Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: POA Theory

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 19, 2005
    Location
    West of the Forbidden Zone
    Posts
    4,093
    Quote Originally Posted by warlock664 View Post
    Farrow’s book in the pilot episode of the TV series presents a problem, unless you treat it as a book of fiction (the picture depicts “New York - 2503”, and IIRC is obviously a drawing, not a photograph). Of course, the mere mention of New York City in a book would be confirmation for Virdon and Burke that they are indeed on earth, so the picture doesn’t have to represent how earth cities actually looked in the 2500s.

    What you say is true, however, when Farrow shows Virdon the book and Virdon comes across the 'NY 2503' picture, he states to Burke "This picture was taken 500 years after we left..." Which to me says the picture is supposed to be a photograph, not a drawing, and in 1974 with nobody really having video-capabilities, they probably figured it'd pass by so quick that nobody would notice it's a drawing, not still photograph.

    Of course nowadays with DVD and Blu-ray players, people can study these things closer, but I believe back then, it was a photo of future NYC.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 19, 2005
    Location
    West of the Forbidden Zone
    Posts
    4,093
    Quote Originally Posted by TheXFactor View Post
    The live action series couldn't be a sequel to BATTLE because- according to the book that Farrow showed to Virdon and Burke in the first episode- human civilization still existed in the early 2500's whereas BATTLE took place (roughly) around 2019/2020. The animated series (set in 3979) could absolutely be a sequel to BATTLE however- right on down to the fact that the vehicles left behind by the mutant army are likely what started the Apes on the path to the "modern" technology seen in RETURN (with some help with the human population of Ape City, of course). The events of the live action series fall in line with the original downfall of mankind as relayed by Cornelius and Zira in ESCAPE where the entire process (virus to rebellion) took place over the course of 500 years. Which would (again, roughly) place that event sometime in the 2500's. Justifying the existence of the book that Farrow had.
    I'm more of the opinion of what you state here as far as the downfall of Man.

    I just remember Rory (Haristas) on the old Yahoo! groups making the suggestion that the TV series was a sequel to BATTLE- My guess is he said that because he really didn't care for either from what I remember, I don't think he said it in any way to try to time-line things together...

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by warlock664 View Post
    Trying to reconcile the inconsistencies in the movies vs the TV series is difficult.
    Farrow’s book in the pilot episode of the TV series presents a problem, unless you treat it as a book of fiction (the picture depicts “New York - 2503”, and IIRC is obviously a drawing, not a photograph). Of course, the mere mention of New York City in a book would be confirmation for Virdon and Burke that they are indeed on earth, so the picture doesn’t have to represent how earth cities actually looked in the 2500s.
    The other major problem the TV series introduces in the pilot that contradicts movie lore is the presence of a dog; Arno, the boy chimp, has a dog that trees Farrow at the beginning, when Virdon, Burke and the dead Jones land in their spacecraft. Of course, we know from the films that a plague wiped out all dogs and cats, which caused humans to take in apes, first as pets and then as servants.
    As far as the "New York - 2503" image goes, I had presumed that they went with a drawing because it was a quickly made prop only intended to be seen for a few seconds on screen. Plus I'm not certain how advanced graphics were back then as far as creating a fake photograph is concerned.

    Back in the day in one of the Yahoo groups (Mike- help me out here), I think that someone made a post to the effect that nothing in science is ever 100% permanent and backed that up with reference to all sorts of supposedly "extinct" species being discovered (rediscovered?) by biological scientists in various different fields. Cornelius made a comment in ESCAPE to the effect of "millions more (dogs and cats) had to be destroyed", but if you think that through logically there's no possible way that every single dog (and cat) on the entire planet could be accounted for. Especially in outlying areas that were sparsely populated. In fact, Breck made a comment to Armando in CONQUEST about him traveling mainly in "the Provinces" (??) and- as such- he was largely unaware of the problems that the larger cities were having with their ape population. So it wasn't all large cities with constant surveillance where such things could be absolutely enforced.

    All that being said, I'm in complete agreement with you that it's difficult trying to reconcile all the inconsistencies between the five films and two television series.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 19, 2005
    Location
    West of the Forbidden Zone
    Posts
    4,093
    Quote Originally Posted by TheXFactor View Post
    Back in the day in one of the Yahoo groups (Mike- help me out here), I think that someone made a post to the effect that nothing in science is ever 100% permanent and backed that up with reference to all sorts of supposedly "extinct" species being discovered (rediscovered?) by biological scientists in various different fields.

    I can't swear to it, but that sounds like something Patrick Michael Tilton may have said.

  5. #15
    The problems of internal logic and consistency regarding the original film series are interesting. I am reasonably sure the writers were not thinking that deeply these issues (the pitch for the third film went something like "let's put some of them monkeys in the present to save money"), but I like the ideas you guys have about the new timeline and the plague brought by the apes. I am not sure the movie, television, and animated plots can be united but I am open to argument. My personal idea about the television show and its unique trajectory is that the intelligent apes civilization came about through tampering with apes but future scientists and a cataclysm of some sort. Zaius seems certain that men "did it to themselves", but doesn't the scientist in "The Legacy" refer merely to imminent destruction? I have often thought how great the show might have been as the astronauts unravel the secret origins of their new world.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 8, 2012
    Location
    Norcal
    Posts
    2,985
    Good read and forever to be considered in the glory of Apes mythos!

