Of course, I'm not including the novel in any of this.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:34:41 PM Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist independently of it's sequels?

Hell yes it does!<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 7:05:46 PM Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

This will take a few days for everyone to answer.  I'll be grouping all the numbers from both groups.

What if they're members on both groups? You are going to just count their vote once right?<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:53:25 PM Central Standard Time, wasitchu@... writes:

I believe that the sequals created one possible timeline for the ape series. I think that a movie or series of movies exploring a different timeline would be nice about now.

Yeah, but that wasn't the question... The question is "Do you think that Planet of the Apes (the 1968 original film) has the right to be considered a stand alone piece?"

Answer either YES or NO

<.html <.html

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com , mlccougar@a... wrote:

> What if they're members on both groups? You are going to just count

their vote once right?

-- And what about all the people who have answered so far but not with
a YES or NO? Are you going to just decide yourself from what they
wrote whether their answer is YES or NO?

Maybe a better option would be to start a group poll?

Neil

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 9:15:12 PM Central Standard Time, nfoster@... writes:

-- And what about all the people who have answered so far but not with
a YES or NO? Are you going to just decide yourself from what they
wrote whether their answer is YES or NO?

That shouldn't be a problem how they answer... By that I mean if they really want their vote to be counted, then they can answer accordingly, either YES or NO...

There really is no way that anyone can be confused on this, and if they want their voice heard, they'll answer it the way it was asked...

<.html <.html

I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:

Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be included in any discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original (such as the inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?  Does the 1968 film exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel it must be looked as part of a five-film saga?

I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel the original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you don't.

-- Rory

 

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

>
> In a message dated 1/3/06 7:46:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> apefan23@y... writes:
>
>
> > Yes I do......to me they are just movies.....I tried
> > to stop making sense of them long ago....
> >
> > Tim
> >
>
> So far two for "yes." That means there are at least three of us.
>
> I just want to find out what the majority thinks, especially

Patrick.

>
> This will take a few days for everyone to answer. I'll be grouping

all the numbers from both groups.

>
> -- Rory

*** Do works of art have rights? Doesn't Boulle's novel have the pre-
eminent 'right' to be considered alone, without recourse to the 1968
film? Doesn't it tend to suffer by comparison (I say "suffer" because
most people seem to prefer the film, though I realize that some --
probably Rory -- feel the book is superior)?

The 1968 film HAD this so-called 'right' when it was the only one,
but that changed when they chose to make a sequel. When they made
sequels -- with the same production company, the same actors (Roddy
WOULD have made "BENEATH" if he hadn't been directing a film at the
time) playing the same roles, etc etc -- they expanded the 'universe'
of "PLANET OF THE APES" so that it would include "BENEATH"...
then "ESCAPE"... etc.

Some people -- Rory included -- remember seeing "PLANET" in its
original theatrical run, and have been disappointed with each
subsequent sequel, because they don't think any of the sequels stack
up to the original.

Others, myself included, remember seeing "PLANET" when it debuted on
TV, after two other APES films had been made, so that -- as a kid,
watching for the first time -- I was only aware that it was a SERIES
of films. Whatever special feeling those "PLANET"-only viewers had, I
never had that luxury. It was ALWAYS a 5-film saga to me, and though
I know that the 1st film was the most original of the bunch, I can
appreciate the sequels -- lower budgets (etc) notwithstanding -- for
being wonderful in their own right.

The 1st movie doesn't have 'rights' -- but those who see these movies
have every right to be "PLANET"-purists or POTA-SAGA-inclusives...
whatever floats their boat. But there ain't a soul alive who doesn't
know that the character Chuck played in the 1st film blows the entire
world up in the sequel. Like it or not, the 1st film will never be
considered a separate entity.

What I do wonder, though, is this: if one wishes to be a "PLANET"-
only proponent, then none of the details in the sequels should matter
whatsoever. I'm talkin' TIMELINES, and all those other arguments we
keep having. Only somebody who includes all 5 films should bother to
have an opinion about whether or not it's a "changed" timeline
from "ESCAPE" onwards, or a "circle". If you're ignoring "BENEATH"
and all the others, then it's a MOOT point.

If somebody cares ONLY about the 1st film, well, why not start up a
Yahoo group devoted to IT and to ONLY it... deleting posts that cross
the line and attempt to include talk about the sequels? I can't
imagine that there would be many members to such a group, with much
to talk about that can't already be talked about in groups like this,
which are inclusive of ALL the POTA works -- Boulle, the 5 films, the
TV shows, the comics, etc.

Whether I like it or not, Lucas invented the Ewoks (and had them
defeating Stormtroopers with sticks and stones) and made 3 crappy
prequels to the magnificently entertaining "STAR WARS" -- and
pretended that Darth Vader was Luke's dad all along... with Leia the
unknown sister that Luke had masturbatory fantasies about. Although I
really loved "EMPIRE" -- in which Darth CLAIMS to be Luke's father,
but we don't really find out if he's being truthful until the 3rd
movie -- there are times when I wish that there were only the
first "STAR WARS" film -- and NOT Episodes I, II, III, and half of VI.

I especially wish that Lucas hadn't messed with the original and re-
jiggered it so that Greedo shot at Han first. That's like going back
and re-editing "PLANET" so that Taylor isn't quite so mean to Landon
when they land that raft and trek across the desert. Or editing out
Julius' tobacco use, just to be "politically correct" in this anti-
smoking world we live in.

