Slashdot Mirror


Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

The original Planet of the Apes had a lot going for it: a compelling lead, an interesting story, a convincing world, a couple of good quotable catch phrases, and of course the not-really-all-that-surprising twist ending. Of course, it was a bit cheesy too. Different trailers for 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' had me concerned and excited: was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film? I am pleased to announce that it is mostly the former and it's totally worth checking out. Read on for my brief review.

It's a hollywood blockbuster, so the plot is simple: James Franco is a scientist testing an Alzheimers cure that goes wrong. The test-chimps are all put down, but one was unexpectedly pregnant. Franco has to adopt the baby, whom he raises and teaches. He eventually uses his meds to cure his sick father, and Caesar is taken away to an animal sanctuary where exciting 2nd and 3rd act plot points lead to an action finale.

James Franco really seems to pick good movies to be in. From Freaks and Geeks on, he really seems to land good roles, and this movie was no exception. I've never had a problem buying him as a stoner or spoiled rich kid, but in this movie he gets to show emotion for his Alzheimer's stricken father, passion for his scientific work, and of course love for his ape "child" Caesar. The first half of the movie hangs on this relationship, and Franco holds up his end of the bargain.

Of course, the other side is the CGI rendered, Andy Serkis acted 'Caesar.' The ape was the unexpected child of a mother used to test Franco's Alzheimers cure, which goes horribly wrong and is cancelled. Caesar is a genius monkey who learns to communicate and solve puzzles far beyond a human child of the same age. It must kind of suck being Serkis: his work as Gollum and Kong has typecast him as the 'Performance Capture' poster child, but he does a great job. I buy the emotion in most of the scenes: it's only a few of the action shots where the weight felt wrong to me. For the film to work, Franco, Serkis, and the SFX had to all be pretty much perfect. And for my money, they were.

The rest of the film has some problems: The "Bad Guys" are so unbelievably "Bad" that it makes you want to wince. The zookeeper. The jerk neighbor. The bad boss. They are drawn with such thick black lines, I felt like we lose a lot of the potential for the story. The fact is that Franco is violating medical ethics, there is cruelty being done to animals, innocent people are hurt but because the "Bad Guys" are ludicrously bad, many of the hard issues are glossed over. Franco: Good. People who disagree with Franco: Bad.

As I said above, my fear for the movie was that it would simply be a Transformers style action film. Now, I like Transformers 3 just fine for what it is, but the majority of those movies are simply non-stop, boring action sequences. And I don't much care for that. I love action, but if that's your entire movie, it's pretty tough to carry 2 hours. Fortunately this movie is mostly about the development of Caesar: him struggling to figure out what he is, and finally learning to survive and escape imprisonment. These scenes are interesting and fun. So when we finally get to the dramatic finale atop the Golden Gate Bridge, it's nice to just have the big action release.

Plus Apes wreck stuff. It's pretty awesome.

Also, I don't recommend singing the Simpsons Planet of the Apes Musical during the closing credits. Your wife will get mad at you, even if it was the part you were born to play.

239 comments

  1. Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by n1ywb · · Score: 2

    I love you Dr. Zaius!

    --
    -73, de n1ywb
    www.n1ywb.com
    1. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by swanzilla · · Score: 4, Funny

      I hate every ape I see...from chimp-an-A...to chimp-an-Z

    2. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really appreciate the affirmative action and equal opportunity that went into the production of this movie.

      Never have I seen so many black people in one movie before. Sure, most of them should have shaved the fur to retain their customary appearance. And constantly calling them "apes" was rather offensive. Still, this is progress. Those African Americans were gainfully employed and proved they can act as well as any white man. This is a moment to be proud of, folks.

      Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

    3. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really appreciate the affirmative action and equal opportunity that went into the production of this movie.

      Never have I seen so many black people in one movie before. Sure, most of them should have shaved the fur to retain their customary appearance. And constantly calling them "apes" was rather offensive. Still, this is progress. Those African Americans were gainfully employed and proved they can act as well as any white man. This is a moment to be proud of, folks.

      Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

      No.

    4. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Heed00 · · Score: 1

      Rock me Dr. Zaius, Dr. Zaius!

      --
      Thought thinks itself.
    5. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. What a racist you are!

    6. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

      Too Soon?

    7. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    8. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    9. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the AC's fault your parents are black.

    10. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it wrong that I find racism so ridiculous in this day and age that shit like this cracks me up?

    11. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really appreciate the affirmative action and equal opportunity that went into the production of this movie.

      Never have I seen so many black people in one movie before. Sure, most of them should have shaved the fur to retain their customary appearance. And constantly calling them "apes" was rather offensive. Still, this is progress. Those African Americans were gainfully employed and proved they can act as well as any white man. This is a moment to be proud of, folks.

      Can we have a "-1 Ought to have the shit kicked out of him" moderation option added?

      Wow! What a sexist you are! Did you ever consider that a news for nerds site could attract females?

    12. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love you Dr. Zaius!

      Dr. Zaius!!
      Dr. Zaius!!

      I watched it also and hought that it was worthy of recommendations. There actually are unexpected things that happen and they work well. The biggest flaws, as the reviewer points out, is that the off plot characters were caricatures of the "annoying" peope that we all know.

    13. Re:Yes you finally made a monkey out of meeeee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

  2. Re:Greetings by YodasEvilTwin · · Score: 0

    Did you know that you're commenting on the internet? You're wasting time more effectively than anyone your ineffective rant reaches.

  3. Previews and review... by GooberToo · · Score: 1

    The two reviews I've read of it basically said the movie was written by monkeys - for monkeys. If you're a human of even remotely human intelligence, you'll pass.

    And the previews - what I can say, looking incredibly dumb - though the graphics look great. So for me, the reviews completely confirmed the obvious conclusion one can draw from the previews.

    I means seriously. This is the fucking PLANET of the apes. The movie should be called one square block of the apes. Let's see, the handful of super intelligent apes and monkeys (in comparison with humans) revolt. They grab spears. The military comes out and butches the shit out of them in five minutes. Ape deaths - all of them. Human deaths - a handful of civilians. End of story. If that's not how the story goes, the writers are idiots (monkeys), writing for other idiots (monkeys). And if that is how the story goes, well, its a dumb fucking movie.

    There, I just saved you all a bunch of money on tickets.

    1. Re:Previews and review... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Not sure how the writers handled this (poorly, I'd suspect), but there have been wild monkeys loose in the Ocala national forest for 70ish years since they were accidentally introduced there. If they could relocate or eradicate them without extensive collateral damage, they would have done it long ago. If the monkeys were a little more intelligent / ambitious, I'm sure they could spread from there.

    2. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military comes out and butches the shit out of them in five minutes.

      Does this mean there is some hot butch combat boot wearing lesbian monkey on lesbian monkey action?

    3. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should see the movie. The apes don't take over because of a revolution like they did in the original. They take over because **DELETED SPOLER**.

    4. Re:Previews and review... by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Sadly, that certainly sounds like a better movie.

    5. Re:Previews and review... by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      They take over because **DELETED SPOLER**.

      Ya, from the first preview I ever saw, I just assumed it was one of two things. One, some cross species super virus as a result of the drug. Or, it ultimately turns everyone into monkeys - basically DNA regression.

      Honestly, unless there are super hot naked chicks in every scene I can't imagine how this movie is anything better than a rental.

    6. Re:Previews and review... by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are lots of hot naked chicks. Are you into rishathra?

    7. Re:Previews and review... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      There are different levels of threats. Some monkeys in forests scores pretty low.

