Escape to the Movies: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - Apes With Machine Guns

Eddie the head

New member
Feb 22, 2012
2,327
0
0
Will everyone hate me if I point out that we all ready live on a plaint of the apes? In that we live on a plaint ruled by apes. Also shouldn't the humans try and go to a plain? I mean use your evolution to your advantage. Despite what the trailers for the last one said the human body is not "that" weak compared to other grate apes. It's different for sure, but that's what evolution dose.
 

Doug

New member
Apr 23, 2008
5,205
0
0
Hi all,

I'm thinking of going to see this, but neither me or my mate have seen Rise of the Planet of the Apes; I'd like to know, do we need to have seen the first movie for this to make sense or be good?
 

WhiteTigerShiro

New member
Sep 26, 2008
2,366
0
0
IanDavis said:
Do I have to have seen the previous one first?
I would say it's less a matter of "have to", and more a matter of "should". Not because the story is necessarily going to make more sense, but because Rise was just an awesome movie. The first time Caesar speaks alone is worth the entire watch; there were literally people going "Whoa" in the theater when I saw it.

Edit: Also, as Bob pointed-out in this review: A gorilla beats-up a helicopter. Let me reiterate that; A gorilla beats-up a helicopter. That is not metaphorical, and it is an awesome scene.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
Eddie the head said:
Despite what the trailers for the last one said the human body is not "that" weak compared to other grate apes. It's different for sure, but that's what evolution dose.
Eh, yes and no. Humans are, barring statistical outliers, significantly weaker (in terms of deliverable force) than most great apes. We simply don't have the musculoskeletal structure to support the same degree of raw strength.

What we do have (speaking in purely physical terms) over pretty much every other animal on Earth though is endurance. The human body is capable of going non-stop for upwards of 15 hours a day with no ill effects whatsoever, and we can work 40+ hours straight if we're willing to push it. There are very, very few animals that can match such a feat, and none of them are remotely near our size. That's one of the reasons why humanity evolved on the plains as a matter of fact; we could successfully hunt simply by walking our prey to death.
 

Zontar

Mad Max 2019
Feb 18, 2013
4,931
0
0
I'm not sure if I'll like this one. I didn't like the one before it for one reason above all else: I hate movies whose whole plot is dependent on everyone being an idiot. Every major part of the plot was basically the direct result of someone being an idiot in action or inaction. For the protagonists father (can't even remember his name) that's one thing, given his illness, for everyone else (especially a genius scientist and the suit who hired him) that's much less so.

It really takes my enjoyment out of a movie when the character sticking to basic safety protocols or using elementary deductive reasoning stops everything from happening.

Also: killing Rodney, that's like 7 sins right there. Ding
 

youji itami

New member
Jun 1, 2014
231
0
0
Johnson McGee said:
youji itami said:
In seriousness the set up for Apes is so, so stupid it makes Transformers look smart which is saying something (just going by the trailers).
I feel the same way about this movie series. Even giving them the benefit of the doubt in how the retrovirus works and what it does, the number of apes on the entire planet is significantly less than a million members among all species combined. Even if every ape on the planet got super intelligent and 99.9% of people got wiped out the apes would still be outnumbered 70:1.

And maybe I'm just getting old but machine-gun gorillas on horseback just looks silly rather than awesome.

It does say a lot when the original 70's series comes up with a better way for apes to overtake humans by being mass breed worldwide as a pet/servant/slave labour force while the human population declines due to decreasing childbirth for why there are more apes than people.

Just look at the breeding rate of natural apes

Gorilla's

Females mature at 10?12 years (earlier in captivity); males at 11?13 years. A female?s first ovulatory cycle occurs when she is six years of age, and is followed by a two-year period of adolescent infertility.[38] The estrous cycle last 30?33 days, with outward ovulation signs subtle compared to those of chimpanzees. The gestation period lasts 8.5 months. Female mountain gorillas first give birth at 10 years of age and have four-year inter-birth intervals.

