Rise of the Planet of the Apes

[thegayhare]

now I've never reviewed a movie and I'm not going to try realy.  I just want to talk about the movie

I'm going to try to avoid any spoilers but with a name like Rise of the Planet of the Apes the ending realy isnt in doubt

to start the movie is a much more believable re-imaging of the old conquest of the planet of the apes.  and does not seem to have any relationship to the previous planet of the apes remake

i really liked it there were moments that really tugged at the heart strings, the effects were great,  some realy great nods to the original movie mythology, there is an especially great if you remember the story told by Cornelius and Zira in Escape From The Planet of the Apes.   

the character evolution of Caesar is really believable and well done

all in all its a really good movie

any one else  with any opinons?  any favorite scenes. 

[Alondro]

Well, as a scientist who works in genetics, I can only say that the science was 100% wrong.  Dead wrong.  In every single way.  The passing of the genes to all the other monkeys in the manner used was more than just implausible, it was impossible.

There's no excuse for fiction that makes no sense when the facts are readily available if they wish to look for them.

Even the epilogue which provided some reason why a tiny number of monkeys and apes could win against 6.5 billion humans who have loads of weapons was highly flawed.  (PS, whatever disease it is would likely infect apes too.  They already contract many of our illnesses due to genetic and histologic similarity.) 

It simply insulted my actual knowledge of the subject.  It was the genetic engineering fearmongering crowd at work again.  Not to mention the typical PETA/ALF-esque demonization of animal experimentation and keeping animals captive in general.  It was as if it was something written by and paid for by PETA.  I cannot see a serious scientist (except an environmental scientist or bioethicist, who are deeply infiltrated by the animal rights radicals... hence the screening people who wish to work with animals go through to ensure they're not one of them) possibly enjoying this movie in any way, shape, or form.

Of course, I expect the public to eat it up, since in general they're dimwits.  I've already dealt with a few of them who ACTUALLY BELIEVE THE MOVIE.  I wish to sterilize them...

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

I believe animals have rights.

One of those rights is for many of them to be extremely tasty...

[thegayhare]

alondro of course the disease effects apes.

the disease that kills humans is the same retro virus that enhanced the apes.  so it kills people and makes apes smarter.

so as the population of humans decline the population of sentient apes rise due to the same vector. 

and I don't see where your coming from with the statement that this demonizes keeping animals in captivity.  Caesar's  home life was pretty close to idealic, and hell even the chimp handler at Gensys was portrayed in a sympathetic way.  the zoo and the female vet were all held in a pretty good light  As for the father and son asshole team at the primate sanctuary that was necessary to show how Caesar evolved from curious george, into the leader of the revolution. 

I liked the movie I thought it was entertaining but if all you got out of it was that it had some huge political agenda well I feel sorry for that.   myself I felt it was a realy great way to come back to the feeling of of the franchise and start it off on the right foot

[Inumo]

the disease that kills humans is the same retro virus that enhanced the apes.  so it kills people and makes apes smarter.

Wait wait wait wait wait. Back up. The exact same virus which was used to make the Caesar, a chimpanzee, smarter, along with his brethren, killed people? Humans? Homo sapiens sapiens? The species which is only ~4% different than chimpanzees, and was the intended user of said retrovirus? ... How does this make sense? Even assuming that the effects of a genetic change /could/ be applied to the brain within a day (which is currently impossible, as most braincells are formed by adulthood and aren't replaced from what I know of biology), take it from a business perspective: if it costs tons of money to develop a retrovirus, why would you not have it usable on your target population? Seriously! I'm not even out of high school and I know this stuff!

[Alondro]

alondro of course the disease effects apes.

the disease that kills humans is the same retro virus that enhanced the apes.  so it kills people and makes apes smarter.

And thatis why it's utterly wrong.  Apes are far too genetically similar to us for a single vector to have entirely opposite effects.  Their immune systems are too similar, their nervous systems are too similar.  That's the reason they are used for certain models because other animals just aren't close enough genetically and phenotypically to work as proper models.  It is scientifically wrong. 

And this is case in point of what I'm talking about.  The public has zero knowledge of the workings of genetics nor infectious diseases, and will be seriously misled by this film's propaganda.

Had it been rats or mice, I could see that working, as there are already numerous diseases that rodents can harbor with few ill effects and yet are lethal to humans, due entirely to our much larger genetic differences (Hantavirus being one). 