      Now imagine that these monkeys were, say, confirmed agents of biological apocalypse. Then they'd be dead within _hours_. Personally, I'd just surround the woods, evacuate people and then just use chemical weapons to kill everything that breathes.

    8. Re:Previews and review... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      unless there are super hot naked chicks in every scene

      You'll probably prefer The Change Up a lot more then.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:Previews and review... by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      We have a winner. Those people who keep offering its a plausible story are completely out of touch with reality. I don't think, "plausible", means what they think it does. They seem to be confused because plausible and completely impossible.

    10. Re:Previews and review... by firex726 · · Score: 1

      Plus at the end...

      ***SPOILER***

      It's implied that there is soon to be the outbreak of disease. The pilot/neighbor showing the same signs as the animal handler from the lab, while hes in a busy airport. You know it was only going to spread from there.
      They were about to have an epidemic, last thing anyone would care about then is some apes that caused a lot of localized damage and ran into the woods.

    11. Re:Previews and review... by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      I don't actively seek out such movies; not that I mind. My point being, unless there are super hot chicks in each scene, the movie doesn't seem to have anything else to offer.

    12. Re:Previews and review... by TheCrazyMonkey · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are lots of hot naked chicks. Are you into rishathra?

      Alas, there is now 1+ Ringworld Reference

    13. Re:Previews and review... by TheCrazyMonkey · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are lots of hot naked chicks. Are you into rishathra?

      Alas, there is no 1+ Ringworld Reference

      ... that's better

    14. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that was my thought. It is going to be the virus that weakens humanity to the point that apes could believable overcome them. I'm still wondering if they will keep the original storyline with nuclear war between humans.

      The original never implied that the apes overtook the humans (obviously discounting the shitty shitty sequels). Rather, the humans killed each other off, and the apes simply stepped up and filled the niche. They kept man subjugated, because of the collective memory of the destruction he was capable of.

      "Man is a menace!"

    15. Re:Previews and review... by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen the movie, but the only way the monkeys could realistically supplant human domination would be to lay low, breed, and wait for humans to weaken themselves sufficiently though the usual means (warfare, economic unsustainability, etc.).

      Then again, it would have been badass if the movie was about the apes infiltrating U.S. nuclear launch facilities and going all WarGames on our candy asses. I'd pay to see a monkey running shell scripts trying to access and decrypt the launch codes.

      --
      Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
    16. Re:Previews and review... by AdamThor · · Score: 1

      *** SPOILER *** cont'd

      You're right. What people would be concerned about was the bio tech who was exposed to a special, extra-virulent virus-based gene therapy. You know, right after he was hospitalized immediately following exposure. Or possibly when he called in sick to work soon after. Or when he reported signs of illness to the authorities. After any of those almost unavoidably probable events the CDC would have been notified, (probably before the Great Ape Escape) and in the ensuing investigation it would have all come out about the apes, though the actual action taken would be hard to predict. No one knows they're in a movie until the credits roll, after all.

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    17. Re:Previews and review... by firex726 · · Score: 1

      Plus the girlfriend wasn't too believable.
      She had been with him for years, but in that time she never wondered what he did for a living?

      He's a researcher at a bio tech company, and you're surprised when he A) experiments on animals, and B) the super smart ape you've been around for years was one that was experimented on.

    18. Re:Previews and review... by firex726 · · Score: 1

      That was my impression of the first movie too.

      That Man destroyed himself, and after a long time the apes developed and filled our place.
      Even with super smart apes I don't think that the apes would have stood much of a chance against a real effort by the humans. The bridge scene was their first real encounter, the military/police did not know what they were up against, now they do, and if not for the virus they could have gone into the forest and wiped them all out. They could have just dropped some kind of chemical/biological weapon in there and let it kill them off.

    19. Re:Previews and review... by Tei · · Score: 1

      I think you are wrong.

      The movie is about the start. These monkeys are supposed to grown on the forest, and grown to milllions, while the humans will suffer the epidemic.

      The movie make a good work to show how monkeys are way more versatile and powerfull than humans, making humans feel idiotic and unadecuate.

      The movie is very good at setting a start for a possible suppremacy of monks. But is sets maybe 4000 years before monkeys end the work :D

      --

      -Woof woof woof!

    20. Re:Previews and review... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The water buffalo in the Everglades were a pretty high priority, and they couldn't manage to capture them. I suppose they could have killed them eventually if they wanted, but they managed to roam free in the swamps for a long time.

      In another vein, Osama Bin Laden was a pretty high priority... and the apes won't be trackable by the means that finally brought him down.

    21. Re:Previews and review... by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      What a buzzkill.

      I guess you hated Jaws too? "Get out of the water. Problem solved."

      (Knock knock. Who's there? Land shark..)

    22. Re:Previews and review... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Well, "Everglade preservation" is not kinda the same as "the preservation of human species". And unlike Osama you won't need to search for him - we can just go genocidal on the whole species (well, we are sort of doing this already).

    23. Re:Previews and review... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen the movie, but the only way the monkeys could realistically supplant human domination would be to lay low, breed, and wait for humans to weaken themselves sufficiently though the usual means (warfare, economic unsustainability, etc.).

      No, all they would have to do is put on a jacket and a tie, get in to law school, graduate and run for elected office.

      On second thought, that might actually improve things.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    24. Re:Previews and review... by gnick · · Score: 1

      If you can't factor in a little bit of "suspension of disbelief," I'm guessing there are fewer than 10 sci-fi movies you could watch without being annoyed. I've seen a lot, but I can't think of 10 that qualify. I feel sorry for you - there's some good sci-fi out there, but very little that passes the "Could this really happen exactly as depicted?" test. Personally I wasn't expecting to like it being a big fan of the originals, but was pleasantly surprised.

      And they didn't go into how the escaped apes were handled by the responders - I guess they're leaving that for the sequel - A 10 minute movie of escaped apes being gassed to death and then carefully handled on the way to the incinerator.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    25. Re:Previews and review... by gnick · · Score: 1

      I'm still wondering if they will keep the original storyline with nuclear war between humans.

      They've already strayed from the original storyline. In the originals, a virus wiped all of the traditional house pets and apes replaced them. Then became servants and were bred to be intelligent. Finally, about the time everyone had at least one ape-servant, they got pissed and went all ape-shit on the humans.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    26. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd pay to see a monkey running shell scripts trying to access and decrypt the launch codes.

      Isn't that pretty much what script kiddies are?

    27. Re:Previews and review... by MarkvW · · Score: 1

      The bird flu virus idea was pretty clever. It hearkens back to the 1918 Influenza. Man would be so weakened by the virus he couldn't mount an effective defense. To win, all the apes need to do is survive and reproduce.

      Or there can be sequels with lots of man vs ape battles!!!!

    28. Re:Previews and review... by stdarg · · Score: 1

      If we found an intelligent subspecies of dolphin that could communicate with us, would you immediately be like "oh kill them all because they might take over the world?"

    29. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Change Up has hot chicks. Sounds more like your thing. Or pick up a magazine - Cosmo is full of hot chicks. Now buy a Change Up ticket and turn in your nerd card.

    30. Re:Previews and review... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Certainly not.

      I'm talking about a case where some species represent an existential threat to humans.

    31. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, but see that whole sequel storyline was stupid anyway. The first one never implied that apes revolted against humans. That's not what the whole thing is about.

      Humans had their chance, but ultimately caused their own downfall.

      In the wake of the human downfall, apes rose up and took that place, instilling "virtues" and shunning the destructive practices of man

      By the time Taylor gets there 2000 years later, the apes are already suffering from many of the same vices of man (violence, prejudice, power hunger). They are well on their way to the same fate.