Orangutan's

Female orangutans experience their first ovulatory cycle around 5.8?11.1 years. These occur earlier in females with more body fat.[35] Like other great apes, female orangutans enter a period of infertility during adolescence which may last for 1?4 years.[35] Female orangutans also have a 22? to 30-day menstrual cycle. Gestation lasts for 9 months, with females giving birth to their first offspring between the ages of 14 and 15 years. Female orangutan's have eight-year intervals between births, the longest inter-birth intervals among the great apes.

Chimpanzee's

In captivity, where they receive regular nutrition, female chimpanzees may reach sexual maturity between the ages of nine and 10 years. In the wild, it may take female chimpanzees an additional three to four years before they can produce young. Males can sire young at the age of 16. After a successful mating, the female will be pregnant for between 230 and 240 days. The offspring may stay with its mother for up to three years. There may be a gap of five to six years between one baby and the next for a female chimpanzee.


At most any single original female ape world have had only 2 offspring none of which would have there own offspring within the 10 year gap between this and the first film so the population of intelligent apes would not even double in the intervening decade.
 

Triaed

Not Gone Gonzo
Jan 16, 2009
454
0
0
Oh Bob, I thought you were going to go with "Bob Chimpman" in your outro credits!
 

JimB

New member
Apr 1, 2012
2,180
0
0
Wait, what's this crap about Doomsday? Are they trying to cram Doomsday into Man of Steel 2: Superman v. Batman v. the Board of Education?

Triaed said:
Oh Bob, I thought you were going to go with "Bob Chimpman" in your outro credits!
Ha! I'd have laughed.
 
Jan 12, 2012
2,114
0
0
LaoJim said:
Thunderous Cacophony said:
Anyways, I just hope that at some point they do finally do the actual Planet of the Apes movie they are building to. I don't particularly want to see it, but I also don't want an endless stream of prequels.
Actually I don't know. Tim Burton tried just do an reboot of the Planet of the Apes which failed miserably. We don't really need another one just telling about a bunch of astronauts (none of them Charlton Heston) crash landing on another "alien" planet only to discover... (spoiler to 50 year old movie deleted) After all the original is still pretty great even if the effects don't hold up.

I haven't seen the new Apes movie yet, but I'm happy with them doing their own thing of contemporary humans vs intelligent apes. If you look at the original movies they started with the end and then worked their way back through history to show how they got there (I think chronologically the order was something like 3,4,5,1,2), I think here is actually interesting to start at the beginning; at least makes it feel different.
True, it does have a different feeling, and it's nice to see them changing it up. I just look at the ridiculously long titles and I know that the studio wants to make as much money as possible out of the "Planet of the Apes" part. The original is still great, but given that they are going to remake it eventually as part of this cycle, I want them to do it, finish a set number of movies, and put the franchise back to rest, rather than dragging it out as long as possible and ending up with no juice and less funding.
Zontar said:
Also: killing Rodney, that's like 7 sins right there. Ding
"Zontar referenced a fantastic series that isn't on the Escapist. Doesn't this comment section know anything about product placement?" Ding
 

Eddie the head

New member
Feb 22, 2012
2,327
0
0
Agayek said:
Eddie the head said:
Despite what the trailers for the last one said the human body is not "that" weak compared to other grate apes. It's different for sure, but that's what evolution dose.
Eh, yes and no. Humans are, barring statistical outliers, significantly weaker (in terms of deliverable force) than most great apes. We simply don't have the musculoskeletal structure to support the same degree of raw strength.
Well it's a good thing I wasn't talking about "raw" strength then. A high endurance is a type of strength, but whatever I'm not going to start arguing over semantics.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
youji itami said:
Johnson McGee said:
youji itami said:
In seriousness the set up for Apes is so, so stupid it makes Transformers look smart which is saying something (just going by the trailers).
I feel the same way about this movie series. Even giving them the benefit of the doubt in how the retrovirus works and what it does, the number of apes on the entire planet is significantly less than a million members among all species combined. Even if every ape on the planet got super intelligent and 99.9% of people got wiped out the apes would still be outnumbered 70:1.

