Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 6:33 AM   
 By:   General Thade   (Member)

most movies have inconsistencies

the matrix had a bunch
even something like the untouchables

movies have these check out nitpicker site for listings of many inconsistencies

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 6:36 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

Yes, but few have as many - and as OBVIOUS ones - as the APES saga.

 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 6:38 AM   
 By:   Wedge   (Member)

Thor! You're talking to GENERAL THADE! He ought to be able to clear up any inconsistencies! Just ASK him!

http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/wink.gif">

 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 8:17 AM   
 By:   Eric Paddon   (Member)

I've said it before Thor and I'll say it again: You'll never be able to perfectly harmonize the continuity of the Apes movies. It's patently obvious that Paul Dehn felt he could capitalize on the fact of life of the pre-VCR era where most people wouldn't remember those plot details one to two years after they saw the last movie. The Apes saga isn't the only one of its time to suffer from this lack of continuity. It's also present in the Bond movies, particularly in the Blofeld trilogy where there is not only the matter of Blofeld's constantly inconsistent appearance (caused by different actors admittedly) but also the fact that after confronting each other in YOLT, there was no immediate recognition of Bond in OHMSS when they meet again.

We might have been spared all this trouble had (a) Heston agreed to star in the sequel and not been so inexorably opposed to a basic sequel project and (b) had Heston not sold that godawful ending of Beneath on Zanuck which he did not because it was a brilliant story concept but because he wanted to find a way of never having to be asked to do another Apes movie again. The new book on the series reveals how the ending decision was absolutely opposed by director Ted Post who fought hard to have just New York destroyed by the blast, wiping out the mutants and ape army thus leaving the better apes and Taylor/Brent/Nova left alive to make a better world at last. To no avail alas.

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 9:38 AM   
 By:   General Thade   (Member)

people make movies only if looking for inconsistencies will MOST people notice them...

apes might have slightly more but dealing with sf flick how about untouchables

every movie has their far share

 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 10:37 AM   
 By:   Glenn Butler   (Member)

***SPOILERS FOR BURTON'S POTA AHEAD***

One thing I was wondering about after seeing Burton's POTA... where did the horses come from? It's explained that the apes came from the test apes on the Oberon, and the humans came from the crew, but where would horses come from? Also, was there any pre-exising life on the planet? The planet evidently could support life. I suppose the apes, ater seizing control (how exactly could THAT happen, anyway? There must have been WAY more humans than test apes), might have just killed off all the other life forms. Also, I just couldn't buy parallel evolution of horses as an explanation.

[This message has been edited by glenniebun (edited 28 August 2001).]
[This message has been edited by glenniebun (edited 28 August 2001).]

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 1:35 AM   
 By:   TVs Frank   (Member)

That example of an inconsistency in the Bond films is a hoot!
I thought the same thing was quite funny, going from YOLT to OHMSS and Bond gets away with just wearing glasses and not being recognized by Blofeld.
I found out while reading "Licence To Thrill" (a really excellent book, by the way) that YOLT was supposed to follow OHMSS, not precede it, hence the scarred Blofeld in YOLT from injuries received at the end of OHMSS. They had wanted to produce OHMSS after THUNDERBALL, since apparently that was the order of the books, but someone felt that they should instead try to outdo the spectacle of THUDERBALL with the epic-sized YOLT. OHMSS seemed like a smaller story to the producers (but a better one at that!).

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 7:21 AM   
 By:   General Thade   (Member)

lot of inconsistencies in movies because look good

end of arlington road car chase
matrix shooting into building not hitting fishboure
untouchables connery shooting

apes look good on horses
that is why they are there

so either horses were on that huge space station (in back along with the gorillas wink wink) or they evolved independently on another planet like did on earth

just go with the flow

i could list dozens or errors nitpicks in burton's pota but all flicks have them sit back and munch the popcorn

 
 Posted:   Aug 28, 2001 - 8:48 AM   
 By:   Laurent WATTEAU   (Member)

Concerning James Bond.

At the big screen, Bond stories are often permutated.For instance, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and DR NO.

At the beginning of DR NO, M asks for Bond's gun because it didn't work during his last mission...

In fact, in the books, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE takes place before DR NO and you learn that it was M himself who offered the Beretta to Bond.
This weapon failed when Rosa Klebb tried to hit bond with her poisoned shoe. In the book, she succeeded. And Bond was sent at the hospital for 6 months (common ending in most of Bond Adventures...)
[This message has been edited by Laurent WATTEAU (edited 29 August 2001).]

 
 Posted:   Nov 26, 2007 - 11:45 AM   
 By:   Scott McOldsmith   (Member)

An oldie, but a goodie. I wanted to respond to a few of Thor's questions after I checked this out while reading the current Apes thread.



PLANET OF THE APES

* As previously mentioned, one must really question the integrity of the spaceships that seem to crash all over the place.


Well, I don't think the ship was supposed to crash. They didn't seem to be expecting a water landing, so it seems (going by the montage after the credits) the thrusters malfunctioned and spit the ship here and there until it crashed. Or, it was programmed to touch down exactly where it did, but it wasn't water back when the ship took off. Why they would want to land in New York City is a mystery though.


* What's up with the blue-flashing lightning effects? Is that supposed to indicate a ruined atmosphere?