      Go back and watch the original sequels. 3-5 are stupid and mess with a lot of the continuity of the first one. In Escape Cornelius says that over HUNDREDS of years apes develop from household pets to servants to sentient beings. In the very next movie it happens in under a generation. stupid.

    32. Re:Previews and review... by FromWithin · · Score: 1

      You haven't even seen it.

      I have and I thought that it was excellent. It was exciting, well acted, well handled, and just generally very good.

      I give it 8/10.

    33. Re:Previews and review... by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      Somehow I refuse to believe that it could possibly be worse than Tron: Legacy. Thank god I was drunk when I watched it, otherwise it might have done some permanent damage to my brain.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    34. Re:Previews and review... by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      Or there can be sequels with lots of man vs ape battles!!!!

      And if god is kind, Ponies!!1!

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    35. Re:Previews and review... by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Given your atrocious spelling and grammar, I believe you feel idiotic and "unadecuate" much of the time, don't you?

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    36. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother with chemical weapons? Just burn the forest. All of it.

      It's not like they don't do controlled burns of two million acres a year in Florida anyway—no one would notice another burn, except that it was a bit more aggressive than usual. Chemical weapons might get noticed.

    37. Re:Previews and review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same thing when I saw the scene on Golden Gate Bridge. One AC-130 Specter could have ended their uprising real quick,

    38. Re:Previews and review... by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      I'm really curious to know if there's an ape-servant that says "no" as the original movie mentions. It's a great concept and I am little worried that super-ape escape concept is going to put paid to the original storyline..

    39. Re:Previews and review... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I agree. I didn't see the movie but I saw the Trailer. Instantly didn't want to see it. We were better off without an explanation of how the apes rose up. I always thought it was something along the lines of, humans destroy themselves through war or some environmental catastrophe, and apes rise up in their place. Remaining humans are taken as slaves by apes. The story in the movie has no plausibility. If apes were given super intelligence and revolted against humans, they would be quickly contained. Non only that, even if they did, they wouldn't revert back to ancient technology as is the case in the planet of the apes original movie.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    40. Re:Previews and review... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      The problem is, that it isn't consistent with the movies that already exist. OK, so the apes become super smart, even smarter than humans. They somehow manage to kill all the humans, and then somehow revert to some less advanced farming civilization and are able to somehow cover up that humans were once the more advanced species.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    41. Re:Previews and review... by UtsuMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about a case where some species represent an existential threat to humans.

      Except humans, they are a big existential threat to humanity.

      And yet I don't see we going genocidal on each other. Oh, wait. It all makes sense now.

      --
      ...or not.
    42. Re:Previews and review... by transami · · Score: 1

      Err... you need to see the movie. It's nothing like that. The movie actually paints a very plausible picture. (okay, it takes a few liberties, but surprisingly few).

      --
      :T:R:A:N:S:
  4. How come there are enough apes to take over? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    It'll be a spoiler, but how can there be enough non-Human great apes to take over the planet?

    Yes they are strong and everything, but they can't fit in MRAPs, M1 tanks or fly Apaches or snipe so I really don't get how they can take over the planet.

    1. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is covered in the plot and does it nicely. I won't spoil it though.

      I agree with the reviewer - they used really thick lines with the bad people in the movie. Storytelling for the people who can't get subtlety. But all in all a pretty good movie.

      The CGI is excellent and the facial expressions and body language of the apes is amazing. I was in awe with regards to that. They did a great job.

      And in comparison, way better than the Mark Wahlberg remake of Planet.

    2. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Imabug · · Score: 1

      the apes don't really need to get rid of people to take over the planet. humans take care of the problem all on their own

      --
      "For I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and Long Words Bother Me"
    3. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoiler... but the same thing that enables the apes to gain intelligence begins (just begins) to wipe out the humans. By the end of the film, the apes have a foothold, and the humans have begun their decline. Within a few years/decades, the apes will be in charge.

    4. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by oracleguy01 · · Score: 1

      The ending showed that the drug/virus spread among humans all over the world, supposedly wiping most of them out. I thought it was kind of silly that they started to play the credits and then showed a scene that hinted at that. It should have been more apart of the last act of the movie, not just an after thought.

    5. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      I fear this movie will have the "poor humans" as just unlucky. The original movie suggests that we failed by our actions, not some single fluke, THEN the apes rose up. Not that they explained why completely different ape species co-developed.....

    6. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Which brings us back to the super stupid plot - dumb plot for dumb people.

      Seriously, if the solution is anything other than shooting them dead - as reality demands - the writers assumed we're all morons. I dunno - sounds like they may have hit their mark.

    7. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I expect the traditional closing to these sorts of movie where the [forces of the first part] are shown [conquering | liberating] [large but finite area (Manhattan being traditional)] from the [forces of the second part] thus showing the audience that the world [is lost | is saved].

      Feel free to replace [the forces of the first part] and [the forces of the second part] with any of
      "zombies", "scientists", "animals", "people", "aliens", "military forces", "Cloverfield Monster", "Intelligent Apes" as needed for your movie.

    8. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Haven't seen the movie, so can't spoil the ending for you, but with an age of maturity of 3 years, it doesn't take too long to expand from a population of 2 to thousands:

      1. Year 1 : 2
      2. Year 2 : 3
      3. Year 3 : 4
      4. Year 4 : 5
      5. Year 5 : 7
      6. Year 6 : 9
      7. Year 7 : 12
      8. Year 8 : 15
      9. Year 9 : 19
      10. Year 10 : 25
      11. Year 11 : 32
      12. Year 12 : 41
      13. Year 13 : 53
      14. Year 14 : 69
      15. Year 15 : 89
      16. Year 16 : 115
      17. Year 17 : 149
      18. Year 18 : 193
      19. Year 19 : 250
      20. Year 20 : 324
      21. Year 21 : 420
      22. Year 22 : 545
      23. Year 23 : 707
      24. Year 24 : 917
      25. Year 25 : 1189

      etc. of course, if they can interbreed with an existing population of apes and get the enhanced intelligence in even half the offspring, that jump-starts any curve like this.

    9. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      You mean all five of those apes.

      The technology base and numbers of humans in comparison is completely insurmountable. Which is why the entire concept is beyond absurd.

    10. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      The problem is, before the end of year one, all the apes are dead.

      So Year 25 looks like this: 0

    11. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by zero0ne · · Score: 1

      It must be me, but why is 420 always used everywhere?

      Is there some back office writers betting going on to see who can cram the most 420 references into a single episode / movie / season?

    12. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Ugh. That means within roughly five to tens seconds of seeing the first preview I had the entire fucking movie figured out. Fucking pathetic.

      Holy shit that is a horrible, piece of shit movie. Hollywood is now officially flinging monkey poo on movie goers - and charging the masses for the honor.

      Sounds like the fall of mankind has begun...

    13. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by firex726 · · Score: 1

      Yea, that's how I saw the original film, that we destroyed ourselves and only had remnants remaining from our civilization.

      The apes over the years then eventually developed and took over what we left behind.

    14. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have some anger issues to work out, GooberToo? From the numerous posts you're making, desperately repeating your opinions to anyone who cares to listen, it sounds like you're hurting inside and this is your only outlet. Do you want to talk about it?

    15. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You posted anonymously. Have some shame to hide that I'm right? Holy shit, you've never been bored. So obviously you know I'm right and this fact injures you because it means you're not nearly as smart as you believe yourself to be. So to feel better, you retaliate and attack. Perhaps it is you who should find someone to talk to.