Also, I should point out that for this vector to become a disease, it means it had to have fused with a pathogenic virus.  No one would make a gene vector with viral replication machinery intact.  Indeed, there isn't enough room inside a viral coat for both the transfected gene (which is almost always many times the size of viral genes) and the viral replication genes.  To acquire replication geens, it would have to lose most or all of the gene intended for transfection.  Meaning, it is no longer the brain-enhancing gene carrier, but a novel disease organism, which neither humans NOR apes have ever encountered.  And since the vector alters the ape nervous system so drastically (meaning it's coat proteins must have tremendous binding affinity for simian neurons/neuroblasts), it means the virus would likely have a far greater infection rate in apes than in humans.  Most likely, it would be like Ebola, with many primate species decimated, and humans as well.

I could also point out that there is no increase in brain size among any of the intelligent apes.  Given what is already known about brain size and its relation to intelligence, such a vast increase is intellect is impossible without increasing brain size.  And also, such a metabolically demanding brain requires much greater caloric intake, and a mandatory decrease in muscle mass to shunt extra nutrients to the brain.  But I digress, the genetic argument alone is drastically flawed.  For a single gene to convey such changes is ludicrous, and a virus simply cannot carry enough genes to bring about genius-level apes.

[Lushin]

Wow I had no intent to see this movie for the fact the apes beat the police and military with simple weapons. Now I have ever more reason not to see this. Hell I watch the previews and the police being beaten on the bridge and it just pisses me off.  It's like the apes get smarter and the humans get stupider. I'm sorry some of the writers of these new movies are like "This will work the public is stupid". I'm never seen the ending to the newer Beowulf movie cause the rest of it just pisses me off so much. I know the story of Beowulf and that bloody movie ain't it.

[thegayhare]

christ Alondro you take this way to serously

do you demand scientific accuracy from all your movies?  

it's a freaking movie,  it's not propaganda it's a freaking summer popcorn movie,  like captain America, or cowboys and aliens but with a more emotional story and less explosions

I mean hell there are tons of mistakes in the movie but if it was strictly a scientifically accurate film it would have been fucking boring because nothing would have happened.

in a realistic movie they would have noticed "Bright eyes" was pregnent before they dosed  her with the original drug,  it would have been nearly impossible for a scientist to smuggle the experimental Alzheimer treatment home to give to his father (the side efect was that it made undamaged minds smarter) but you know what that would have been a lot less entertaining movie.

[Lushin]

If it's a movie you are supposed to enjoy and don't you should be allowed your option on why it doesn't work. I had a girlfriend that had to stop an anime we where watching because of the fact it had humans on Mars and they where so much weaker than humans from Earth. I literally went on about it for an hour after she jumped up and stopped it thinking I would shut up about it. Also the fact some people think the movie could really happen are annoying. I had to listen to people complain that the Titanic sank at the end of the movie. I can't stand a lot of the new movies cause I see them as so ignorant and don't understand why people talk about them like they where so awesome and there must be something wrong with me cause I didn't like it. Hell I didn't really like the new Thor movie.

[Inumo]

As a forewarning, the following post is likely to be viewed as offensive. Thus, as a disclaimer, I'd like to note I have nothing against the GLBTQIA (or whatever the current acronym is) community. I merely wish to put this issue in a bit of a different light. For the sake of this analogy, assume the following film would somehow not get shot down within a month of its announcement by the GLBTQIA community.

Imagine, if you will, that a movie came out called "Rise of the Planet of the Homos." The plot is that some discovery by science allows homosexual men and women to have children through some genetic alteration. At the same time, this discovery also makes it that, if a homosexual kisses a heterosexual person of their gender, they turn the heterosexual into a homosexual. Thus, through the movie, the heterosexual population of the world is slowly converted into a homosexual population. Continue imagining, if you will, that while a large number of people know that this is an impossible story, the general public (which makes up a much larger percentage of the population) believes that such a story is completely possible, and may even already be happening.

This is the issue me, Alondro, and apparently Lushin have with RotPotA taken to the extreme. Of course, if this post has offended, remember that 'tis all pretended, and that these words may disappear, if anyone wishes not what's here. (To put in plain English, if you don't want this up, feel free to delete the post, or let me know and I'll edit it away).

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

It's a valid point, Inumo. And you've phrased it such that it is clear that it's a thought experiment. I have no problems with your post.


