Best Planet Of The Apes sequel?

[RJDiogenes]

This is a tough question; I think the original Planet of the Apes series is best viewed as one epic story. However. In terms of overall quality, Escape From The Planet of the Apes is probably the best-- but I hesitate to vote for it because I can't forget that they expect us to believe that Cornelius and Zira roamed around the Forbidden Zone, somehow found the lake where Taylor's ship sank, somehow knew it was there, somehow raised it to the surface, somehow repaired it, somehow fueled it, somehow learned how to fly it, somehow launched it and somehow found their way back in time to roughly the same time that Taylor left. That's a lot to swallow. The last two movies are ostensibly the worst in terms of production values and story, but Battle has that great speech by Roddy McDowall. Beneath has production values equal to the original, but the story is weaker and I always felt that the mutants were superfluous to the concept-- although I did like the climactic sequences in the mutants' lair. And, as noted, there is Linda Harrison. If forced to choose, the far-fetched premise of Escape forces me to default to Beneath.

 

[cooleddie74]

The best thing about Battle in my eyes was John Huston as the Lawgiver. He added some very much-needed gravitas and in-universe continuity to the film, a film that like I said earlier was a pretty sloppy mess with the weakest final edit of any of the Apes films with the exception of the abysmal Tim Burton remake.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I was absolutely blown away by the ending of Beneath. If the rebooted film series makes it far enough, I'd like to see them do the same thing.

That being said: What's everyone's opinion on the theory that the original POTA films establish a closed time loop?

 

[Stevil2001]

I waffle back and forth between Escape and Conquest on this one. I remember liking Conquest a lot, but last time through, Escape edged it out. (What a tone shift that one has!)

Beneath I always found to be a boring version of the original, with the exception of the ending. Nothing good at all is happening in Battle.

 

[Saga]

i always fall asleep during Beneath.

 

[Christopher]

This is a tough question; I think the original Planet of the Apes series is best viewed as one epic story. However. In terms of overall quality, Escape From The Planet of the Apes is probably the best-- but I hesitate to vote for it because I can't forget that they expect us to believe that Cornelius and Zira roamed around the Forbidden Zone, somehow found the lake where Taylor's ship sank, somehow knew it was there, somehow raised it to the surface, somehow repaired it, somehow fueled it, somehow learned how to fly it, somehow launched it and somehow found their way back in time to roughly the same time that Taylor left. That's a lot to swallow.

That's just an example of what makes it hard for me to see the five films as one epic story. None of them, save the last, was designed with a sequel in mind. So each film had to retcon the rules of the previous film in order to justify its existence. In the original, there was no time warp; Taylor and his men were just in hibernation for thousands of years, maybe time-dilated by their velocity, but either way just in suspended animation. Beneath had to retcon that into a time warp to justify a second ship coming to the same future. Then Escape needed the rather absurd retcon you describe, and it introduced the revised backstory that the apes themselves were responsible for the destruction of human civilization after being bred into servants, rather than evolving in the wake of human nuclear war as the original indicated. (Taylor's famous rant before the Statue of Liberty only makes sense if he's directing his rage at humanity for its self-destruction; saying the apes were responsible undermines it, even if you say they were driven to it by human cruelty.) But Escape implied that those events were a considerable distance in the future -- naturally, since it would've taken time to breed the apes into the more humanoid form we see. Yet Conquest showed that the apes had somehow magically mutated into that form within a single generation after the previous film -- although at least they were almost all mute except for Caesar. But then Battle retconned that and had all the apes able to speak. Ironically, Battle was the only film that was written with the goal of allowing a sequel to exist, yet it didn't get one. (Unless you count the TV series, which retconned things even further.)

So while the idea was to create the illusion that these films followed on one another in an overall arc, they really don't fit together logically. Each one is a reinvention of the premise to some degree.

 

[BennyRussel]

Escape....if only for my favorite line in the series not spoken by Heston.

"Because I loathe bananas!"
- Dr. Zira

 

[Harvey]

RE: Christoper

You really think that the cliffhanger in Escape from the Planet of the Apes wasn't intended to facilitate a sequel? I can't remember the behind-the-scenes details, so perhaps it wasn't, but it's always struck me as the movie that had a follow-up in mind.

 

[Christopher]

I remember seeing a special about the POTA movies some years ago, and I'm pretty sure they said that Battle was the only movie written with a sequel in mind. Certainly the ending of Escape was meant to be ominous, to show that the seeds of the apocalyptic future had been sown, but as I said, I think the idea there was that it would be many generations down the road, not just a couple of decades as the next movie had it.

 

[Galileo7]

Beneath POTA. Escape POTA would be my next favorite.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Escape implied that those events were a considerable distance in the future -- naturally, since it would've taken time to breed the apes into the more humanoid form we see.

I read once that there was a subplot (or maybe just one scene, like a character reading a book or something) which was cut from the original film, and which would have placed the 'ape holocaust' at several centuries into our future, like the 26th or 27th centuries. Most people assume that it happened in the present, but there's no real proof of that.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ I think there was a scene like that in the first episode of the TV show.