    16. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are more than five. And there's a little thing called mating.

    17. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      We are so many humans. We would even win without weapons. And we have approx 6-7 billion people and approx 600 million guns out there. Not mentioning planes, helicopters etc. so most likely we can murder all of them. We could even use strange gases. Or do what we always did, destroy their habitat.

      Even if they are twice as smart as humans (which they cannot be, due to energy constraints), they are technologically so backward that it won't work. They cannot build tools which would fit their proportions in such a short time, that we wouldn't recognize that and can take counter measures.

      The interesting thing with the book and the original film was not the ape takeover as such. It was the new idea and the message. We already got that message. And the new movie does not focus on the message anyway.

      Its like having Faust saving Gretchen from the prison and living happy ever after.

    18. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by McGuirk · · Score: 1

      You've made so many aggressive posts about this movie, yet you haven't even seen it. Are you paid by another studio to knock it or just trolling?

    19. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Sectoid_Dev · · Score: 1

      Apparently from the previews, they jump great distances which always takes humans by surprise. It is their inherent advantage to which we can not overcome.

      I'll be skipping this movie until it comes out on Netflix and I'm bored.

    20. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I loved the movie, but I do hope that they keep the original nuclear war plotline in any sequels.

    21. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is to be the movie that broke the camel's back - for me. The fact I completely deduced the entire movie within seconds of seeing the trailer for the first time pretty much says it all.

      Why is it hurting you that I hate the movie, having never seen it, and that everything I've based my opinion on has been confirmed by people here? Its simply not possible that the movie really is a steaming pile of shit? Guess what, I'm far from alone - even with people who have seen the movie. Perhaps the movie really is that transparent, that thin, that unintelligent, that horrible...

      Granted, the movie probably is entertaining f or many - after all, two neanderthals pounding people over the head with sticks is plenty of entertainment for a large number of people. But entertainment is far from good story telling. They are two different things. So I'll grant you, perhaps the movie is marginally entertaining, assuming one can completely turn off their brain. But while perhaps entertaining, as constantly confirmed, a horrible example of story telling.

    22. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The fact I completely deduced the entire movie within seconds of seeing the trailer for the first time

      means that the writers have done their job well. Their job, being, to produce a movie that people will enjoy and pay to see, tell their friends to pay to see, rent from Netflix, buy on DVD, etc.

      Sheeple like predictability. You are clearly not a sheeple - and therefore of no concern to the marketing department. Your opinions, regardless of how loudly you express them, will not change the profitability of the venture.

    23. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      In this case it was a random product of a hand calculation adding the previous number to 1/2 of the 3rd previous number, with probable errors thrown in. The real answer you are looking for is likely 42.

    24. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      And there's a little thing called mating.

      You must be new here.

    25. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      OK, OK, so you didn't like it already.

      How was Cowboys vs. Aliens?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    26. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We could even use strange gases.

      I am now in love with the term "strange gases".

    27. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by losfromla · · Score: 1

      It might be a nascent movement, you are a nerd thus not part of it. Possibly too old too, give it a decade or so, see where it goes.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    28. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's more puzzling that you expend so much energy attacking something you aren't going to bother learning anything about... Aggressive, self righteous ignorance. It's a thing of beauty.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    29. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by the_fat_kid · · Score: 1

      no, it's real.
      I seen some of it on the internet, just the other day.
      Mating, that is.

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
    30. Re:How come there are enough apes to take over? by macron1 · · Score: 1

      SPOILER ALERT the smart monkeys in the monkey pound escape, there must be say 30-50 of them? They then bust some regular ones out of the zoo (another 20-30?) as well as busting some more out of the research labs (100?), then they all escape into the forest via a bridge, and get lucky that it is a bit cloudy and the humans cannot see them to kill them. A few get killed along the way, then I guess the remaining procreate in the forest or something, then take over the planet. I suppose the humans could just nuke the forest or something, but maybe the monkeys would outsmart them again I dunno.

  5. Re:Greetings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    owned

  6. Obligatory Simposons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    http://www.strimoo.com/video/16728738/Planet-of-the-Apes-The-Musical-Veoh.html

    It's hard to find a good video due to Fox being so strict. But this is still one of the funniest scenes Simpsons scenes of all time.

    1. Re:Obligatory Simposons by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 1

      Excellent.

      --
      -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
  7. Andy Serkis on npr about virtual acting by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    NPR played a great interview with Andy Serkis last week. He has no trouble with being "typecast", but after hearing that interview I definitely will chase up Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll. Serkis sounded so much like Ian Dury.

    And off topic some more, we already know about trying to raise a monkey as a human baby

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  8. It's good. by MarkvW · · Score: 2

    It is not a great movie, but it was good. My wife was sad for the apes, and that kind of detracted from her experience (she really likes science fiction). I was rooting for the Apes the whole way and I liked it.

    The CGI is the best. At one point animated clothing is ripped off an animated ape. Only now, as I'm writing this, does it sink in show technically awesome that was.

    The review is correct about the moral stupidity of the movie. Franco's unethical behavior and his exploitation of the primates is glossed over, while the Anti-Franco people are all evil.

    It was fun, though. I didn't want it to end.

    1. Re:It's good. by ah.clem · · Score: 1

      Franco's unethical behavior...

      Here's what's unethical; I have Alzheimer's or something equally serious. You have a potential cure. I ask you to administer it to me, knowing the risks. You refuse.

      That's unethical.

      --
      "Life is not magic." Dr. Ron Weiss - "If we don't play God, who will?" Dr. James Watson
    2. Re:It's good. by MarkvW · · Score: 1

      Okay, but when the apes take over the world, it will be all your fault!

    3. Re:It's good. by Straif · · Score: 1

      You're assuming all risks end with yourself. They don't.

      Semi Spoiler - If a drug using a virus based delivery system has side affects on it's subject it's not just the subject who has to deal with it. But then I guess you're fine with untested viral mutations being spread willy nilly amongst populated areas.

      If you're willing to receive the cure but stay confined to a medical lab for long term monitoring then feel free, although having a disease that primarily targets the brain and reduces cognitive skills who is to say that you are in your right mind when volunteering to become a human guinea pig.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    4. Re:It's good. by MarkvW · · Score: 1

      Penicillin resistance comes to mind. . . .

  9. Could be worse . . . by LMacG · · Score: 2

    > was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?

    As long as it's not a Syfy film!

    --
    Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
    1. Re:Could be worse . . . by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      > was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?

      As long as it's not a Syfy film!

      I'm suprised the Sy Fi channel hasn't come out with "Rise: The planet of the Apes" (with the addition of a colon) in the same way that there was "Battle:Los Angeles" and "Battle Of Los Angeles". Or will we get Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    2. Re:Could be worse . . . by vlm · · Score: 1

      > was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?

      As long as it's not a Syfy film!

      I'm suprised the Sy Fi channel hasn't come out with "Rise: The planet of the Apes" (with the addition of a colon) in the same way that there was "Battle:Los Angeles" and "Battle Of Los Angeles". Or will we get Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?

      Wouldn't they have to cancel / rearrange the wrasslin' and ghost huntin' shows? That sounds like a lotta work.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Could be worse . . . by berashith · · Score: 1

      Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?

      When does this one release. Sounds totally bad ass.

    4. Re:Could be worse . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > was it going to be a Sci-Fi film, or an action film?

      As long as it's not a Syfy film!

      I'm suprised the Sy Fi channel hasn't come out with "Rise: The planet of the Apes" (with the addition of a colon) in the same way that there was "Battle:Los Angeles" and "Battle Of Los Angeles". Or will we get Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey?