It's a more likely scenario than RotPotA, I'll grant you, from what I understand. ;-]

[thegayhare]

the thing that annoies me is complaining about a movie you haven't seen

You have atleast stated you haven't seen the movie and from statements mentioned in there posts like not knowing major plot points of the movie I'm not sure Alondro or Lushin have seen it either. 

you mentioned the battle on the bridge how could apes have one that you say against armed humans.  well simply put the humans were out maneuvered.   Fog limited visibility Ceasar had Maurice the orangutang take most of the apes under the bridge.  He then had Rocket take a group of chimps up the cable supports on the bridge.  5 or 6 gorilla's pushed a tipped bus as a shield  protecting Ceasars force.  Ceasar then led the charge on the humans,  at the same time Rocket attacked from above on the police officers from the bridge supports.   It wasn't a fight to the death when for the apes it never was ceaser just wanted to get them to muir woods. so when the police who were out numbered were attacked from multiple directions, in close combat with animals who are stronger then they are.  after they took significant loses there morale was shattered they broke and fled

that's also why there was no military presence in the movie.  the apes weren't seizing territory they were escaping the city trying to get to the California redwoods.  the whole battle was little more then a running charge through the city headed straight for the woods.



now for you planet of the Homo's analogy inumo.  it's flawed in a couple was  first off the virus seems in the movie once in a host seems to need fluid contact more then a kiss could provide.  it would be more accurate  to say that any scenario would need to have sexual or blood contact.  so to "convert" a straight person the gap person would have to either have sex with them or get blood into an open wound.  Which There are already stupid people in the world stating gays are doing to  convert or kill straight people

second a treatment with that side effect would never be released.  The Alzheimer treatment in the movie wasn't tested on humans yet so they hadn't discovered the side effects before Ceaser made his run.  It got out when a lab tech was exposed to the aerosol version of the treatment  the first verson was safe but worked to slow, so they created the second version and rushed it into testing

how in your homo version that needs human testing for it to reach the point where it could be used as the plot.  how would that possible side efect be over looked, what impetus would the homosexuals have to spread it rather then the stereotyped horny bastards.  are we escaping from the lab raping, pillaging and redecorating across town  and even if you used the accidental exposure route if all it did was replace heterosexual urges with homosexual ones what would be the lab tech's impetus to infect revenge?  he couldn't be straight so no one could

ceaser had a reason to use the second form of treatment on the apes if they were smarter they could work together and be stronger. 

[Alondro]

It's a valid point, Inumo. And you've phrased it such that it is clear that it's a thought experiment. I have no problems with your post.


It's a more likely scenario than RotPotA, I'll grant you, from what I understand. ;-]

Rise of the Planet of the Ponies...

OH SH.... IT"S ACTUALLY HAPPENING!!!  D:

Meh, just 'because it's a movie' is no excuse to be lazy about the science when the science is already known. 

And internal believability is VERY important to me in sci-fi movies (Moreso if they dare to be allegorical.  If trying to 'teach me a lesson, you'd better have all the facts straight.  I agree with JRR Tolkien's dislike of allegory; inevitably most are highly prejudiced and flawed in their presentation), a certain level of consistency is crucial for my enjoyment.  Indeed, movies like the newest Star Trek flick were ruined for me because of concepts like 'red matter', which was a poorly contrived plot device with totally inconsistent effects.  For instance, a teeny dot of it destroyed a whole planet in seconds, but the entire rest of the giant ball of the stuff took many minutes to destroy one little ship at the end.  Plus, air is full of matter.  The stuff should have reacted the instant it got splattered around.  And... urg... that had so many plot holes...

Basically, don't give me a movie with bad science.  I can rip it to pieces instantly.

I like the old Andromeda Strain.  Now there was a clever bit of sci-fi!  And even today, we cannot be sure that a crystalline, anime-based life form doesn't exist.  Indeed, we see that single peptides such as prions are widespread, and many are pathogenic.

The isolation levels and constant changes of clothing and removal of sources of contamination are also quite well-conceived, actually mirroring many real procedures.  Though, the nuke self-destruct device may be a little extreme... maybe... or maybe not!  *eyes his own lab's testing facility nervously*  Must be sure no alien germs get out...  o_o  Not sure about the crystal being a tiny nuclear reactor... I do think that's a bit far-fetched, but the idea was presented with strong internal logic, so I forgive it.

That's an example of taking the best of science fact and incorporating it into a film that holds together even after decades.  The only plot problem I've found is right at the end where ALL the Andromeda in the air mutates into a non-infectious form all at once.  That wouldn't happen.  But I think the writer was stuck at that point.  How else could it be stopped?  The reality in that story would be that most living things on earth would be destroyed by the unstoppable alien 'crystalline entity' (except extremophile lifeforms in high-alkaline or high-acid environments, and the few average creatures lucky enough to have abnormal physiologic pH.  And I don't think he wanted to end on such a depressing note.