And maybe I'm just getting old but machine-gun gorillas on horseback just looks silly rather than awesome.

It does say a lot when the original 70's series comes up with a better way for apes to overtake humans by being mass breed worldwide as a pet/servant/slave labour force while the human population declines due to decreasing childbirth for why there are more apes than people.

Just look at the breeding rate of natural apes

Gorilla's

Females mature at 10?12 years (earlier in captivity); males at 11?13 years. A female?s first ovulatory cycle occurs when she is six years of age, and is followed by a two-year period of adolescent infertility.[38] The estrous cycle last 30?33 days, with outward ovulation signs subtle compared to those of chimpanzees. The gestation period lasts 8.5 months. Female mountain gorillas first give birth at 10 years of age and have four-year inter-birth intervals.

Orangutan's

Female orangutans experience their first ovulatory cycle around 5.8?11.1 years. These occur earlier in females with more body fat.[35] Like other great apes, female orangutans enter a period of infertility during adolescence which may last for 1?4 years.[35] Female orangutans also have a 22? to 30-day menstrual cycle. Gestation lasts for 9 months, with females giving birth to their first offspring between the ages of 14 and 15 years. Female orangutan's have eight-year intervals between births, the longest inter-birth intervals among the great apes.

Chimpanzee's

In captivity, where they receive regular nutrition, female chimpanzees may reach sexual maturity between the ages of nine and 10 years. In the wild, it may take female chimpanzees an additional three to four years before they can produce young. Males can sire young at the age of 16. After a successful mating, the female will be pregnant for between 230 and 240 days. The offspring may stay with its mother for up to three years. There may be a gap of five to six years between one baby and the next for a female chimpanzee.


At most any single original female ape world have had only 2 offspring none of which would have there own offspring within the 10 year gap between this and the first film so the population of intelligent apes would not even double in the intervening decade.
I thought a nuclear war also factored in to the original's backstory, what with the ruined Statue of Liberty that Charlton Heston was screaming about blowing up.
OT: This movie won't have a blatant "SCIENCE BAD" message to it, will it? The TV spots I watched had this one scene of a woman saying the apes aren't at fault, but "scientists in a lab". I at least hope there's some reference to the "future" movies, and Caesar's mate being named Cornelia has caught my trivia-driven fanboy attention.
 

LaoJim

New member
Aug 24, 2013
555
0
0
Thunderous Cacophony said:
True, it does have a different feeling, and it's nice to see them changing it up. I just look at the ridiculously long titles and I know that the studio wants to make as much money as possible out of the "Planet of the Apes" part. The original is still great, but given that they are going to remake it eventually as part of this cycle, I want them to do it, finish a set number of movies, and put the franchise back to rest, rather than dragging it out as long as possible and ending up with no juice and less funding.
Agree about the silly titles (and am I the only one who is going to be eternally referring to Lara's new adventure as "Rise of the Planet of the Tomb Raider).

I think they can have a well rounded out series. I don't know what happens in the current movie, but a reasonable arc might be.

1) Humans on top, apes are treated badly
2) Starts with humans/apes at peace and equal, war begins.
3) All out war, humans end up as slaves (nuclear war possible at some point, also how humans stop talking)
4) Generations pass. Humans fight back, some kind of balance is returned to the force.

Depending on how far they've got in 2 then maybe 3 and 4 could be one movie. Knowing studios 1-3 will be one trilogy then 4 will be extended into another trilogy. They don't particularly need a spaceship turning up though a wormhole.
 

youji itami

New member
Jun 1, 2014
231
0
0
Darth_Payn said:
youji itami said:
Johnson McGee said:
youji itami said:

I thought a nuclear war also factored in to the original's backstory, what with the ruined Statue of Liberty that Charlton Heston was screaming about blowing up.
OT: This movie won't have a blatant "SCIENCE BAD" message to it, will it? The TV spots I watched had this one scene of a woman saying the apes aren't at fault, but "scientists in a lab". I at least hope there's some reference to the "future" movies, and Caesar's mate being named Cornelia has caught my trivia-driven fanboy attention.