      Wouldn't they have to cancel / rearrange the wrasslin' and ghost huntin' shows? That sounds like a lotta work.

      Actually... Mega-Piranha/Shark/Gator/Crocodile/Octopus vs Dino-Ape/Monkey sounds like it'd make a sweet Wrestlemania card :)

    5. Re:Could be worse . . . by mishu2065 · · Score: 1

      It already has... unfortunately.

    6. Re:Could be worse . . . by berashith · · Score: 1

      no, i want the shark/gator/crocodile/octopus. single giant animals are for sissies

  10. On a scale of one to five Cowboys and Aliens by kmdrtako · · Score: 2

    Where one is it sorta sucks, and five is it really sucks.

    1. Re:On a scale of one to five Cowboys and Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Whispers) I believe this goes up to eleven.

  11. [fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Great. Another "science will destroy us all" theme. Maybe Will Smith could show up as Robert Neville and attack the apes with the cancer-cure-gone-all-wrong from I Am Legion.

    The "Bad Guys" are so unbelievably "Bad" that it makes you want to wince.

    Nothing new there. Hollywood sucks at creating compelling villains. It's why the Green Lantern movie gave us Yet Another Evil Space Cloud.

    1. Re:[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] by bkaul01 · · Score: 1

      I Am Legion.

      Is that the one with a herd of zombie pigs running off the cliff?

    2. Re:[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      Great. Another "science will destroy us all" theme.

      Good news everybody! We're all going to die...but with SCIENCE!

    3. Re:[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] by jokermatt999 · · Score: 1

      Actually, no not really. Watch the movie, there's a lot less anti-science than I expected. The apes rising up is due to human mistreatment. The spread of the virus is due to the greedy businessman pushing ahead with trials sooner than the scientist advised. The lead character is clearly shown to want to save both Caesar and his father. Seriously, give it a chance. I had huge misgivings from the trailer, but the movie delivered fairly well. The complaints about the "bad guys" being two dimensional is somewhat true, but they do all at least have clear and reasonable motivations, despite their lack of development.

    4. Re:[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Oh, I was planning to rent/stream it regardless.

      So instead of Bumbling Science we have the refreshingly new Evil Corporation. Yay! ;-)

    5. Re:[fluttershy]Yay![/fluttershy] by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Sure, why not.

  12. Homocentricity by ablaze · · Score: 1

    What I liked about the original Planet of the Apes is that it was told that the monkeys started to say "No!" if I remember correctly. I always imagined it as some kind of evolutionary development. Nature fought back! This one gets it all wrong. Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes? This is ridiculously homocentric.

    1. Re:Homocentricity by Smidge207 · · Score: 1, Informative

      . Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes?

      Ummm.....humans are part of the Great Ape family; sorry to break it to you.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or is eldavojohn an idiot?
    2. Re:Homocentricity by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes? This is ridiculously homocentric.

      If you watched the originals and didn't get the message that it's all mankind's fault, you seriously missed the point...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    3. Re:Homocentricity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying they should quite being huge homos?

    4. Re:Homocentricity by symes · · Score: 1

      Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes?

      You know for once it would be nice if the mollusks were the bad guy, screwing things up for humans. Gastropods could evolve to have hi-tech bio-warfare labs in their shells, they retreat and then re-emerge with an exotic neurotoxin precisely tailored to the threat. Then! Fed up with being trodden on and being cooked in French cuisine they turn on mankind by turning chimps into hyper-intelligent evil psychopaths! Only to find that the now dominant chimps evolve a taste for escargots au beurre d'ail.

    5. Re:Homocentricity by dzfoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not in the original. In that one, the story--by inference--is that humans blew up the world, and thus killed themselves; and that the apes eventually evolved to be the superior species and took over the planet.

      It was a cautionary message of determinism, and how insignificant we actually are on the large scale of things: we ceased to exist, and nature found a way to replace us. Eventually, the apes would have done the same, as they were going in ostensibly the same path.

      Everything else was revisionist crap to sell more tickets on an increasingly absurd franchise.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    6. Re:Homocentricity by Braintrust · · Score: 1

      If you watched the originals and didn't get the message that it's all mankind's fault, you seriously missed the point...

      So what you're saying is... wait, the beach... the buried monument... ... Oh my God... I'm back.

      I'm home.

      All the time it was... we finally really did it.

      YOU MANIACS! YOU BLEW IT UP!
      OH, DAMN YOU! GODDAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!

      --
      Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
    7. Re:Homocentricity by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Everything else was revisionist crap to sell more tickets on an increasingly absurd franchise.

      Nah, the second one was OK. Solved the problem of too many sequels, too... so everything after that was revisionist crap.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    8. Re:Homocentricity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything I post ends with this because I can't figure out how to not put it in the body of my own post.

                      -dZ.

  13. Re:Greetings by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 0

    You tell The Man what for, Che! You go girl!

    underground commando

    Underground? So, like, dead?

  14. I've not seen this particular movie by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    But the theme in the Planet of the Apes movies (and books) was that humanity eventually started using apes as slaves who eventually ended up doing all of the work and then were able to rebel because they were the only ones with any technical skills.

    So a human military violently putting down an ape rebellion doesn't really end the saga unless not only are all the mutant apes exterminated but the very technology used to create them is also destroyed.

    1. Re:I've not seen this particular movie by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      The chances of a super intelligent, super aggressive, alpha-human level predator not being genocided is exactly zero. Humans have done far worse to other humans for far less. The fact its a sub-human species means its an absolute given.

  15. Saw it last night by Imabug · · Score: 1

    and rather enjoyed it. The ending was different from what I expected or thought it might be, but given the nature of apes, a much more fitting ending than the one I imagined.

    the only people the apes kill are the ones that deserved it. on the other side, lots of apes were killed by people.

    --
    "For I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and Long Words Bother Me"
  16. CGI vs actors by eclectus · · Score: 1

    The thing that impressed me the most, as well as dissapointed me the most, was that the CGI Caeser's acting was better than all the human actors. Part of it was bad writing keeping the actors from being anything more cardboard cutouts, but the Caeser's facial expressions really conveyed what he was going through. I was impressed by that. The rest of the movie, though, felt a little flat in comparison.

    --
    This signature is a waste of 42 characters
    1. Re:CGI vs actors by vlm · · Score: 1

      The thing that impressed me the most, as well as dissapointed me the most, was that the CGI Caeser's acting was better than all the human actors.

      Does anyone on /. know of any purely CGI acted movies? I'm not talking about anime, or even rotoscoped like "scanner darkly" but a movie where all the actors are "realistic looking computer generated human beings"? Like all tech, I'm sure the pr0n industry will implement it first...

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:CGI vs actors by Xylaan · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within? Or are you talking about where all of the actors performances were done via motion capture? Avatar comes closer to the latter, but obviously isn't entirely done that way.

    3. Re:CGI vs actors by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 1

      Does anyone on /. know of any purely CGI acted movies? I'm not talking about anime, or even rotoscoped like "scanner darkly" but a movie where all the actors are "realistic looking computer generated human beings"? Like all tech, I'm sure the pr0n industry will implement it first...

      I think one of the first was Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. Not a great film, but the tech is impressive for its era (2001).

      The best example is probably James Cameron's Avatar. All the aliens were computer-generated, and the acting for them is pretty good. Of course it's not as good as Andy Serkis in 'Rise'....

      --
      Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
    4. Re:CGI vs actors by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Golum steals the show again... ;)

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    5. Re:CGI vs actors by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Here's an LA Times article on Serkis and his role as Caesar.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    6. Re:CGI vs actors by firex726 · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy?