I always wondered about that. Perhaps it's a leftover effect from the nuclear war.


1. Why do the Apes speak English?


Yeah, good question. Being this is New York, it should be Spanish.


2. Why are the apes so incredibly harsh to the humans if they are unaware of how humans treated them in the past?


Because the strong always abuse the weak. It's human nature and, I expect, simian nature by this time and point in their evolution.


3. Why do the apes not question their own past prior to "The Lawgiver" 1200 years ago?


Probably because, of the apes we see in this film, they don't care. Just like the majority of people ignore the inconsistancies in the bible.


4. And related to the above, where are the reversed bible quotes culled from? The Lawgiver?


Sure, The Lawgiver most likely adapted the bible for his own use.

My big issue is the set up of the film itself. Heston and crew get in a spaceship and go into deep space for "months." At not time during his last transmission does he expect to return to Earth. So far so good. But then...

1. Why did the ship turn around and go home? Did something alter the trajectory, causing it to circle back? And if they did expect to return, they should have known upon landing that they were on Earth. See below for more on this.

2. The astronauts spend a short time trying to figure out what planet and system they've made it to. So...NASA (or whomever) launched a ship with no destination in mind? "Here, just keep going until you land." The only realistic destination would be Alpha Centauri, but these guys throw out the guesses like they just crashed the USS Enterprise.

3. Did they bring along the female Stewart just to use her as breeding stock? Taylor mentions that, with her dead, they are the last of the line. Great, I wonder if she had any say in this?

Being that the original post was long, I want to skip to something I always thought about. It seems that many people are locked in the idea that the destruction of the earth in the 34th century is going to happen no matter what. And to address your questions about time, Thor, this answer covers both.

No matter how they found a way to get there, as soon as the three apes reached Earth in the 3rd film, the timeline was altered. Things humanity never knew have now been brought to light long before they were supposed to. So, nothing in the Apes history matters anymore, because Cornelius and Zira changed it all. So, from this point on, the events which lead to The Planet of the Apes do not have to happen at the years previously established. They set it all into motion much earlier.

It would be ironic if the virus which killed dogs and cats was actually brought to the 20th century by the apes themselves....

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 26, 2007 - 1:13 PM   
 By:   Scaramouche   (Member)

While waiting on line to pick up furniture at IKEA yesterday evening, I met a woman who works in the primate section at the L.A. Zoo.

In retrospect, I should have grilled her about all this POTA stuff. It might've cleared up everything.

 
 Posted:   Nov 26, 2007 - 3:18 PM   
 By:   Jehannum   (Member)

All these unfamiliar (to me) usernames on the thread from 2001! Quite odd to look at.

 
 Posted:   Nov 26, 2007 - 5:19 PM   
 By:   TOR The Wrestler From The Past   (Member)

bump this thread to the Non-Score forum

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 12:46 AM   
 By:   The Lodger   (Member)

All these unfamiliar (to me) usernames on the thread from 2001! Quite odd to look at.

All those names from 2001, and not one of them is called Bowman, Poole, or HAL...

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 2:24 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

bump this thread to the Non-Score forum

Burgomaster, this thread was created BEFORE the division into two fora and consequently deserves its place here.

I´ll get back to the specific points that have been made here in a while.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 3:32 AM   
 By:   franz_conrad   (Member)

Wonderful list there Thor. You sure picked through the movies with a fine tooth comb!

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 4:00 AM   
 By:   crazyunclerolo   (Member)

Actually, Thor and the Ape films took turns grooming each other.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 4:40 AM   
 By:   CinemaScope   (Member)

You get a lot of inconsistencies & loss of logic with apes. The biggest one is in "King Kong", where the natives build a big wall to keep him out, but put a bloody big gate in it to let him in.

Apes speaking english? Well that's a cinema convention. The romans/greeks/egyptians all spoke english in those ancient world epics.

There's a good example in "Where Eagles Dare". Burton is speaking to Eastwood in english as they approach a German checkpoint, then Burton starts talking german, but is still speaking english (Eastwood looks perplexed as he doesn't speak german). We understand he's speaking german as the guards seem happy & onced passed Burton goes back to english (english, english) & Eastwood understands - sounds complicated but it works fine, audiences get it (without even thinking about it) - a good subject for a lecture.

Back to "Planet Of The Apes" I saw this when it came out...& the ending was a big surprise. I would think much harder to do these days, with all the movie sites & reviews with spoilers.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 5:58 AM   
 By:   Les Jepson   (Member)

I've always been puzzled about the astronauts'differences of opinions regarding the time dilation consequences of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. First postulated over a hundred years ago and proved countless times since, why would anyone in a relativistic starship doubt it? They also don't mention Einstein, but rather someone called "Hesslein" or "Hasslein", or some such name!

 
 Posted:   Nov 27, 2007 - 6:24 AM   
 By:   Scott McOldsmith   (Member)


Back to "Planet Of The Apes" I saw this when it came out...& the ending was a big surprise. I would think much harder to do these days, with all the movie sites & reviews with spoilers.


Yeah, it only happens once in a while these days. The press and public went out of their way to keep the ending of The Sixth Sense a secret too. But mostly, it's spoiler city today.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.