I love the original "PLANET" and if it had been the ONLY one they
ever made, I would still consider it my favorite movie of all time.
As it is, they chose to make more movies -- and, budgets
notwithstanding, they were ABOUT something and they were entertaining
and often profound. Worthy sequels to the (admittedly superior)
original film. What about the 'rights' of THOSE films? If the
original can have 'rights', why can't they?

Patrick

.html

I want to ask this of everyone in the two groups:

Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist independently of it's sequels, or must the sequels always be included in any discussion of the original, or any presentation of the original (such as the inclusion of trailers for the sequels on a DVD of PLANET, etc.)?  Does the 1968 film exist in the universe as a separate piece of art, or do you feel it must be looked as part of a five-film saga?

I want just a "yes" or "no" answer because I think either you feel the original has a right to not be saddled with its sequels, or you don't.

-- Rory

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 10:02:31 PM Central Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

Like it or not, the 1st film will never be considered a separate entity.

Did he say that it has to be? He simply asked if in your opinion it has the right to be considered a stand alone piece? He said nothing about totally ignoring the sequels altogether, he just asked if PLANET can/should be allowed to stand apart from them and be judged on it's own merit(s)...

So, anyway, you never voted, what's your opinion on this: YES or NO?

<.html <.html

.html

<.html

James,

I have an idea.

Why not make this a project for all the POTA groups?

ie involve the other groups in the planning and co-ordination of this
instead of shoving it down their throats (warts - or typos - and all!)?

Patrick would have to be the best writer amongst us - why not have Patrick
write the letter?

Neil is the obvious choice to design the banner - why not ask Neil to do so,
or to do a background illustration for the page?

Mez or Kass could proof-read and provide the final words.

This is a chance to actually do something in a co-operative way James,
instead of always having to control things. If you really want to work as a
co-operative unit, you have a lot of work to do....you can't just come up
with something then include other groups as an AFTERTHOUGHT because you know
you only have about 20 genuine members in your group aside from the ones you
created yourself.

And you would have to advertise it as a JOINT EFFORT that promotes ALL
GROUPS EQUALLY, not an effort of David's group where other plebs do your
dirty work.

Michael




-----Original Message-----
From: Neil T Foster [nfoster@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2006 8:10 AM
To: 'JamesA1102'
Subject: RE: Battle Petition


No. Sorry (maybe if it didn't have the typos it could be the sort of
thing we would promote but we don't want to associate ourselves with
something that would make us look amateurish in the eyes of Fox at this
point in time.)

Neil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JamesA1102 [JamesA1102@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2006 5:57 AM
> To: nfoster@...; Patrick Tilton;
> mdownes@...; apecalypsenow; hoknes@...
> Subject: Battle Petition
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm writing to all of you because you're members of the POTA
> group as well
> as being Owners of some of the most active Planet of the Apes
> groups on
> Yahoo.
>
> We need your help in promoting the Uncut Battle Petition
> http://www.petitiononline.com/Battle/. So far with just the
> POTA group
> promoting it, we've gotten almost 50 signatures in about a
> week. However,
> our goal is 500 to 1,000 signatures by the end of January. So
> we need to
> step things up a bit.
>
> All we'd like from you is to display the banner with
> hyperlink on your Yahoo
> home page. And we've made it very easy for you to do so. Just
> copy and paste
> the below HTML code at the bottom of your group description:
>
> <p align="center"><a
> href="http://www.petitiononline.com/Battle/"><img
> border="0"
> src="http://www.freewebs.com/planetoftheapes3/restore_Battle_b
> anner.gif"
> width="468" height="60"></a></p>
>
> The banner with hyperlink will be displayed automatically. It is that
> simple.
>
> Thanks for your help in this endevour. Working together I
> think we can make
> an impact.
>
> James
>
>
>

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 5:47:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, neetstuff@... writes:

I thought this says it all about "Gun Control" so.......

 

Beware the beast man,
for he is the devil's pawn.

 

And since he is . . . as Taylor says,

 

" . . .I want one anyway."

<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:06:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

Patrick is proposing that tunnels were built by mutants long after Armageddon

 

No! 

 

they were built by the Morocks!

The Morlocks and the Mole People.

and the CHUDS.

 

 

 

<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:34:41 P.M. Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

Do you think the original PLANET OF THE APES film has a right to exist independently of it's sequels

 

I like to think of it as separate, a bit.

If they had kept up the standards of

the original in writing and production

values I would be more inclusive of them.

 

<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:38:16 P.M. Central Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

I also found it interesting that all the animals had British accents except for the wolves.

 

That's because they're evil.  Evil I tells ya!

 

<.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of LordTZer0@...
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 3:45 PM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [PotaDG] The Chronicles of Narnia

In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:38:16 P.M. Central Standard Time, taebokitti@... writes:

I also found it interesting that all the animals had British accents except for the wolves.

 

That's because they're evil.  Evil I tells ya!

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 10:08:55 PM Central Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

Planet was the only one that was not just made to be a money spinner.
 
There was a completely unique team working on it, and it is about getting across some great science fiction.
 
I like the sequels too, though.


Gotta go along with Whitty on this one... The sequels aren't total wastes of time to watch, but  NOTHING stands up to the original... Not the sequels, not the TV series, or the animated series either... PLANET is PLANET... the rest are all APES films...<.html <.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:51:07 P.M. Central Standard Time, Haristas@... writes:

That means you answer "yes," that PLANET has a right to exist independently of the sequels?

 

I think the other's should come free

on one disc when you buy the original.

 

 

<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:49:37 P.M. Central Standard Time, nfoster@... writes:

I want just a "yes" or "no" answer

 

In a perfect world there would be no need to separate them.

Because they would be just as good if not better then it was.