      Not that great but seems like it'd fit your criteria.

    7. Re:CGI vs actors by sexconker · · Score: 0

      Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within

      No, it's not anime / anime-like. That's Final Fantasy VII - Advent Children.

    8. Re:CGI vs actors by gorzek · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean, although Polar Express might fit the bill. The human actors in that were mocapped but it was a 100% CGI film.

    9. Re:CGI vs actors by Nephilium · · Score: 1

      How about Beowolf?

    10. Re:CGI vs actors by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within, and Beowolf.

      Beware, however, that both fall rather hard smack-dab in the bottom of the uncanny-valley.

              -dZ/

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    11. Re:CGI vs actors by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Caeser was a human actor. Doing your performance in a motion-capture rig in 2011 is no different than doing your performance in a rubber mask in 1967.

  17. Monkey Attack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, I like Transformers 3 just fine for what it is

    A big, mechanized, heaping, pile of shit? Not my cup, so to speak. OTOH, if there is a scene in this ape movie where a battalion of monkeys are repelling the US military by letting loose a lethal barrage of flung poo, I might be persuaded to go see it. Can anyone confirm such a scene? Is there any lethal poo flinging in this movie, at all?

  18. It was completely plausible. by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Most of the naysayers who haven't seen this film are complaining that they don't believe a handful of apes could take over the entire planet.

    Well, they don't. Get over that. This is a prison breakout movie. They do eventually own the planet, through a twist that's telegraphed in advance and completely plausible. But the main action is a couple hundred apes against the San Francisco PD.

    Just go see the movie. It's very, very good, completely plausible, with no plot holes. (Although as mentioned, some of the humans in it do act stupidly evil.) And Serkis deserves an Oscar nod for the role.

    --
    Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
    1. Re:It was completely plausible. by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Apes have already taken over the planet, you insensitive fool!

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    2. Re:It was completely plausible. by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      Some of us are insensitive fools you insensitive clod!

    3. Re:It was completely plausible. by AdamThor · · Score: 1

      They do eventually own the planet, through a twist that's telegraphed in advance and completely plausible.

      I guess I figure not so much, if your bio-research lab has any protocol at all for accidental exposure.

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    4. Re:It was completely plausible. by Straif · · Score: 1

      By far the biggest plot hole in the movie.

      I liked the movie in general but that entire scene of them administering the newly redesigned drug was sooooo painful to watch. From the delivery method to their security procedures it made me wish I had gone for a snack break and missed those 5 minutes. I would have rather just heard someone describe it, after the fact, and assumed it couldn't be as bad as they made it sound then to see such a blatantly bad scene be projected on screen just to push the story along.

      Still a good movie but a little more imagination would have helped.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    5. Re:It was completely plausible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the biggest plot hole is that the main experimental subject was pregnant, and they didn't know this until after she was dead.

  19. News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    Plus Apes wreck stuff. It's pretty awesome.

    First there's all the stories about comic book movies aimed at 12-year olds, now we're getting spammed about another crappy film you couldn't pay me to see, written by what seems to be a third-grader. Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"

    1. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by idontgno · · Score: 2

      Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"

      I dunno, when did you join?

      I kid, I kid.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First there's all the stories about comic book movies aimed at 12-year olds, now we're getting spammed about another crappy film you couldn't pay me to see, written by what seems to be a third-grader. Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"

      Did you ever care to think that people may not need "ambient temperature" IQ's to enjoy a movie or story? What kind of entertainment gets you? The Hitchhiker Guide to the Galaxy? Herp derp 42. Dune? Herp derp spice spice spice space worm spice.

      You can degrade anything into mindless drivel if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it can entertain us for a few hours from aspects of life that are not entertaining (e.g. filing expense reports after a business trip).

      Take your arrogance and shove it where the sun never shines.

    3. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by GooberToo · · Score: 0

      Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"

      You seem to have forgotten this is slashdot. Most of the high IQ posters left a while ago. Most of all that's left are room temperature IQs - and worse.

    4. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by mattb112885 · · Score: 2

      When we started measuring in Kelvin

    5. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by 2names · · Score: 1

      "...shove it where the sun never shines."

      Shove it in Seattle?

      --
      "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
    6. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      I find it kind of warm in here....

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    7. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by desdinova+216 · · Score: 0

      and yet you posted in this to mention this?

    8. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Can't pay you to watch it... but you'll complain about it for free!

      --
      +1 Disagree
    9. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      +1

    10. Re:News for nerds with room temperature IQs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take your arrogance and shove it where the sun never shines.

      How will sending his arrogance to Seattle Washington help?

  20. Re:Greetings by AdmV0rl0n · · Score: 0

    Here have a clue. The last time some dickheads decided its time for communism - they spent all their efforts shipping AK47s and RPG7's to as many people as possible. What were they used for - Lets see, War, Famine, desolation, civil war, bloodshed. Robert Mugabe and others decided to implement Communist doctrine, wreck farms, and drive through the idealogy. Was done in a myriad of other locations.

    I don't think people like you have a right to tell everyone else people are starving. Now fuck off and die.

    --
    We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
  21. OMG! by Asmor · · Score: 1

    Oh my gosh! I was wrong! It was Earth, all along!

    1. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now you've finally made a monkey (yes you've finally made a monkey) out... of... me.

    2. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Can I play the piano anymore?" "Of course you can!" "Well I couldn't before!"

    3. Re:OMG! by Trilkin · · Score: 1

      I love legitimate theater!

      --
      Nobody cares what the CAPTCHA for your post was.
    4. Re:OMG! by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Oh my gosh! I was wrong! It was Earth, all along!

      Planet of the Apes is here, look at all the monkeys and baboons in Congress.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
  22. Here's MY review. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We went to see it because it received high ratings on IMDB but there was no point in doing so. The CGI isn't bad, but it's obvious enough to be slightly distracting. The plot is thin to non-existent as it is already summed up in the trailer.

    In writing there is a saying that one should be careful of trying to fill three acts with one act of plot, and that is exactly what this movie did. The entire first half of the movie could have been an ape's voyage of self-discovery and the second half a replay of every revolution in the history of man. But it wasn't.

    Worst of all, when writing what is a simple revenge plot, it is EXTREMELY distracting to have the director be averse to showing violence on the screen. Constant cut-aways to avoid a violent scene, the ape's repetitively holding back because they're non-violent (hint: apes are absolutely not non-violent) and so on.

    It's one of the worse movies I've seen in a while unless you just want some simple, dull and ultimately unfulfilling action. It rises to that level.

  23. Re:Greetings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's apes not monkeys you insensitive clod!

  24. They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) by crow_t_robot · · Score: 1

    They ruined this moving by removing the paradox that Cesar was the "son" of Xera. He wasn't genetically modified. He was smart because he was the son of smart/evolved apes.

    1. Re:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) by ildon · · Score: 1

      Even in the original Planet of the Apes series of movies, the original timeline that led to the ape future was unaltered. Xera going back in time and Caesar initiating the revolt actually resulted in a different future where apes and humans lived together peacefully rather than the ape future that Taylor visited. This is established in Battle For the Planet of the Apes.

    2. Re:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) by poena.dare · · Score: 2

      In this movie "Bright Eyes" is Cesar's mother - the same nickname given to Taylor. The subtext is that Charlie Heston was reincarnated as a female chimp!

