shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 4, 2017 17:15:43 GMT -5
Good to know, but as far as I'm concerned whatever "explanations" anyone comes up with (regarding the issues I mentioned in the films from Escape-on) will not make any sense - or at least not enough sense to be viable explanations. How can you be sure if you haven't read 'em?  I think I'd rank my POTA universes as follows: 1. Doug Moench original Marvel run (including Terror on the Planet of the Apes, Future History Chronicles, and Derek Zane). Far deeper, more thoughtful, and more wildly creative than the original, and Jason is less whiny/obnoxious than Charlton Heston. 2. The original film universe. If you want to count the first two films as being a different universe than the last three, then I'm going with the last three. The first film is an American classic in its own right, but it's those final two films that truly make the series for me. 3. Revolution on the Planet of the Apes. Rough, haphazard, and incomplete, but far more thought went into this volume than any other. Ty Templeton truly had a plan to make the original film universe WORK. Too bad he was never given a chance to complete it. 4. Return to the Planet of the Apes (TV). A few powerful episodes, and Roddy McDowell was fantastic as usual without ripping off his previous roles. 5. The new film universe. Far less logic lapses, and its very well done, but it lacks both the fun and the depth of my first four picks. 6. Boom's Planet of the Apes. Also few logic lapses and a strong execution, but also lacking both the fun and the depth. 7. Lump in nearly every other POTA comic here, as well as Tim Burton's POTA film and the '70s animated series. 8. Star Trek / Planet of the Apes: The Prime Directive. 9. The Malibu/Adventure comics volume |
|
|
|
Post by rom on May 9, 2017 13:20:50 GMT -5
Good to know, but as far as I'm concerned whatever "explanations" anyone comes up with (regarding the issues I mentioned in the films from Escape-on) will not make any sense - or at least not enough sense to be viable explanations. How can you be sure if you haven't read 'em?
Point taken. However, I doubt the "explanation" (if there is one) regarding how Milo, Cornelius, and Zira found Taylor's damaged ship & got it fueled & operational - in 3-5 days - would make any sense. In fact, any attempt at explaining this at all would be ridiculous & not at all plausible.
However, the explanation about how the Apes become more evolved & intelligent (in the years between Escape & Conquest) may be interesting. So, I would like to read "Revolution on the POTA" at some point. However, based on my research this series has not been reprinted in the Trade Paperback format, but is only available these days in the original floppies. I don't collect floppies anymore & haven't gone digital yet, so it may be a while before I read this... |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 9, 2017 19:47:44 GMT -5
However, the explanation about how the Apes become more evolved & intelligent (in the years between Escape & Conquest) may be interesting. So, I would like to read "Revolution on the POTA" at some point. However, based on my research this series has not been reprinted in the Trade Paperback format, but is only available these days in the original floppies. I don't collect floppies anymore & haven't gone digital yet, so it may be a while before I read this... [/p][/quote] There was going to be a trade, but then the publisher went belly-up. Unfortunately, the original floppies have an incredibly low print run. It's hard to obtain a complete set. But, if you can, it's truly brilliant stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by rom on May 10, 2017 19:02:21 GMT -5
However, the explanation about how the Apes become more evolved & intelligent (in the years between Escape & Conquest) may be interesting. So, I would like to read "Revolution on the POTA" at some point. However, based on my research this series has not been reprinted in the Trade Paperback format, but is only available these days in the original floppies. I don't collect floppies anymore & haven't gone digital yet, so it may be a while before I read this... There was going to be a trade, but then the publisher went belly-up. Unfortunately, the original floppies have an incredibly low print run. It's hard to obtain a complete set. But, if you can, it's truly brilliant stuff.[/quote] Good to know. I was collecting comics when this series was out in stores, but I don't remember seeing all of these issues - I suspected the series never got a wide release. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 10, 2017 19:52:02 GMT -5
Good to know. I was collecting comics when this series was out in stores, but I don't remember seeing all of these issues - I suspected the series never got a wide release. Unknown start-up publisher. They were available through Diamond, but a lot of LCSes didn't take the plunge. Fortunately for me, mine got the first issue, and I set up a pull from there. |
|
|
|
Post by rom on May 13, 2017 10:16:29 GMT -5
Re: my preference regarding the POTA films:
1) The new films, i.e. Rise of the POTA & Dawn of the POTA, and I'm sure I'll also enjoy the forthcoming War for the POTA. All excellent films with great stoies & amazing effects.
2) The Tim Burton 2001 POTA film. Yes, I know a lot of fans (and the general public) hated the film, but I thought it was great. Incredible make-up effects by Rick Baker for the Apes (far superior to the original films), and a solid story. I also really enjoyed the ending, which was an obvious "homage" to the ending of the original 1963 POTA novel by Pierre Boulle, i.e. where the astronaut went back to Earth & found out that the "evolution" of the Apes had happened in his absence. Obviously, a lot of people seeing the film when it came out probably didn't realize that connection.
3) The first two original films, POTA & Beneath - those are my two favorite original Apes films, though I find them difficult to watch these days. The make-up/prosthetics are poor, and I don't like the fact these Apes basically look just like people in ape-suits. I know that's all they could do at the time, but it really takes me out of the film(s) to some extent. That being said, if you can get past this the story is amazing.
4) Escape - Battle films: Again, this franchise completely breaks down in terms of any kind of logic (even sci-fi logic) when you realize that the three Apes escaped the Earth at the end of Beneath. I'll buy the time-travel angle (since it was already established that Taylor & co. traveled through time in the first film), but everything else just can't be explained.
Comics:
1) I consider the original Mike Ploog-drawn comics (from the b&w '70's POTA magazine) to be truly incredible. Great original stories with amazing art. Looking forward to the reprints coming out this summer.