As it is, POTA has to stand on the Gold Medal spot on the

Ape Movie Olympics.  There's a reason that spot is higher.

 

 

<.html

.html.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 5:47:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, neetstuff@... writes:

I thought this says it all about "Gun Control" so.......
 

Beware the beast man,
for he is the devil's pawn.

That verse from the Sacred Scrolls doesn't say anything about "gun control"... It says that Mankind is a killer... (no matter what he's armed with)...

<.html<.html

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

>
> In a message dated 1/3/06 3:54:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> > Milo knows it, Rory, and you'd better wise up and learn it, too!
> >
>
> No way, man! The future can be changed!
>
> Oh yeah, about the tunnels seen in BENEATH.... you see the same

tunnels in CONQUEST! What mutant built those tunnels, Patrick?
HA!!! I got you there! Those tunnels must have been standard issue
throughout the future right-wing world seen in CONQUEST, hence them
also in New York City. The mutants just did cosmetic repairs to them
over the centuries.

>
> Mutants will industrial tunneling equipment? You're a freak,

Patrick!

>
> -- Rory

*** Just because there are cylindrical tunnels in "CONQUEST" doesn't
mean that they're the SAME tunnels, Rory. Just LOOK at 'em and you'll
see the obvious differences. The ones in "CONQUEST" have light-
fixtures along the walls, with strategically placed telephones and
sliding doors sealing off sections of 'em. They are used for people
to travel from the COMMAND POST to various other areas in the
vicinity of that part of Breck's city. They are NOT glorified
ventilation shafts.

But the ones in "BENEATH" unequivocally ARE ventilation shafts. And
they weren't in existence before the Nuke War, either. They HAD to
have been dug AFTER the Nuke War:

1) The Nuke War happened, causing rubble and/or solidified magma to
fill part of the city of New York, including a section of the avenue
(5th Avenue) just southeast of the steps leading up into the NEW YORK
PUBLIC LIBRARY.

2) The Mutants dug a tunnel THROUGH THAT POST-NUKE-WAR RUBBLE, as
part of their ventilation system, connecting that part of NYC (the
NYPL building, with its famous lion statues) to a cave where a subway
line from across the East River enters into Manhattan -- where Brent
and Nova find the entrance to that ventilation system: the circular
aperture with the metal-rung ladder that -- when touched -- causes
the HUMMMMMMM to cease.

The cylindrical tunnels in "CONQUEST" were dug BEFORE the Nuke War,
and the tunnels in "BENEATH" had to have been dug AFTER it. The spot
where Brent and Nova emerge into the ruins of Manhattan -- the NEW
YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY -- is obviously something that had to have been
constructed after the rubble had filled in part of the now-
underground city.

As to the Mutants using tunneling machines, those tunnels
in "BENEATH" prove it. As to whether or not they used similar
machines to tunnel part of the way across country, that's another
argument.

In my scenario, after Mendez becomes the leader of Breck's city upon
the death of Kolp, he will investigate the Archives section, to see
just exactly what it was that was so important that Caesar risked
radiation poisoning to find out. Mendez will replay the same tapes of
Cornelius and Zira's testimony to the Presidential Commission and
he'll realize that the description of the destruction of the Earth
in "3950" that the Ape-onauts witnessed from orbit can only be the
result of the detonation of either the Alpha Omega bomb, or of one
just like it.

Mendez, who doesn't want the world to be destroyed any more than
Caesar does, wants to dismantle it. Render it incapable of destroying
the planet. But there's a problem.

His followers have taken to heart his admonition to VENERATE the
Bomb. It has now become their "god", and it has given them a purpose
that he can't just take away from them without disheartening them to
the point they were at when they were so demoralized at their defeat
by Caesar's forces.

Mendez doesn't know that Cornelius and Zira's people, in "3950",
lived in the NEW YORK CITY region. He assumes that -- since they wore
the SAME clothing styles as Caesar is seen to wear on the security
camera footage -- that Cornelius and Zira's "Ape City" is in the SAME
region of America where it currently is -- ON THE WEST COAST.

So... Mendez figures that the safest thing to do, for the sake of
posterity, to prevent Doomsday without dismantling the Bomb, is to
REMOVE THE BOMB from the "Forbidden City"... to lead his people on a
trek AS FAR AWAY as the U.S. military tunnel system will take them,
to the OTHER END OF THE CONTINENT, the East Coast.

So Mendez leads his people out of the California region, underground,
going from Base-to-Base, scavenging for supplies from each abandoned
military facility (etc). They get all the way across the country,
eventually discovering at least ONE of the tunneling machines that
had been used to dig those military tunnels in the first place... and
they use it to dig their way the last leg of the trip -- to the
hollowed-out area of the now-buried New York City.

This is all done in the mid-21st Century, in the lifetime of the same
Mendez who took over after Kolp died.

Little does he know that eventually there will be a migration of some
of the Apes (and Humans) from the California region to the New York
region -- overland, though, and not like them, underground, sometime
in the 27th to 28th Centuries.

In my scenario, the 'nice' Lawgiver in "BATTLE" will be leading the
descendants of Caesar's pro-peace community which, in the next
century, will find its way to a place they had to flee to, to escape
the anti-human bigotry (and ape-vs-ape "human lovers"
discrimination), when the now-armed gorillas rejoin the Chimp-
Orangutan-Human society and take power, subjugating the Humans and
spurring the rewriting of Ape History to conceal Man's former
civilization (and whitewashing Aldo's Cain-like murder of Cornelius
Jr.).

And that sets the stage for the TV era of 3085.