    3. Re:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) by SpeZek · · Score: 1

      That's somewhat disputed. I remember at the end of Battle, when all seems to have changed, there's a shot of a statue of Ceasar while a voice-over questions what the future holds. The movie ends with the statue shedding a tear. It's quite ambiguous what the tear represents, but it's not a stretch to say that it means that, ultimately, Ceasar's plan for a unified planet fails and we end up with the apes in control again, giving the circular timeline.

    4. Re:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      OK, now I've truly seen it all.

      That's it for me!

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    5. Re:They Wrecked It (Removed The Paradox) by ildon · · Score: 1

      Uh, at the end the Lawgiver is clearly giving a speech to a mix of human and ape children and it's obviously supposed to be long after Caesar's death. Perhaps not 2000 years in the future but far enough that the ape-dominated future seems at least unlikely if not impossible.

  25. It must kind of suck being Serkis by alen · · Score: 1

    no it doesn't. not everyone wants to be julia roberts or another top tier star. they don't even make that much money after all the taxes and agent fees are accounted for.

    i bet Serkis loves his job because he never leaves the studio, doesn't have to travel around the world all the time and is always there for his kids while making a very nice living and not seeing most of his money go to agents, publicists, accountants and lawyers

    1. Re: It must kind of suck being Serkis by MojoRilla · · Score: 2

      i bet Serkis loves his job because he never leaves the studio, doesn't have to travel around the world all the time and is always there for his kids while making a very nice living and not seeing most of his money go to agents, publicists, accountants and lawyers

      Wrong.

      According to NPR, motion capture actors now perform on the real set wearing a Lycra bodysuit covered with dots. Both live action and motion capture cameras "capture" the scene.

      According to the interview, Serkis doesn't see any difference between motion capture acting and live action acting. They are both acting to him.

      And Serkis most definitely has an agent, publicist, a manager and even a web guy.

    2. Re: It must kind of suck being Serkis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er... what? Top-tier stars make tons of money. Sure, it may be a few million dollars less after the fees you mentioned, but in the end it's still millions of dollars.

    3. Re: It must kind of suck being Serkis by fermat1313 · · Score: 1

      no it doesn't. not everyone wants to be julia roberts or another top tier star. they don't even make that much money after all the taxes and agent fees are accounted for.

      You're right, I'll be she can barely scrape together the money make the payment on her $20 Million house in Malibu, or her two ~$4 Million apartments in Mahnattan. I just don't know how she survives.

  26. Re:Greetings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I was 5, I tried to call up Africa and tell them they could have my brussel sprouts. They didn't want them either. So it's not my fault!

  27. Wow, that ape can act! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No really, true story. At one point, an ape was dying and I caught myself thinking, "Wow, that ape can act!". lol

    Best action movie of the summer.

  28. Where is the: by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!

    The apes don't win against humans; the humans do in themselves first.

    1. Re:Where is the: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is the:

      You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!

      You haven't taken a look at the stock market today, have you?

      The apes don't win against humans; the humans do in themselves first.

      In the end, it doesn't matter whether it was the jackasses, the elephants, or the apes at the rating agencies.

      You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!

  29. I thought it was pretty good.. by Kaitiff · · Score: 1

    I saw it yesterday and thought it was pretty good overall, regardless of my 'room temperature IQ' as some posted. The only really 'BAD' guy in the film is the one ape handler, and I didn't think he was really over the top either. The next door neighbor I kind of felt sorry for; poor bastard reacted pretty much the way most people would I think. The one thing that irritated me a A LOT was the typical Hollywood 'I want a really cool shot where apes are flying through the air!' so they did... chimpanzees flying through plate glass windows stories above the ground and acting like it was nothing. That, and the inconsistency with the size of the chimps. Golly, I didn't know that if a chimp stood up like a MAN it would auto-magically grow about a foot... aka Cesar looking eye to eye with his 'father'. That, and the aerobatics Cesar was able to perform while running through the house. Unnecessarily over the top. Oh, and in typical fashion once the miracle drug was administered to the apes at large, they were all able to organize and become a cohesive fighting unit instantaneously and be able to communicate perfectly.... all within a day.

    --
    If I sound stupid, it's not me talking....
  30. stupid idea..again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From all the great sci fi novels and short stories out there, do really had to use the retard idea again.

  31. Charlton Heston compelling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To hysterical laughter maybe...

    1. Re:Charlton Heston compelling? by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      Actually, Charlton Heston was like a lot of old-school leading man actors--in that he only sucked when he was in the lead (playing the cliched handsome leading man). He was pretty good in later supporting roles (where he got out of that leading man mentality).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  32. for good sci-fi, see Attack the Block by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    Attack the Block is currently the best sci-fi movie I know of in theatres (though very FEW theatres). Much less humorous than the premise or trailers make it out to be, but there is a fair amount of humour in it.

    1. Re:for good sci-fi, see Attack the Block by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Reading the reviews of various movies mentioned here, I realize that "Plan 9 from Outer Space" wasn't that bad after all.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  33. Serkis by bhcompy · · Score: 1

    So is Andy Serkis the new Kevin Peter Hall?

  34. The plot and the Idea by prefec2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the original "Planet of the Apes" movie, this kind of plot was chosen to show us humans, how we behave and how stupid and violent it is.
    First, it pointed out that humans destroyed earth after all, because of the usual things: greed, stupidity and being power hungry morons. Second, it changed the perspective for humans. Now humans are the animals and the apes are those who control the world. Humans are mistreated and used for experiments without any doubt in the action. Just as we humans did and do. Third, it shows that the apes, who call themselves superior (being a little bit chauvinistic at this point), that they would not resolve their problems in violence. However, in the end they do. In that part it discusses the problem with unequal power inside a society can result in problems when not controlled properly.

    The way to broach those issues were good and typical for the time the movie was made. All this World War III stuff can be seen in different movies, books and other creative work. However, nowadays such plot is more than lame. The idea of being taken over by apes is not very convincing. Even if apes are twice as smart as a human (which is not possible, due to energy constraints). We humans are 6 billion entities 1/12 has guns. On the other side, there are at top most a million apes (I doubt that there are still that many of them) without guns. And the very idea of fire weapons is, that physical power does now longer count. So the apes are largely outnumbered and outgunned.

    But the top most thing is, our cultural context changed since 1963 (book)/1968 (movie) and it does not make sense to discuss these issues in a move in the same way. A much more convincing plot would be a world, were we eradicated almost all animals and un-diversified plant life in such a way that some simple deceases destroy all our crops and humans die out (almost) due to food shortage.

    Such movies are however, difficult because the transition takes so long. You either use the Roland Emmerich approach and let happen a deep freeze in days instead of decades or you try to do a 12 Monkeys approach. YOu not necessarily need time travel, but it is a method to connect the move past and the move present.

    1. Re:The plot and the Idea by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Actually I really liked the original movies because of the way the arc went.
      You had the planet of the apes which was your typical cautionary tale. You can read into it so may subjects from violence to racism.
      Then you had beneath the planet of the apes which I feel was the worst of the four. More of a cautionary tale and both sides are just evil and everybody dies.
      Then you had escape from the planet of the apes where you saw a chance and humans where good or acting out of fear and terror but there was both a threat and a hope.
      Then Conquest of the planet of the Apes which was interesting and showed hope.
      And finally Battle for the planet of the Apes which really ended it all on a hopeful note.
      This one with the whole pandemic thing is just a bit too much 12 monkeys for my taste.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:The plot and the Idea by fermat1313 · · Score: 1

      The idea of being taken over by apes is not very convincing. Even if apes are twice as smart as a human (which is not possible, due to energy constraints). We humans are 6 billion entities 1/12 has guns. On the other side, there are at top most a million apes (I doubt that there are still that many of them) without guns. And the very idea of fire weapons is, that physical power does now longer count. So the apes are largely outnumbered and outgunned.

