• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

"Planet Of The Apes" prequel "Caesar" starts production July 2010

Lord Garth said:
The fourth Planet of the Apes movie, the one with Caesar leading the Ape revolution, is my favorite of the sequels. It's the best pick if they're going to remake any besides the original.
Click to expand...

Yup, Conquest is a gem. If they had only had the same level of makeup quality of the original, it would have been truly awesome.

I watched it again the other day, and I am just amazed at what they did with essentially a microbudget. An ultramodernist landscape has never been as convincingly portrayed in film. I also can't think of another film where the use of color in the production design is as effective, unless it's A New Hope. And if the scenes of the ape revolution had just a few more extras or maybe if someone could travel back in time and give them a little CGI, they'd be the Cecil B. Demille of B movie sci-fi.
 
Definitely use modern make-up designs. Baker's work for Burton's film was great, though the insistence on prettying up the female apes was silly.

They also really have to use "Planet Of The Apes" in the title to leverage the reputation of the series - "Rise Of The Apes" wouldn't work. Planet Of The Apes: Caesar would probably work.

And yeah, the original films were too long ago to worry about trying to fit anything into their continuity. Reboot is the best approach.
 
RJDiogenes said:
Greg Cox said:
Because that was over thirty years ago. Most of the today's audience wasn't even born when the original cycle was a big deal. It makes sense to reinvent the series for the 21st century.

(Heck, the original film was 42 years ago!)

Beside, the original five films already form a nice circular loop. There's no compelling reason to try to squeeze more films into the sequence.
Click to expand...
As I said, there's plenty of room for new stories; others have done it (the Doug Moench and Mike Ploog stories spring to mind, as does the TV show). It would be easy enough to fit in an elaboration of the life of Caesar or later developments without contradicting the original stories. We still don't know how Humans became mindless, for example.
.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, and I remember those Marvel stories fondly, but my main point still stands. Expecting modern audiences to be invested in the continuity of a film series that ended nearly forty years ago would be insane.

Don't get me wrong. I love the original films. I saw them all as a kid, bought the comics, read the novelizations, built the plastic models, etc. But any new POTA series needs to be aimed at modern audiences, not a handful of aging fans.

Just the new TREK movie . . . .
 
Am I the only one who thinks the original movies were just.... bad? I mean, the original is watchable, but the rest of them are just terrible, IMO. I have no interest whatsoever in a new POTA movie, just like I had no interest in the remake from ten years ago.
 
No, I think the original film is an absolute classic, better written and more imaginative than 95 percent of the science fiction and fantasy films made since. The third one is a decent film - to some extent, the story's an inversion of the first movie - and the other three really are pretty mediocre.
 
Dennis said:
No, I think the original film is an absolute classic, better written and more imaginative than 95 percent of the science fiction and fantasy films made since. The third one is a decent film - to some extent, the story's an inversion of the first movie - and the other three really are pretty mediocre.
Click to expand...

Ditto. The original PotA is still imminently watchable (and I say this pretty much despising Charlton Heston's style of acting), and one of the rare cases in which the movie was better than the book. The film not only manages to be a rousing adventure, it's also a (admittedly rather simple) satire on human nature. And then it's interesting for very successfully mixing sci-fi sub-genres - it creates a convincing alien world, and manages to be a stunning post-apocalyptic vision. Likewise, Escape manages to capture a new, more humorous tone while retaining the adventure/ satire aspects. Never much cared for Beneath, Battle or Conquest though. There are glimmers of a good story in the last two but the energy had gone.
 
Dennis said:
No, I think the original film is an absolute classic, better written and more imaginative than 95 percent of the science fiction and fantasy films made since. The third one is a decent film - to some extent, the story's an inversion of the first movie - and the other three really are pretty mediocre.
Click to expand...

Well, since Rod Serling worked on the original, would you expect the writing to be any less?
 
(and I say this pretty much despising Charlton Heston's style of acting)
Click to expand...

The original PotA, as well as The Omega Man, handled Heston in the best way possible: they gave him a character who is a hammy, grandiloquent narcissist and he just had to play himself. I think Heston's Taylor is a fantastic and completely believable performance.
 
There are many sci-fi franchises I enjoy and Planet of the Apes is a favorite. I just want to know where to place this new movie in the continuity of Ape movies. It is part of the original run of movies or is this part of the rebooted movie done b Tim Burton?