That was retconed with the 4th film once they realised that global nuclear war would you know kill apes as well as humans.
 

chozo_hybrid

What is a man? A miserable little pile of secrets.
Jul 15, 2009
3,479
14
43
SeeDarkly_Xero said:
Ape with a machine gun? It's been done:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xlk63g_young-justice-episode-13-part-1-2_shortfilms
Timestamp :52 | (and that's entirely coincidental and not at all any attempt to be clever)
But not dual wielding like Bob said :D

I think I will go see this, I liked the first one okay, so this should be something i will enjoy too.
 

Chairman Miaow

CBA to change avatar
Nov 18, 2009
2,093
0
0
I'm afraid I fall on the silly rather than cool side of the fence with this one. I also wasn't a big fan of the first. The bits it did well were great but it was trying so hard to be serious and then every so often it would undermine its hard work with its terrible, terrible caricature villains.
Thunderous Cacophony said:
Zontar said:
Also: killing Rodney, that's like 7 sins right there. Ding
"Zontar referenced a fantastic series that isn't on the Escapist. Doesn't this comment section know anything about product placement?" Ding
Referencing somebody elses reference for humourous effect. Ding
 

SwimmingRock

New member
Nov 11, 2009
1,177
0
0
Johnson McGee said:
And maybe I'm just getting old but machine-gun gorillas on horseback just looks silly rather than awesome.
That's my problem as well. I like the underlying idea and theme of the movie (according to Bobs review, that is), but I can't shake the feeling that it gets way too stupid in the third act. Might still go see it and just leave early.
 

Product Placement

New member
Jul 16, 2009
475
0
0
GOD DAMMIT, BOB! I stopped watching your videos because you couldn't write a fricking review without spoiling most of the movie. Now you put them in your damn titles!?
 

The Great JT

New member
Oct 6, 2008
3,721
0
0
How do they keep making these silly-seeming moments awesome? Gorilla beating up helicopter, now machinegun akimbo ape on a horse, this is hardcore silliness. AND IT IS SO DAMN AWESOME.
 

Netrigan

New member
Sep 29, 2010
1,924
0
0
I ended up being disappointed. It's still entertaining thanks to the action sequences and the Xavier/Magneto thing going on, but it feels like the movie is supposed to be a tragedy and there's never a sense of anything actually lost... save for the peace between humans and apes which we knew wasn't going to happen back when Charleston Heston was starring in these things.

The humans are destined to bear the brunt of this "tragedy", but the human family which make up the co-leads of this film are uninteresting and the movie never goes full George RR Martin on anybody. Gary Oldman manages to wring one good tear-jerking moment out of an iPad, but largely he's there to reluctantly go to war. This is the sort of movie that uses an image of a kid celebrating at a party prior to the ape raid in lieu of putting forth any effort to make us care about the San Fran colony... look, there's a kid, you are contractually obligated to care about the fate of these people.

And I'm not really sure what this movie is trying to say. Rise gave us an angry slave uprising grounded in animal cruelty. Here we have two camps of people who (with one exception) don't trust each other because they don't know one another. The ball bounces a little bit different and these two groups could be the best of friends... which isn't the back story we got from Rise where seething anger was much more the norm. An early attempt of the humans to blame the apes for the simian flu is immediately stepped on, so all we get is this vague racism on the human side who can't quite bring themselves to think of the apes as their equals. There's really no parallel to the real world (outside of random armed groups trying to figure out if they can trust each other) as there's no sense of the history between these two groups, no deep-seeded anger (apart from one character) sabotaging the peace effort.

The Planet of the Ape movies tend to rage against the machine. Charleston Heston was the angry entitled white guy who rankles at being enslaved by his inferiors (although he does have a couple of monkeys as friends) and subsequent films held humanity accountable for its misdeeds with its monkey metaphor. Rise gave us a heaping dose of animal cruelty. While Dawn is about a bunch of even-tempered folks who get their peace hijacked by a single monkey who is justifiably pissed off about being tortured. If there's a machine being raged against, I'm not sure what it is.