2) I also liked the 2011-2013?! BOOM first POTA comic series - the first issue came out several months before "Rise of the POTA". Great book, with a good story & solid art - and, it tied into the original two films to some extent.
3) The Marvel comics 1970's adaptation of "Beneath the POTA" is one of my favorite comic book adaptations ever, and I actually found it far superior to the film itself. Very grim, and the mutants were drawn to look a lot more grotesque than they appeared in the film. I remember reading the adaptation numerous times as a kid, and I probably have more familiarity with this than I do with the film itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 16, 2017 10:30:06 GMT -5
Thanks, shaxper! I recall you posting that you were not going to review Gold Key's Beneath the Planet of the Apes adaptation, but in the spirit of being complete / honoring the 1st Apes comic ever published, I decided to review the one-shot here.
Beneath the Planet of the Apes
Publisher: Gold Key Release: 1970 Writer: N/A Artist: Alberto Giolitti & Sergio Costa Other credits: N/A This is a fantastic review! Much as I own and have read both Gold Key and Marvel adaptations on numerous occasions, I've never thought to compare them side-by-side. An incredibly nice touch. At least in terms of the principal actors, Marvel artists were specifically told to change the appearance of the characters due to legal issues. My memory is fuzzy on the specifics, but I believe the idea was something akin to Marvel owning the rights to the film licenses and characters, but not to the actors' likenesses. As Gold Key was famous for their photo covers, I assume they had a different licensing arrangement that did specifically allow them to use actors' likenesses. Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed the review. About actor likeness, Marvel created some strange substitutions for the actors. Take a look at the side-by-side comparisons of Heston, Franciscus, and their Marvel counterparts--   Its one thing to have to find an alternative to the actors, but if not for the familiar dialogue, one would never assume the Marvel images had anything to do with the Planet of the Apes series. What's odd is if Marvel could not use actor likenesses at all, then how did the cover for the reprint Adventures on the Planet of the Apes #11 (December, 1976) slip by, as the Taylor on the cover is clearly based on Heston--  |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 16, 2017 10:37:37 GMT -5
What's odd is if Marvel could not use actor likenesses at all, then how did the cover for the reprint Adventures on the Planet of the Apes #11 (December, 1976) slip by, as the Taylor on the cover is clearly based on Heston--  Great point. I wish I had an informed response to this. |
|
|
|
Post by rom on May 16, 2017 12:17:27 GMT -5
Can't add anything to this POTA question. However, re: actor/celebrity likenesses in comic books, I remember that the classic & iconic 1970's-early 1980's series Master of Kung Fu had various celebrity likenesses featured back in the day; IIRC at least Humphrey Bogart & Marlon Brando were in the book, though they weren't identified as such.
Prior to these recent MOKF Omnibus releases (2016-2017), I remember fans being concerned as to whether these celebrity likenesses would result in the books not being able to be reprinted. As it turns out, that didn't seem to be an issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on May 16, 2017 20:51:55 GMT -5
About actor likeness, Marvel created some strange substitutions for the actors. Take a look at the side-by-side comparisons of Heston, Franciscus, and their Marvel counterparts--  It looks to me like Tuska was using this picture as photo reference for his rendition of Taylor. It makes me wonder if the art was originally more faithful to Charlton Heston, because those heavy eyebrows--and perhaps the eyes--are Hestonesque. Perhaps the inker might have added the thick wavy hair as an easy way to claim they weren't using the actor's likeness. And maybe I'm misremembering, but I sure seem to recall something in the POTA letters pages that implied that Marvel was a little late in learning that they didn't have the rights to actors' likenesses. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 28, 2017 18:59:43 GMT -5
About actor likeness, Marvel created some strange substitutions for the actors. Take a look at the side-by-side comparisons of Heston, Franciscus, and their Marvel counterparts-- It looks to me like Tuska was using this picture as photo reference for his rendition of Taylor. It makes me wonder if the art was originally more faithful to Charlton Heston, because those heavy eyebrows--and perhaps the eyes--are Hestonesque. Perhaps the inker might have added the thick wavy hair as an easy way to claim they weren't using the actor's likeness. And maybe I'm misremembering, but I sure seem to recall something in the POTA letters pages that implied that Marvel was a little late in learning that they didn't have the rights to actors' likenesses. In the rest of the adaptation, Taylor looks like his intro panel. He looks more like Mattel's Big Jim action figures from the same period...  ...than anyone who ever portrayed an astronaut in the Apes franchise! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2017 13:00:31 GMT -5
From the Kirby FB page celebrating the 100th a little Kirby POTA...  -M |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Aug 11, 2017 17:07:02 GMT -5
From the Kirby FB page celebrating the 100th a little Kirby POTA... -M Wow. For once, I'm glad Kirby didn't get a gig. Not only do those look...not good, but Kirby has confused Galen with Cornelius. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Aug 13, 2017 22:23:48 GMT -5
From the Kirby FB page celebrating the 100th a little Kirby POTA... -M Wow. For once, I'm glad Kirby didn't get a gig. Not only do those look...not good, but Kirby has confused Galen with Cornelius. Horrible. Absolutely horrible. While it is a sketch, considering he used a couple of the TV characters (1974), this was closing in on mid 70s Kirby art, and if you've seen his 2001: A Space Odyssey, you know how bad things turned in his work. Totally unsuited for the Apes world. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 10, 2017 22:24:46 GMT -5
I hope you pick up Kong on the Planet of the Apes, I don't usually care too much for crossovers but telling the story of King Kong through the cast of the Apes sounds fun to me.
|
|