Eventually, there will be a War between Ape and Man after 3085,
perhaps partly instigated by Virdon and Burke, and Zaius (with
others) or his son/heir will be part of a pilgrimage going eastward,
following in the centuries old footsteps of the 'nice' Lawgiver who
had eventually set up a peaceful community at the site of the
movie "APE CITY". A 'heretic' orangutan who had lived amongst the
peaceful co-existers will have been made a pariah because of his
severe anti-human views: he will have trekked westward, and come
across the Zaius-led community in Central City, informing them of the
human-loving community on the other side of the continent -- which is
one big reason for Zaius (or his heir) to make the eastward trek from
CENTRAL CITY to APE CITY. To "set things right".

They get there, and they duke it out, easily overcoming the
pacifists, who either "repent" of their views and adopt the new
doctrines of the 'mean' Lawgiver... or they flee into the Forbidden
Zone, as apostates. And their scriptures -- the "Secret Scrolls" are
confiscated and hidden away by the ancestor of Dr. Zaius. Those who
fled into the Forbidden Zone will ultimately be compelled by the
descendants of Mendez' now-telepathic Mutants to kill each other off
("We are a peaceful people; we don't kill our enemies... we get our
enemies to kill each other").

A site on the shore of Dead Lake (a site which Taylor never saw) will
be the place where those "apostate" Apes and Humans fled, on the
shore of a stream that feeds into the lake, which feeds via river
into the Ocean/Sea. They live on fish and freshwater, attempting to
make a home in that small sliver of green between the Eastern and
Western Desert.

Taylor, Dodge and Landon will land their raft just to the SOUTH of
this site, and they set out southward (towards the Ape City area), so
they never run into the site. But their fellow ANSA astronauts from
the 3rd Shuttle -- the ones who remotely controlled Taylor's ship's
descent and splashdown -- will have parked their working ship on the
ocean shore, and then trekked out around Dead Lake around the North
and West shore, trying to get to the vicinity of Taylor's splashdown
site. Before they get to Taylor's raft, they will encounter the site
on Dead Lake where Apes and Humans eventually slaughtered each other,
due to the insidious influence of the 'peaceful' Mutants who deemed
both Apes and non-Mutant Humans to be their "enemy".

That's just my scenario, though, which I know you (and some others)
don't care for. But it IS consistent with the evidence on-screen. It
bridges the gap from the California region ("CONQUEST"/"BATTLE" and
the TV show) to the New York region ("PLANET"/"BENEATH"). And it
gives more back-story to Zaius' line about how "Only an APOSTATE
would flee to the Forbidden Zone"... he's citing an historical
precedent, dating back to the encroachment of his own ancestor and
his people into the peacenik society that had lived in the troglodyte
cave complex for 3 centuries, in peace... until Zaius' ancestor and
the Lawgiver spoiled the party.

Patrick

.html

I knew you'd never get a yes or no answer from Pat.

 

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/2006 11:00:46 PM Central Standard Time, LordTZer0@... writes:

I knew you'd never get a yes or no answer from Pat.

That's true enough, nothing can ever be that simple when asking him a question...

But, in my scenario, I think he voted "No"...<.html <.html

.html <.html

.html
-- <.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 10:57:20 P.M. Central Standard Time, mlccougar@... writes:

Mankind is a killer... (no matter what he's armed with)...

 

Especially Alpha Omegas

 

<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/3/2006 11:08:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

I am buying them too!

 

Do you need 6?

Why not leave some for others?

You can always buy them later if they don't sell.

 

<.html

.html <.html

.html

In a message dated 1/4/2006 3:25:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

I want them to sell out.

 

That's all well and good.

But you're not going to get

those new fans buy buying up

all the copies.  What's the

difference if they sell out this

week or a few weeks from now?

 

 

<.html

mlccougar@... wrote:

> In a message dated 1/3/2006 6:53:25 PM Central Standard Time,
> wasitchu@... writes:
>
>> I believe that the sequals created one possible timeline for the ape
>> series. I think that a movie or series of movies exploring a
>> different timeline would be nice about now.
>
>
>
> Yeah, but that wasn't the question... The question is "Do you think
> that Planet of the Apes (the 1968 original film) has the /right/ to be
> considered a stand alone piece?"
>
> Answer either YES or NO
>

Without a doubt yes.

Red.

.html <.html

.html
-- <.html

.html <.html

.html <.html

Yes, It has the right and stands alone much better without the
watered down sequels (which I still love). If someone has no
knowledge of Planet of the Apes I think it would be better to see the
original and walk away thinking, "Wow that was a really great film."
Rather than getting wrapped up in all the fodder that was fed to us
as kids. I truly enjoy all the Apes projects but do agree that they
hurt the reputation of the original and turn them into "old goofy
talking monkey movies." When someone is curious about my obsession
with the "Apes" franchise, who knows little or nothing of it, I
always watch the original with them.