[Turnsky]

Now, i feel the need to play devil's advocate here.

And internal believability is VERY important to me in sci-fi movies (Moreso if they dare to be allegorical.  If trying to 'teach me a lesson, you'd better have all the facts straight.  I agree with JRR Tolkien's dislike of allegory; inevitably most are highly prejudiced and flawed in their presentation), a certain level of consistency is crucial for my enjoyment.  Indeed, movies like the newest Star Trek flick were ruined for me because of concepts like 'red matter', which was a poorly contrived plot device with totally inconsistent effects.  For instance, a teeny dot of it destroyed a whole planet in seconds, but the entire rest of the giant ball of the stuff took many minutes to destroy one little ship at the end.  Plus, air is full of matter.  The stuff should have reacted the instant it got splattered around.  And... urg... that had so many plot holes...

A) It's startrek, Technobabble and hyperbole has ALWAYS been rife in this series.

See: FTL. However it can also be said that "warp speed" isn't strictly moving faster than light, as the techbabble suggests that the vessel is enveloped in a subspace bubble that permits it to move at faster than relativistic speeds by distorting local spacetime (at least according to the memory alpha wiki). Taking from that it can be considered that it infact doesn't actually 'beat' the lightspeed barrier but rather bypasses it entirely by bending spacetime a little, and in the case of the so-called "coaxial" warp drive, and Battlestar Galactica's "FTL" drives, fold space entirely.

However in the case of the "red matter" it's easier to see that a special containment device is needed for the matter itself, the moment it breaks containment, all hell breaks loose, now with vulcan's destruction it did infact take longer for the planet to be destroyed than the nerada did when the whole lot went off, the amount used on vulcan was roughly the same amount spock used early on to head off the supernova shockwave before all this temporal jiggery-pokery occured.

the whole amount of red matter being 'ignited' could have taken longer simply because there was more of it, simple matter of 'surface area' and all that rot, there's also the idea that it didn't ignite all at once, as it was scattered about beforehand and some remained in containment.

For a scientist you have a slight issue at looking at -all- the details from every plausible angle, and presenting more than one theorem as to how it might be, rather than dismissing it outright.

Sometimes you have to not take things on their face value and look at it from different angles.

[Inumo]

*stuff*

The point of the analogy, TGH, was that it was taken to the extreme. It's playing off existing stereotypes and fear of homosexuals (that they'll go run around and kiss every guy/gal they see, that all they want to do is get in your pants), as well as existing thoughts on genetic modification and fear of the ubiquitous unknown of high-end science. The plot holes could be filled through the full film, but the point isn't to present a cohesive story, but that the idea of RotPotA isn't that good.

[Kafzeil]

*stuff*

The point of the analogy, TGH, was that it was taken to the extreme. It's playing off existing stereotypes and fear of homosexuals (that they'll go run around and kiss every guy/gal they see, that all they want to do is get in your pants), as well as existing thoughts on genetic modification and fear of the ubiquitous unknown of high-end science. The plot holes could be filled through the full film, but the point isn't to present a cohesive story, but that the idea of RotPotA isn't that good.

You claim the idea of Rise of the Apes is a bad one, admit you haven't seen it. Now, I myself haven't seen it but this kinda bothers me. How do you know of a works themes and ideas without having seen them yourself?

I'll probably get to seeing this movie eventually, but from what I heard it's bit like Frankenstein and The Second Renaissance WITH APES.

But I'm the kind of guy who is willing to ignore bad science/history( To a degree, the latter less so) so long as the story it tells is good.If scientific accuracy comes at the expense of good plot or characters,  then I think science-fiction has forgotten that "Fiction" part and should re-evaluate itself. Sure, having an author who did his homework is nice and all, but if I want to read a novel, I'll read a novel. if I want to learn more about genetics, I'll read a text book about it.

[Inumo]

*stuff*

The point of the analogy, TGH, was that it was taken to the extreme. It's playing off existing stereotypes and fear of homosexuals (that they'll go run around and kiss every guy/gal they see, that all they want to do is get in your pants), as well as existing thoughts on genetic modification and fear of the ubiquitous unknown of high-end science. The plot holes could be filled through the full film, but the point isn't to present a cohesive story, but that the idea of RotPotA isn't that good.

You claim the idea of Rise of the Apes is a bad one, admit you haven't seen it. Now, I myself haven't seen it but this kinda bothers me. How do you know of a works themes and ideas without having seen them yourself?

Point taken. I guess I got a little carried away with that last bit (late night posts are a bad idea in a discussion).

[Darkmoon]

I'm tired of this topic. Goodbye.