That being said: What's everyone's opinion on the theory that the original POTA films establish a closed time loop?

I'd buy a closed time loop that changes a bit on each pass; that would or could explain many of the timeline contradictions.

That's just an example of what makes it hard for me to see the five films as one epic story. None of them, save the last, was designed with a sequel in mind. So each film had to retcon the rules of the previous film in order to justify its existence. In the original, there was no time warp; Taylor and his men were just in hibernation for thousands of years, maybe time-dilated by their velocity, but either way just in suspended animation. Beneath had to retcon that into a time warp to justify a second ship coming to the same future.

Well, it was certainly a messy epic. Aside from the problems with Escape, the thing that bothers me the most is the evolution of the time dilation to a time warp to a two-way time warp (and in the show there was no suspended animation at all). While I consider the first film Grade-A, I look at the whole thing collectively as a B-Movie-- lots of fun, but with damaging plot holes and contradictions and inconsistent production values.

 

[Christopher]

I'd buy a closed time loop that changes a bit on each pass; that would or could explain many of the timeline contradictions.

But doesn't that contradict the definition of a closed time loop? If it's closed, that means it's a fixed causal loop that just cycles back to its own beginning. What you're describing is more of an open loop, a "helix" with each time travel creating a new parallel path.

Well, it was certainly a messy epic. Aside from the problems with Escape, the thing that bothers me the most is the evolution of the time dilation to a time warp to a two-way time warp (and in the show there was no suspended animation at all). While I consider the first film Grade-A, I look at the whole thing collectively as a B-Movie-- lots of fun, but with damaging plot holes and contradictions and inconsistent production values.

Yeah, the first film is a classic (although it certainly has its own conceptual flaws, like the apes speaking English and the implausibly rapid evolution), while the other four are collectively a lesser accomplishment, although Escape and Conquest have some effective social satire/critique.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I'd buy a closed time loop that changes a bit on each pass; that would or could explain many of the timeline contradictions.

But doesn't that contradict the definition of a closed time loop? If it's closed, that means it's a fixed causal loop that just cycles back to its own beginning. What you're describing is more of an open loop, a "helix" with each time travel creating a new parallel path.

I suppose, since such a thing doesn't exist in real life, it depends on how time behaves in the context of a particular work of fiction. An orbit is a closed loop, but it can oscillate and change over time. If your concept of time is "wibbly wobbly timey wimey" enough, you could have a closed loop that is a little different on every pass.

 

[cooleddie74]

Time is a funny thing in science fiction. How it behaves depends entirely on the author or scriptwriter and how they want time to behave within the context of their own stories.

Look at the new Abrams timeline in the Trek franchise. In the Roddenberry and B&B eras a radically altered timeline would have been repaired by either our heroes to set things right or by time-traveling "temporal cops" from the future who monitor the flow of history to make sure nobody's screwing with things. It might have taken a two- or three-part episode to correct things and return the known universe to the way it was, but it was done and our heroes went back to the bridges of their starships or space station and relaxed.

Now we have what appears to be a permanent or at least semi-permanent new temporal events sequence that takes place parallel to the Prime/original timeline of Trek and one - it appears - no Federation timeship from the 29th, 30th or 31st century is in any rush to correct.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Look at the new Abrams timeline in the Trek franchise. In the Roddenberry and B&B eras a radically altered timeline would have been repaired by either our heroes to set things right or by time-traveling "temporal cops" from the future

No one in the 'prime' timeline knows that the Abrams timeline even exists. They have no idea where Spock Prime and Nero went. From their point of view, both men simply vanished. Can't repair a timeline that they don't know exists...

 

[cooleddie74]

Look at the new Abrams timeline in the Trek franchise. In the Roddenberry and B&B eras a radically altered timeline would have been repaired by either our heroes to set things right or by time-traveling "temporal cops" from the future

No one in the 'prime' timeline knows that the Abrams timeline even exists. They have no idea where Spock Prime and Nero went. From their point of view, both men simply vanished. Can't repair a timeline that they don't know exists...

There's the theory that the unique qualities of the Red Matter black hole/singularity masked Nero's arrival in 2233 and the changes made to history so nobody from the distant future could detect the alterations with their temporal sensor equipment, but that's just more technobabble really. Who knows what the "real" in-universe explanation might be.

Maybe Braxton and Daniels were in the men's room when it happened and never took notice?

 

[Enterprise is Great]

I think that the Star Trek time cops really only care about timeline changes that affect them in their own time period.

 

[Tom]

I have to re watch those films again. I did like the recent 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' and look forward to 'Dawn of the Planet of the Apes'. The new 'smart ape' evolution (and revolution) in the wake of a new global pandemic seems alot more plausable.

BTW, shouldn't this be in the scifi section?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I think that the Star Trek time cops really only care about timeline changes that affect them in their own time period.

There's a line in one of Christopher's DTI novels that mentions Daniels and his people "isolating" a timeline. Specifically:

Spoiler: DTI

the one featuring the aborted new animated series, with the explosion of Omega molecules which tore the Federation in half and made much of the quadrant impassable to warp drive.

Maybe they did that with this one as well.