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/3/06 8:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
tybunny@g...
> writes:
>
>
> > The first movie is so, so much better than all of the sequels, it
is a
> > different animal entirely.
> >
> > HOWEVER, I'm such a sucker for the sequels, all of them except
Battle, that
> > I am thrilled they were made. None of them are as sublime, as
clever, as
> > memorable as the original, but the sequels are all guilty
pleasures. It's
> > almost the same as the Star Wars franchise...the original is a
great movie, EVERY
> > one of the sequels is a disappointment.
> >
> > Ty the Guy. Still a huge fan of Conquest and Beneath, against
all the odds.
> >
>
> Yes, but what I'm sort of asking is do you feel it's necessary that
PLANET
> can only totally be enjoyed if you also watch all the sequels and
then the TV
> show, etc.? Would you say to a stranger, "You want to know PLANET
OF THE APES?
> Then, you gotta watch all these movies." Or is it enough that they
just
> watch the original?
>
> Of course, I'm not including the novel in any of this.
>
> -- Rory
>

I too am a child of the 70's who never knew a time when Planet of the
Apes stood alone and I love the sequals. That being said, I have to
admit that when sharing my love for this franchise with someone new
to it, I always watch the original. It is a great film, way ahead of
its time and still stands up today as something I can be proud to be
a fan of. The sequals entertain me and help feed my nostalgic need
for a time long forgot, but someone without those chilhood memories
is more apt to view them as "old goofy talking monkey movies." Which
is what they have been reduced to over the years.





--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, "patrickmichaeltilton"
<patrickmichaeltilton@y...> wrote:

>
> --- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, Haristas@a... wrote:
> >
> > In a message dated 1/3/06 7:46:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > apefan23@y... writes:
> >
> >
> > > Yes I do......to me they are just movies.....I tried
> > > to stop making sense of them long ago....
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> >
> > So far two for "yes." That means there are at least three of us.
> >
> > I just want to find out what the majority thinks, especially
> Patrick.
> >
> > This will take a few days for everyone to answer. I'll be

grouping

> all the numbers from both groups.
> >
> > -- Rory
>
> *** Do works of art have rights? Doesn't Boulle's novel have the

pre-

> eminent 'right' to be considered alone, without recourse to the

1968

> film? Doesn't it tend to suffer by comparison (I say "suffer"

because

> most people seem to prefer the film, though I realize that some --
> probably Rory -- feel the book is superior)?
>
> The 1968 film HAD this so-called 'right' when it was the only one,
> but that changed when they chose to make a sequel. When they made
> sequels -- with the same production company, the same actors (Roddy
> WOULD have made "BENEATH" if he hadn't been directing a film at the
> time) playing the same roles, etc etc -- they expanded

the 'universe'

> of "PLANET OF THE APES" so that it would include "BENEATH"...
> then "ESCAPE"... etc.
>
> Some people -- Rory included -- remember seeing "PLANET" in its
> original theatrical run, and have been disappointed with each
> subsequent sequel, because they don't think any of the sequels

stack

> up to the original.
>
> Others, myself included, remember seeing "PLANET" when it debuted

on

> TV, after two other APES films had been made, so that -- as a kid,
> watching for the first time -- I was only aware that it was a

SERIES

> of films. Whatever special feeling those "PLANET"-only viewers had,

I

> never had that luxury. It was ALWAYS a 5-film saga to me, and

though

> I know that the 1st film was the most original of the bunch, I can
> appreciate the sequels -- lower budgets (etc) notwithstanding --

for

> being wonderful in their own right.
>
> The 1st movie doesn't have 'rights' -- but those who see these

movies

> have every right to be "PLANET"-purists or POTA-SAGA-inclusives...
> whatever floats their boat. But there ain't a soul alive who

doesn't

> know that the character Chuck played in the 1st film blows the

entire

> world up in the sequel. Like it or not, the 1st film will never be
> considered a separate entity.
>
> What I do wonder, though, is this: if one wishes to be a "PLANET"-
> only proponent, then none of the details in the sequels should

matter

> whatsoever. I'm talkin' TIMELINES, and all those other arguments we
> keep having. Only somebody who includes all 5 films should bother

to

> have an opinion about whether or not it's a "changed" timeline
> from "ESCAPE" onwards, or a "circle". If you're ignoring "BENEATH"
> and all the others, then it's a MOOT point.
>
> If somebody cares ONLY about the 1st film, well, why not start up a
> Yahoo group devoted to IT and to ONLY it... deleting posts that

cross

> the line and attempt to include talk about the sequels? I can't
> imagine that there would be many members to such a group, with much
> to talk about that can't already be talked about in groups like

this,

> which are inclusive of ALL the POTA works -- Boulle, the 5 films,

the

> TV shows, the comics, etc.
>
> Whether I like it or not, Lucas invented the Ewoks (and had them
> defeating Stormtroopers with sticks and stones) and made 3 crappy
> prequels to the magnificently entertaining "STAR WARS" -- and
> pretended that Darth Vader was Luke's dad all along... with Leia

the

> unknown sister that Luke had masturbatory fantasies about. Although

I

> really loved "EMPIRE" -- in which Darth CLAIMS to be Luke's father,
> but we don't really find out if he's being truthful until the 3rd
> movie -- there are times when I wish that there were only the
> first "STAR WARS" film -- and NOT Episodes I, II, III, and half of

VI.

>
> I especially wish that Lucas hadn't messed with the original and re-
> jiggered it so that Greedo shot at Han first. That's like going

back

> and re-editing "PLANET" so that Taylor isn't quite so mean to

Landon

> when they land that raft and trek across the desert. Or editing out
> Julius' tobacco use, just to be "politically correct" in this anti-
> smoking world we live in.
>
> I love the original "PLANET" and if it had been the ONLY one they
> ever made, I would still consider it my favorite movie of all time.
> As it is, they chose to make more movies -- and, budgets
> notwithstanding, they were ABOUT something and they were

entertaining

> and often profound. Worthy sequels to the (admittedly superior)
> original film. What about the 'rights' of THOSE films? If the
> original can have 'rights', why can't they?
>
> Patrick
>

.html

In a message dated 1/4/2006 5:06:28 A.M. Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Sorry – I'll return them! 

 

You don't have to do that.