Sorry if this has been addressed already.
 
Space Therapist said:
There are many sci-fi franchises I enjoy and Planet of the Apes is a favorite. I just want to know where to place this new movie in the continuity of Ape movies. It is part of the original run of movies or is this part of the rebooted movie done b Tim Burton?

Sorry if this has been addressed already.
Click to expand...


I don't think there's a definitive answer yet, but my best guess is that it's a brand new reboot, set in its own continuity.

I'd be very surprised if there were any links to the Burton version . . . .
 
FluffyUnbound said:
(and I say this pretty much despising Charlton Heston's style of acting)
Click to expand...

The original PotA, as well as The Omega Man, handled Heston in the best way possible: they gave him a character who is a hammy, grandiloquent narcissist and he just had to play himself. I think Heston's Taylor is a fantastic and completely believable performance.
Click to expand...

:lol: Well said!
 
Greg Cox said:
RJDiogenes said:
Greg Cox said:
Because that was over thirty years ago. Most of the today's audience wasn't even born when the original cycle was a big deal. It makes sense to reinvent the series for the 21st century.

(Heck, the original film was 42 years ago!)

Beside, the original five films already form a nice circular loop. There's no compelling reason to try to squeeze more films into the sequence.
Click to expand...
As I said, there's plenty of room for new stories; others have done it (the Doug Moench and Mike Ploog stories spring to mind, as does the TV show). It would be easy enough to fit in an elaboration of the life of Caesar or later developments without contradicting the original stories. We still don't know how Humans became mindless, for example.
.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, and I remember those Marvel stories fondly, but my main point still stands. Expecting modern audiences to be invested in the continuity of a film series that ended nearly forty years ago would be insane.

Don't get me wrong. I love the original films. I saw them all as a kid, bought the comics, read the novelizations, built the plastic models, etc. But any new POTA series needs to be aimed at modern audiences, not a handful of aging fans.
Click to expand...
Why not both? The new film could easily be a strong, standalone story that doesn't contradict the original continuity. Then, not only could us graybeards enjoy it as a continuation, but the younger fans could enjoy it as something new and perhaps be drawn into the overall mythology, cultivating an interest in the history of the genre. I don't think enough kids have respect for the classics; the current social climate encourages them to be disrespectful. But I'm glad to hear you're a fellow aficionado. :bolian:

Just the new TREK movie . . . .
Click to expand...
:crazy: :rommie:
 
I'm on board. I've always loved the story shown in the 3rd and 4th movies, almost as much as the first film.
 
I know Caesar's presence prolly disallows this, but it might be an idea to depict the original, non-contaminated timeline, absent Taylor, Cornelius and Zira. A time-loop was formed, but it almost had to have derived from prior existing events before it was locked in by the time-travelers. Whichever came first, chicken or egg, something had to push the 'go' switch for the time-trap that ultimately destroyed the Earth.
 
hopefully this will be an intro film into a new film series, the concept has a "testing the waters" vibe to it, and thirded for Greg to do the novelization, the apes world needs a bleaker outlook to it
 
Gojirob said:
I know Caesar's presence prolly disallows this, but it might be an idea to depict the original, non-contaminated timeline, absent Taylor, Cornelius and Zira. A time-loop was formed, but it almost had to have derived from prior existing events before it was locked in by the time-travelers. Whichever came first, chicken or egg, something had to push the 'go' switch for the time-trap that ultimately destroyed the Earth.
Click to expand...

No, the whole point of a paradox is that there IS no original timeline.
 
Gojirob said:
I know Caesar's presence prolly disallows this, but it might be an idea to depict the original, non-contaminated timeline, absent Taylor, Cornelius and Zira. A time-loop was formed, but it almost had to have derived from prior existing events before it was locked in by the time-travelers. Whichever came first, chicken or egg, something had to push the 'go' switch for the time-trap that ultimately destroyed the Earth.
Click to expand...

It didn't destroy the earth - in fact the point of the story is that earth went on just fine after humans bombed themselves out of the equation. That's one its most powerful points. Humans are just animals like every other creature on this planet and other animals could easily become intelligent and the dominant species, given the right evolutionary opportunity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top