War for the Planet of the Apes

Mitch Connor

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I just gave examples on the contrary

What I feel you did was point to plot points used to tie them to the same ideas as teh originals, but I think they are more likely (far more so) to be set ups for re-imaginings of the original movies rather than movies that are designed to directly lead into the originals.

The Star Wards prequels were set up to tie directly to the original (and failed to do so in a lot of cases, but that is another argument). These movies are not prequels to the originals in the same way - are they actually called prequels?

Yes the astronauts went missing, but it isn't the same astronauts as in the original movies. Yes we have Nova, but not the same nova. The timelines simply don't match, and that is 100% intentional so that they can make their own Planet of the Apes movie in a few years, if they want to.

expectationlost

writer/director says that rise reset the story, with a sudden intelligence not requiring a long evolution, so its not going to match the timeline of the previous films https://soundcloud.com/thedirectorscut/episode-82-war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-with-matt-reeves-and-drew-goddard

Ash.J.Williams

Mitch Connor wrote: »

What I feel you did was point to plot points used to tie them to the same ideas as teh originals, but I think they are more likely (far more so) to be set ups for re-imaginings of the original movies rather than movies that are designed to directly lead into the originals.

The Star Wards prequels were set up to tie directly to the original (and failed to do so in a lot of cases, but that is another argument). These movies are not prequels to the originals in the same way - are they actually called prequels?

Yes the astronauts went missing, but it isn't the same astronauts as in the original movies. Yes we have Nova, but not the same nova. The timelines simply don't match, and that is 100% intentional so that they can make their own Planet of the Apes movie in a few years, if they want to.

thats almost exactly what i said

Ash.J.Williams

Mitch Connor wrote: »

What I feel you did was point to plot points used to tie them to the same ideas as teh originals, but I think they are more likely (far more so) to be set ups for re-imaginings of the original movies rather than movies that are designed to directly lead into the originals.

The Star Wards prequels were set up to tie directly to the original (and failed to do so in a lot of cases, but that is another argument). These movies are not prequels to the originals in the same way - are they actually called prequels?

Yes the astronauts went missing, but it isn't the same astronauts as in the original movies. Yes we have Nova, but not the same nova. The timelines simply don't match, and that is 100% intentional so that they can make their own Planet of the Apes movie in a few years, if they want to.

i do apologise... i appear to have lost a post from earlier in which i used the phrase "re-imagining" ....damn phones

Tony EH

Thought this was very good and a fitting end to the "Caesar" trilogy. I do hope it's not the end of the series though. I'd like to see more. I don't know if I want to see another remake of the original 'Planet of the Apes' however. I think that might be a bit pointless at this stage.

As an aside, I think Maurice has probably been the best "ape character" in the modern take and the effects are absolutely top notch. Even in the places where there was a little slippage in quality, they remain some of the best examples of CGI that I've seen. Absolutely fantastic work.

Slydice

Gave it a watch. It's really good. Felt like it was tying everything all together as best it could!

Lorelli!

Watched it the other night. Really enjoyed it. I didn't like the Avalanche though.

I agree with the Op that I like what they've done with the franchise although keep wondering to myself when I'm watching "how come I'm not up for the humans and humanity?"