I just thought you wanted there to be

more fans.  It is possible that if they sell

out they'll restock.  However, if you're

hoarding multiple copies those are

copies that others won't find  and can't

buy and enjoy when they go to the comic

shop.  So what happens?  They go their.

They don't see it, but it, or read it. They

buy & read something else.  I like the

plan, I just think it's premature.  I can't

see the difference if they sell out the

first week of the month or the third,

except that those copies you have

might have ben bought buy other

fans or created new fans who just

bought it cause it looked cool.

But you know best, I'm sure.

There's probably some flaw

in my logic somewhere.

 

<.html

.html<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/4/2006 5:11:00 A.M. Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

Seriously T, I have said I will provide these to anyone on the group who cannot get one.  

I'd also like to sell some on eBay – there are many POTA fans on eBay who may not have heard about this comic otherwise.

 

Well, I just assumed since everyone here has a computer

and can get them from Dreamland Comics, and there are

already copies popping up on ebay there was no need.

 

<.html

.html

In a message dated 1/4/2006 9:31:16 A.M. Central Standard Time, DrZaiusDavis@... writes:

Yes, It has the right and stands alone much better without the
watered down sequels

 

And mediocre remakes.

Just as the original is a step from the sequels

the films are a step from the remake, until

you have a picture of the artist painting a picture

of the artist painting a picture of the artist painting a picture

of the artist painting a picture of the artist painting a picture

of the landscape.  Except Battle.  They are equals. 

Equally bad.

 

<.html

.html
-- <.html

.html
-- <.html

.html
-- <.html

As usual Greg, many, many thanks for taking the time to do this.

 

Is your new scanner happening yet?

Michael

 

.html

In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:50:21 P.M. Central Standard Time, whitty@... writes:

These stores NEED too see the comic SELL OUT

 

Well, I just ordered one, so I'm doing my bit.

One suggestion, double check your info.

I edited mine before paying for my order

and it was still wrong on the receipt.

I hope this won't cause delivery probs.

 

<.html

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the PotaDG
group.

File : /Within the Planet of the Apes/WPOTA 63.gif
Uploaded by : munkeyman63au <nfoster@...>
Description :

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PotaDG/files/Within%20the%20Planet%20of%20the%20Apes/WPOTA%2063.gif

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

munkeyman63au <nfoster@...>

Attachments :

.html <.html

Attachments :

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Neil T Foster
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 9:13 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Within the Planet of the Apes strip #63

 

<.html

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com , mlccougar@a... wrote:

> He simply asked if in your opinion it has the right to be considered

a stand alone piece? He said nothing about totally ignoring the
sequels altogether, he just asked if PLANET can/should be allowed to
stand apart from them and be judged on it's own merit(s)...

-- That is all very well and good but I would argue that ANY movie has
the 'right' to be considered a stand alone piece whether its a sequel,
prequel or part of a 'series'.

Just an aside, whenever I look up Planet of the Apes in a movie
reference book or such it ALWAYS mentions the sequels etc.

Neil

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Neil
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 10:02 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question

--- In PotaDG@yahoogroups.com, mlccougar@a... wrote:
> He simply asked if in your opinion it has the right to be considered
a stand alone piece? He said nothing about totally ignoring the
sequels altogether, he just asked if PLANET can/should be allowed to
stand apart from them and be judged on it's own merit(s)...

-- That is all very well and good but I would argue that ANY movie has
the 'right' to be considered a stand alone piece whether its a sequel,
prequel or part of a 'series'.

Just an aside, whenever I look up Planet of the Apes in a movie
reference book or such it ALWAYS mentions the sequels etc.

Neil

<.html

.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 11:08:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

As I have said before, it was the comic of BENEATH that got me hooked....and then I had to piece everything together (thinking there might be a Derek Zane movie!!!).

Actually, I never got the Statue of Liberty - having seen them all out of order it never occured to me that it was any OTHER Planet!  Lucky my dad loved it and sat with me explaining things to me!

Michael



Oh, I do feel sorry for those that weren't there at the beginning.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Haristas@...
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:36 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question

In a message dated 1/3/06 11:08:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

As I have said before, it was the comic of BENEATH that got me hooked....and then I had to piece everything together (thinking there might be a Derek Zane movie!!!).

Actually, I never got the Statue of Liberty - having seen them all out of order it never occured to me that it was any OTHER Planet!  Lucky my dad loved it and sat with me explaining things to me!

Michael

Oh, I do feel sorry for those that weren't there at the beginning.

-- Rory

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/4/06 7:39:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

And I feel sorry for those who can't allow themselves to enjoy something because they just like it.

All the analysing we do of POTA in these groups is interesting but it has taken away the magic for me, which is sad.

Michael


I feel your pain, but we're all not 10-year-olds anymore.  What do you want to do, keep talking about it as if we were?

The original is such a truly good movie that I have no problem feeling the "magic" in it, even after over 300 viewings!

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Haristas@...
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:44 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question

In a message dated 1/4/06 7:39:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

And I feel sorry for those who can't allow themselves to enjoy something because they just like it.

All the analysing we do of POTA in these groups is interesting but it has taken away the magic for me, which is sad.

Michael

I feel your pain, but we're all not 10-year-olds anymore.  What do you want to do, keep talking about it as if we were?

The original is such a truly good movie that I have no problem feeling the "magic" in it, even after over 300 viewings!

-- Rory

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/3/06 11:02:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

The 1968 film HAD this so-called 'right' when it was the only one,
but that changed when they chose to make a sequel. When they made
sequels -- with the same production company, the same actors (Roddy
WOULD have made "BENEATH" if he hadn't been directing a film at the
time) playing the same roles, etc etc -- they expanded the 'universe'
of "PLANET OF THE APES" so that it would include "BENEATH"...
then "ESCAPE"... etc.

Some people -- Rory included -- remember seeing "PLANET" in its
original theatrical run, and have been disappointed with each
subsequent sequel, because they don't think any of the sequels stack
up to the original.

Others, myself included, remember seeing "PLANET" when it debuted on
TV, after two other APES films had been made, so that -- as a kid,
watching for the first time -- I was only aware that it was a SERIES
of films. Whatever special feeling those "PLANET"-only viewers had, I
never had that luxury. It was ALWAYS a 5-film saga to me, and though
I know that the 1st film was the most original of the bunch, I can
appreciate the sequels -- lower budgets (etc) notwithstanding -- for
being wonderful in their own right.

The 1st movie doesn't have 'rights' -- but those who see these movies
have every right to be "PLANET"-purists or POTA-SAGA-inclusives...
whatever floats their boat. But there ain't a soul alive who doesn't
know that the character Chuck played in the 1st film blows the entire
world up in the sequel. Like it or not, the 1st film will never be
considered a separate entity.

I'm so glad you wrote the above comments, Patrick.  I once called you a "disrespector" of the original film and now I know how very right I am.  You have no respect for the fact that the original came first without any thought of there being a sequel.  And as for " Like it or not, the 1st film will never be considered a separate entity ," you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.  

What I do wonder, though, is this: if one wishes to be a "PLANET"-
only proponent, then none of the details in the sequels should matter
whatsoever. I'm talkin' TIMELINES, and all those other arguments we
keep having. Only somebody who includes all 5 films should bother to
have an opinion about whether or not it's a "changed" timeline
from "ESCAPE" onwards, or a "circle". If you're ignoring "BENEATH"
and all the others, then it's a MOOT point.

You couldn't be more wrong, Patrick, and it's about the timelines that I'll get to eventually.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/4/06 7:51:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

Anyway - the original WAS designed for SEQUELS Rory, they were just poorly managed!

Michael


I couldn't disagree more and I think the facts of the production bare that out, as well as Charlton Heston's attitude when the idea of a sequel was first suggested to him.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Haristas@...
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:51 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question

In a message dated 1/3/06 11:02:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

The 1968 film HAD this so-called 'right' when it was the only one,
but that changed when they chose to make a sequel. When they made
sequels -- with the same production company, the same actors (Roddy
WOULD have made "BENEATH" if he hadn't been directing a film at the
time) playing the same roles, etc etc -- they expanded the 'universe'
of "PLANET OF THE APES" so that it would include "BENEATH"...
then "ESCAPE"... etc.

Some people -- Rory included -- remember seeing "PLANET" in its
original theatrical run, and have been disappointed with each
subsequent sequel, because they don't think any of the sequels stack
up to the original.

Others, myself included, remember seeing "PLANET" when it debuted on
TV, after two other APES films had been made, so that -- as a kid,
watching for the first time -- I was only aware that it was a SERIES
of films. Whatever special feeling those "PLANET"-only viewers had, I
never had that luxury. It was ALWAYS a 5-film saga to me, and though
I know that the 1st film was the most original of the bunch, I can
appreciate the sequels -- lower budgets (etc) notwithstanding -- for
being wonderful in their own right.

The 1st movie doesn't have 'rights' -- but those who see these movies
have every right to be "PLANET"-purists or POTA-SAGA-inclusives...
whatever floats their boat. But there ain't a soul alive who doesn't
know that the character Chuck played in the 1st film blows the entire
world up in the sequel. Like it or not, the 1st film will never be
considered a separate entity.

I'm so glad you wrote the above comments, Patrick.  I once called you a "disrespector" of the original film and now I know how very right I am.  You have no respect for the fact that the original came first without any thought of there being a sequel.  And as for "Like it or not, the 1st film will never be considered a separate entity," you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. 

What I do wonder, though, is this: if one wishes to be a "PLANET"-
only proponent, then none of the details in the sequels should matter
whatsoever. I'm talkin' TIMELINES, and all those other arguments we
keep having. Only somebody who includes all 5 films should bother to
have an opinion about whether or not it's a "changed" timeline
from "ESCAPE" onwards, or a "circle". If you're ignoring "BENEATH"
and all the others, then it's a MOOT point.

You couldn't be more wrong, Patrick, and it's about the timelines that I'll get to eventually.

-- Rory

<.html

I feel happy also to be able to discuss these films. I will be honest, I
have found greatness in each of them. Yes, the original was a movie well
beyond it's time. However, the sequals, and the TV series did create a new
depth to the storyline making it that much more enjoyable. I have said
this before, I would really love to see what would happen if someone made
a sequal to the original and took a different direction. I do have a hard
time understanding why some in the group are becomming so angry over each
others opinions. I feel that we are all each and everyone of us of an
opinion, and that we feel what we feel about the movie and it's sequals
individually.

RedAce.