    If you really want to deep dive, I recommend another of Rich Handley Apes books, Timeline of the Planet of the Apes The Definitive Unauthorized Chronology. As he explains, rather than take sides in the "circular vs. changing" debate, he gives you nearly all of the source material to look collectively, rather than just what nicely fits together.

    In a larger context, with each crossing of the Hasslein Curve, time shifts and the history can change.

  7. #17
    Cheetahs were on the verge of extinction, but artificial insemination and frozen embryos brought them back. There are currently plans to bring back Wholly Mammoths. Its not a stretch to imagination that scientists tried to bring back dogs and cats, with at least some limited success. Personally though I believe that the TV shows are in an alternate timeline from the movies.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by apes3978 View Post
    I can't swear to it, but that sounds like something Patrick Michael Tilton may have said.
    That sound right. Of course, he **also** had this crazy theory about both Taylor and Brent's ships being launched from a larger "mothership" in outer space...

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by MysteryWho View Post
    The problems of internal logic and consistency regarding the original film series are interesting. I am reasonably sure the writers were not thinking that deeply these issues (the pitch for the third film went something like "let's put some of them monkeys in the present to save money"), but I like the ideas you guys have about the new timeline and the plague brought by the apes. I am not sure the movie, television, and animated plots can be united but I am open to argument. My personal idea about the television show and its unique trajectory is that the intelligent apes civilization came about through tampering with apes but future scientists and a cataclysm of some sort. Zaius seems certain that men "did it to themselves", but doesn't the scientist in "The Legacy" refer merely to imminent destruction? I have often thought how great the show might have been as the astronauts unravel the secret origins of their new world.
    Once it was known a second sequel was required, it was actually Arthur P. Jacobs who made a comment to screenwriter Paul Dehn to the effect of "Presumably Cornelius and Zira are dead, however..." (I'd have to do a little digging to find the exact quote). They knew there was a smaller budget to work with, and that's where the reverse time travel idea eventually came from.

    What the scientist in "The Legacy" refers to as imminent destruction really doesn't contradict what Zaius said about mankind doing it to themselves. If anything, scientists would be well aware of the catastrophic level of destruction involved with a nuclear war, and- as such- would be motivated to preserve what knowledge they could in the time they had left.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Confessional View Post
    Good read and forever to be considered in the glory of Apes mythos!

    If you really want to deep dive, I recommend another of Rich Handley Apes books, Timeline of the Planet of the Apes – The Definitive Unauthorized Chronology. As he explains, rather than take sides in the "circular vs. changing" debate, he gives you nearly all of the source material to look collectively, rather than just what nicely fits together.

    In a larger context, with each crossing of the Hasslein Curve, time shifts and the history can change.

    I'd have to disagree with that. A Hasslein Curve is no more a physical thing that gets "crossed" any more than a Bell Curve is. Brent says (to his Skipper) that they "passed through a Hasslein curve- a bend in time", and later to the Mutants that they "came through a defect; a slippage in time". There's overwhelming evidence that circular doesn't work because- by what is shown in the original five films- things don't happen the same exact way even when it's only the second time through. As I mentioned previously, the original downfall of mankind (virus to rebellion) as relayed by Cornelius and Zira in ESCAPE took place over the course of 500 years. After they traveled back in time, their presence ultimately brought it about much quicker. The 'In Memoriam' statue in CONQUEST says 1983 (IIRC) for the virus, and the movie itself takes place in 1991. So mankind's downfall happened sometime between then and when BATTLE took place in (roughly) 2019/2020.

    In other words, the world we first saw in both PLANET and BENEATH was the end result of the natural unfolding of events over (roughly) 2000 years time. When Cornelius and Zira (and Milo) went back to 1973, that did not erase the aforementioned 2000 years from happening. Everything that happened in PLANET and BENEATH is part of Cornelius and Zira's past, but now things will start to unfold differently because of their physical presence in 1973. Ergo, an alternate timeline makes complete sense. Where both the live action and animated TV fall on said timeline can be debated, although- as I mentioned previously- the animated series (set in 3979) could easily be seen as happening in a post-BATTLE world. Right on down to the fact that the vehicles left behind by the mutant army are likely what started the Apes on the path to the "modern" technology seen in RETURN (with some help with the human population of Ape City).

    BTW, I know that some of this sounds like the time travel explanation in Avengers: Endgame (“If you travel to the past, that past becomes your future, and your former present becomes the past, which can’t now be changed by your new future.”), but everything I wrote above is from a timeline I originally put together in 1991 (that's a saga unto itself and for another time). So- much like the writers of Engame- I've never been a fan of the whole "Back to the Future" explanations of time travel. I mean, the "You're Fired" message disappears (towards the end of Part III), but the piece of fax paper it was printed on still exists? Nope, don't think so.

    Burton's movie is it's own universe, as is the recent trilogy (ditto for any related books/comic books).
    Last edited by TheXFactor; Oct 1, '21 at 3:46 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •