Discussion in 'Movies and Television' started by Bumblethumper, May 13, 2010.
Fox Firms Up ‘Planet Of The Apes’ Prequel – Deadline.com
But will the rise of the apes be because of an ape sent from the future?
Eh, showing how it ended up being "Earth all along" is possibly a bad idea. I don't know, I just think it's one of those things that is more fun when it is a total mystery and nobody quite knows exactly how it happens, but everyone has a theory.
If it's a prequel to the original film(as all released information currently indicates), it will almost certainly conflict with some of the original sequels.
I knew the 2001 movie couldn't live up to the original, and I don't expect this will either, but it might be fun just the same. The test for me will be if it can capture some of the same flavour. There's just something cool about those films.
The main reservation I have right now is it sounds like a rush job to get it ready for 2011. If I recall correctly, the 2001 was also rushed into production. Hard to believe it's almost been a decade since then.
Meh..not too sure about this. Will they film this as a documentary, possibly with handycams? Showing these 'origin' stories kinda destroy any mystery of not knowing what exactly happened by just giving the facts to the audience.
I bet if this does well (and any hyped movie does well nowadays), the sequel will be a big battle movie between apes and humans, ala Troy, Braveheart, etc...
So it's that crap Jurassic Park 4 idea, except with monkeys. Not interested.
Never did see the remake and pry won't see this either.
The Marky Mark and the Monkey Bunch Planet of the Apes is about the worst movie I've ever seen so I am about as excited for this as I am the next Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants.
Needs people in costumes or it can GTFO.
That's not the case with the franchise at all.
Planet of the Apes had multiple sequels, showing timelines from after the first film - Beneath the Planet of the Apes, to Escape from the Planet of the Apes wherein Cornelius and Zira go back in time and have a child. Then there's Conquest of the Planet of the Apes wherein their son, Caesar, foments ape revolution, then Battle for the Planet of the Apes which explored an alternate timeline.
So this is nothing new at all and, in fact, has already been exhaustively explored.
So this upcoming film is actually just a reboot of Conquest.
(Damn dirty ape fan.)
I want them to start off from where Planet of the Apes ended with Whalberg in the Lincolin Memorial replaced by that Ape insted.
I think this film is supposed to be a reboot of the franchise and have no real connection to any of the other films that have been made previously.
Oh God, not the Dino-Riders-esque concept. Don't bring that up please :banghead what happened with JP4 anyway? First it's not gonna happen, then it is, then it wasn't, now it is but it's a spinoff trilogy I'm losing interest really fast now.
Other than that, I saw Tim Burton's remake and while I didn't like it I didn't hate it either. My father is a big fan of the original series though and has the original movies on a VHS collectable set. I've watched a few of them a few years back, maybe I should plug the VCR back in and take a look at them one more time.
I think the concept is great behind the series in general. I'll keep an open mind about this sequel.
A Reboot? WTF? It was rebooted for the first time with Planet of the Apes(2001). It was a good story of what happend.
Just to let you know, you and people like you who think the Burton Planet of the Apes was a good film are in the minority. Vastly in the minority.
I remember seeing the Tim Burton version in the theatres years ago and liking it for the most part, although by far not as good as the original. But to be honest, it was a long time ago so I might have looked at it from a whole different angle.
I do remember not liking two thins in that movie, though:
1. The whole 'humans are beasts that have no soul' idea worked in the original movie since the humans actually were mostly mindless animals..in the Tim Burton version though, the human inhabitants talk the same language as the apes, rationalize, etc. etc.
Right now I don't remember if they adress that Descartes idea in the remake, but they do seem to treat like humans are mindless morons. Even if the apes hate humans and treat them as slaves, there would be no way they'd think so low of them?
2. How is it possible that the future Marky Mark arrives back in is pretty much our Earth but with apes, including an Ape Lincoln statue? It worked for the surprise plottwist, but it makes no damned sense.
Burton's Apes is to SF fans what Zombie's Halloween is to horror fans. Even Burton admits the ending made no sense at all.
There is a ton of potential to be found in the Apes universe for anyone willing to explore.
As for whether or not this will contradict the original sequels, that is very debatable.
There is one school of thought that says that the prequels establish the Apeverse as a causal paradox, with Cornelius and Zira creating their own future.
There is another school of thought that says the ape sequels create an alternate timeline, which merely accelerated the oncoming ape uprising by a few years.
If this has any connection to the original POTA at all, even if its just in a fan's imagination, then clearly the film will favor the "alternate timeline" school of thought, and will explore how the original uprising occured without any interference from the future.
The key is they can't puss out on us like T4 or the SW prequels did. If you are going to give us the ape rebellion, then give it to us - if not in the first film, then the sequel. I want to see the Conquest rebellion given us on a scale larger than a shopping mall.
1. In fairness, any time humans have enslaved others, they have found ways to see them as "less than" themselves, going so far as to say they have no souls. While such attitudes are thankfully marginalized in the western world, they still exist, and in some places are prevelant (or in the case of North Korea, institutionalized).
2. SPOILER WARNING! The ending was essentially taken from Pierre Boulle's original novel, where it did make sense. However, in that story, the astronaut actually does land on another world, one that parallels our own, but farther along in its development. Eventually he learns that the apes took over not through violent revolution, but because humans became complacent and lazy, and handed more and more tasks over to trained monkeys (a variation on themes we saw in Time Machine and, more recently, Wall-E). When the astronaut returns to Earth (having been gone centuries) he discovers that his own people have allowed the same to happen.
I could really go for a DinoRiders movie actually. But I'd rather not have the Jurassic Park franchise bastardised for it to happen.
Yeah, but this new prequel has nothing to do with that movie. Or the 2001 POTA remake for that matter.
I was working at Blockbuster video when the Burton Ape movie was in theatres. People would rent the original, and I remember quite a few of them saying they liked the remake better. I didn't think it stood a chance of matching the original, but it wasn't a total waste of time either. It didn't have the drama or the edge of the sixties version, but it did surpass my low expectations.
I liked the ending. Maybe it doesn't make a huge amount of sense, but it was fun just the same.
The main problem I had with that movie was the Helena Bonham Carter chimp. Looked like the offspring of Michael and Bubbles.
Ah right, thanks for clearing that up! Still, in this movie it makes less sense, since the apes live in an exact human copy of Washington, including the buldings, signs, cars, etc etc just with apes instead of humans. But like I said, I guess this was probably done to keep the twist until the very last minute? I have to admit I didn't see it coming.
Separate names with a comma.