On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:51:08 -0500, Whitty, Michael
<Michael.Whitty@...> wrote:

> You know Rory, I'm just happy to be ABLE to talk about it.
> For years as I grew up it was a VERY lonely thing to be into.
> Lots of people LIKED it but not with the same passion as I.
> I do like to hear lots of different opinions, from Cougar (who I would
> categorise a purist) to Patrick (creative purist?) etc. Where I am at
> now,
> though, brings me less joy! I was so happy when I just believed it was
> all
> a big circle. Now it's like I have met God and he's just an old drunken
> fool who had nothing better to do than create a universe! ;)
> I don't think the intenton of those who made ANY of the films was to
> make us
> think TOO much....you gotta just enjoy it!
> Anyway - the original WAS designed for SEQUELS Rory, they were just
> poorly
> managed!
> Michael
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com ]On Behalf Of
> Haristas@...
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:44 AM
> To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question
>
>
> In a message dated 1/4/06 7:39:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> Michael.Whitty@... writes:
>
>
>
>
> And I feel sorry for those who can't allow themselves to enjoy something
> because they just like it.
>
> All the analysing we do of POTA in these groups is interesting but it has
> taken away the magic for me, which is sad.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> I feel your pain, but we're all not 10-year-olds anymore. What do you
> want
> to do, keep talking about it as if we were?
>
> The original is such a truly good movie that I have no problem feeling
> the
> "magic" in it, even after over 300 viewings!
>
> -- Rory
>
>
> IMPORTANT
> 1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
> 2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential
> information
> for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
> 3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
> a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
> 4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous
> publications
> and DVA does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic
> messages.
> 5. Please go to http://www.dva.gov.au/feedback.htm#sub to unsubscribe
> emails
>
> of this type from DVA.
>

--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Haristas@...
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:54 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question

In a message dated 1/4/06 7:51:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

Anyway - the original WAS designed for SEQUELS Rory, they were just poorly managed!

Michael

I couldn't disagree more and I think the facts of the production bare that out, as well as Charlton Heston's attitude when the idea of a sequel was first suggested to him.

-- Rory

<.html

Some people are just angry by nature.

You see, Rory saw God at a young age (ie PLANET).

Since then, nothing came up to expectations.

Me, I started with a comic adaptation of a sequel, liked that, then went on
a quest for more. I'm an Aussie, so at 10 years of age the whole statue of
liberty thing meant shit to me. Even if I had seen Planet first, I would
have still thought that Taylor was pissed because someone ruined his
monument rather than thinking "oh - this is EARTH!".

So while I wallowed in the shit Rory detests, and loved it dearly, poor Rory
was simply critical.

Who do YOU feel sorry for? ;)

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com ]On Behalf Of
Ralph
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:59 AM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [PotaDG] Re: A question


I feel happy also to be able to discuss these films. I will be honest, I
have found greatness in each of them. Yes, the original was a movie well
beyond it's time. However, the sequals, and the TV series did create a new
depth to the storyline making it that much more enjoyable. I have said
this before, I would really love to see what would happen if someone made
a sequal to the original and took a different direction. I do have a hard
time understanding why some in the group are becomming so angry over each
others opinions. I feel that we are all each and everyone of us of an
opinion, and that we feel what we feel about the movie and it's sequals
individually.

RedAce.

.html.html In a message dated 1/4/06 7:55:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

I think you mean to say the original never intended the sequels it GOT.

It left SO many openings for sequels it actually seems to me it was intended to spawn more films.

Michael


No, I don't mean that at all.  PLANET was originally intended as a one shot deal.  Same as the original '31 FRANKENSTEIN and the '33 KING KONG.  It was the popularity of these movies that got them "sequelized."  Now, the first James Bond movie, DR. NO, or the first Harry Potter movie, yeah, but then they were spawned from book series.

-- Rory<.html <.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Haristas@...
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 12:09 PM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question?

In a message dated 1/4/06 7:55:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

I think you mean to say the original never intended the sequels it GOT.

It left SO many openings for sequels it actually seems to me it was intended to spawn more films.

Michael

No, I don't mean that at all.  PLANET was originally intended as a one shot deal.  Same as the original '31 FRANKENSTEIN and the '33 KING KONG.  It was the popularity of these movies that got them "sequelized."  Now, the first James Bond movie, DR. NO, or the first Harry Potter movie, yeah, but then they were spawned from book series.

-- Rory

<.html

.html.html In a message dated 1/4/06 8:01:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

At the time, other than Andy Hardy, how many sequels had there actually BEEN?

Michael

Oh, Michael, you are little ignorant of film history.  Here's a list of just some of the film series that existed before the APES series:

TARZAN
THE WOLF MAN
FRANKENSTEIN
DRACULA
THE INVISIBLE MAN
THE MUMMY
THE CISCO KID
HOPALONG CASSIDY
SHERLOCK HOLMES
THE SAINT
THE THIN MAN
MA AND PA KETTLE
CHARLIE CHAN
MR. MOTO
DR. KILDARE
DR. CHRISTIAN
ANDY HARDY
HENRY ALDRICH
BLONDIE
NANCY DREW
THE MEXICAN SPITFIRE
THE DEAD END KIDS<.html <.html

.html

-----Original Message-----
From: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com [PotaDG@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Haristas@...
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 12:16 PM
To: PotaDG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PotaDG] Re: A question

In a message dated 1/4/06 8:01:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael.Whitty@... writes:

At the time, other than Andy Hardy, how many sequels had there actually BEEN?

Michael

Oh, Michael, you are little ignorant of film history.  Here's a list of just some of the film series that existed before the APES series:

TARZAN
THE WOLF MAN
FRANKENSTEIN
DRACULA
THE INVISIBLE MAN
THE MUMMY
THE CISCO KID
HOPALONG CASSIDY
SHERLOCK HOLMES
THE SAINT
THE THIN MAN
MA AND PA KETTLE
CHARLIE CHAN
MR. MOTO
DR. KILDARE
DR. CHRISTIAN
ANDY HARDY
HENRY ALDRICH
BLONDIE
NANCY DREW
THE MEXICAN SPITFIRE
THE DEAD END KIDS