      I guess you didn't actually see the movie. That specific point is taken care of very well in the movie. I think the foreshadowing done at the end of the movie provides for a very nice transition from the world we know to the world of Planet of the Apes.

      There are lots of people here hating this movie on spec. That's fine, I guess, if you don't want to see it. But please don't comment about plot holes or other issues if you haven't bothered to see the damn thing.

    3. Re:The plot and the Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      note that the movie implies that the newer virus that made apes smart was lethal to humans. the end of the movie is the next door neighbor pilot spreading the virus across the globe. the implication being that, like with conquistadors and North America, most of the humans were killed by the virus rather than by the apes.

    4. Re:The plot and the Idea by flitty · · Score: 1

      I actually really appreciated the update to the format. The original movie beats you over the head with symbolism and was never subtle about it. This movie made the apes, you know, apes. There are two very, very interesting Ape stories that should be required if you are going to watch Rise. The first, as others have mentioned is Project Nim, and the second is a story about an ape named Lucy. There is a great hour long program by NPR called Radiolab where they talk about the Lucy Story for nearly an hour, and it's a near copy of the story of Rise of Planet of the Apes, and interesting tidbits about how apes bite off fingers to show disrespect, etc...

      --
      Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
    5. Re:The plot and the Idea by jokermatt999 · · Score: 1

      Spoilers ahoy! The virus that increases the apes' intelligence is fatal to humans. It seems to be symptomatic a few days after infection, and kills the infected about a week or so after infection. During the credits, we see an infected pilot stepping into a busy airport and sneezing blood. The apes wouldn't have to fight.

    6. Re:The plot and the Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you read "The Death of Grass" by John Christopher? It's very much along the lines you suggest.

    7. Re:The plot and the Idea by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      It is true, I didn't watch the movie. I just read the plot information on Wikipedia. The movie might be a good action movie. And it might be fascinating to watch it. However, a strain which make apes intelligent over night is not very convincing. Even more that the same strain kill almost all humans. And humans are not able to take any counter measures. Looks like 12 Monkeys to me, which is an interesting film of its own, but which is not becoming more convincing when used in a second movie.

      I guess, if you want to see a good sci-fi-look-a-like action movie, that might be a good place to go to. However, if you are looking for a new story or a true science fiction movie than it might be disappointing.

    8. Re:The plot and the Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SPOILER ALERT

      they solved that in rise, all the humans fall sick and die.

    9. Re:The plot and the Idea by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      So, it implies that the people manipulating the virus were dumbfuck enough to use/create a virus that spread through any other method but blood contagion? I mean, simply from a proprietary interest, let alone the possible horror scenarios, you would make damn sure it had a fully controllable attack vector.

  35. All I can say is by BetaDays · · Score: 1

    "If you're wondering how he eats and breathes / And other science facts / Then repeat to yourself 'It's just a show and I should really just relax". Lalala" - mstk3k

    --
    Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
  36. Warning: RETCON! by sexconker · · Score: 0

    This movie retcons the original story.
    Therefore, this movie is wrong and bad by default.
    The fact that this movie is stupid and bad on its own merits doesn't help things.

    The original story is that a disease killed off all the cats and dogs and such. So we took in apes as pets. Then we started using and treating them more and more as helpers, laborers, and eventually, slaves. Apes became more numerous, more intelligent, familiar with human tools and machinery, and angry. Humans became weak, dependent, and lazy. When the uprising started, humans were caught with their pants down facing a dumber force, but one that was numerous, in their homes, and physically superior.

    This movie posits that a drug makes apes smart and people dumb, and that this new intelligence difference is enough for a few dozen apes to mount a successful, small-scale rebellion against modern day humans. The movie doesn't end with Earth being overrun by apes (of course not - you need room for a sequel to the prequel), but the idea that they get to the point they do is laughable enough.

    I give it a Triple F Minus.

  37. Trailer CGI looked terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having only seen the trailer, it appeared that the CGI absolutely sucked. Has it been redone since?

  38. I see what they did there... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Apparently, someone heard about a movie where only a handful of humans remain on Earth trying to figure out what wiped out the rest of humanity.
    Movie being called "Twelve Monkeys" they assumed it was one of the "Planet of the Apes" movies and a part of that canon.

    Not that they've actually seen any of those movies. They just kinda make movies, they don't watch them.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  39. Read the book, Watch the originals by assertation · · Score: 1

    The most loved sci-fi shows Star Trek, Dr. Who were famous for not so great special effects. Special effects do not good sci-fi make unless great stories, good acting and good scripts are there too.

    Read the book. It is fantastic. Though the story in the original movie is very different, it holds true to the spirit of the book. Both excellent.

    Watch the original moves, they hold up very well even after 30 years.

    1. Re:Read the book, Watch the originals by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The most loved sci-fi shows Star Trek, Dr. Who were famous for not so great special effects. Special effects do not good sci-fi make unless great stories, good acting and good scripts are there too.

      Star Trek... [brief pause] Good acting?

      Even with the original Dr Who's the acting wasn't that great, but the stories in ST and DW were great, truly engrossing. The [original] Star Wars trilogy had a very compelling story and also had quite good whilst having good SFX for the time, Babylon 5 fell into this category too, despite some really cringe-worthy acting the story managed to save the entire series. The later series of Star Trek had decent SFX but seriously began to suck at the story telling part.

      Watch the original moves, they hold up very well even after 30 years.

      Of course they hold up, they were an original idea, not a constantly recycled one remade year after year. In addition to that the make up was very well done.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  40. Alzheimer's/Deep Blue Sea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alzheimer's research in animals gone bad? Is this a remake of Deep Blue Sea (smart sharks)?

  41. This was a really bad movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly I was surprised on how bad this movie was. The CG was...underwhelming, and honestly I still think LOTR did it better. The story was horrible. Yes, horrible and boring. I couldn't care less about the humans or the apes. No one in this movie did their job particularly well,maybe with the exception of the Orangutang. The 'bad' guys in this movie were just stupid, and there were no 'good' guys.It was an empty, unambitious, lackluster film that hurt to watch.This movie is poo flung at the screen.

    1. Re:This was a really bad movie. by rworne · · Score: 2

      No one in this movie did their job particularly well,maybe with the exception of the Orangutang.

      I have to ask:
      Was there a "Right turn, Clyde" reference in this movie?

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  42. Re:Greetings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm an underground commando. I'm sitting in the basement and not wearing underwear.

  43. Apes.. The Original.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This movie make me think Humans stole Parkour from the Primates.

    1. Re:Apes.. The Original.... by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      This movie make me think Humans stole Parkour from the Primates.

      Um, we are primates.

  44. As per your request: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    amorous-bonobos.html

    http://compassofpleasure.org/notecards/amorous-bonobos.html

  45. Re:Greetings by Rei · · Score: 0

    So by that logic, why is China, the world's largest "communist" state, the world's second biggest economy (and closing), only 4th in international arms sales? Why is US #1 in international arms sales? Many despotic regimes such as Saudi Arabia are entirely dependent on arms sales from the US.

    Exporting war and brutality is an capitalism/communism-independent phenom. :P

    --
    Anchor: "We take you now to our Chief Meteorologist, Paris Hilton." Paris: "It's hot." Anchor: "Thank you."
  46. Re:Greetings by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    I hate every ape I see,
    From chimpan-A to chimpanzee,
    No, you'll never make a monkey out of me!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  47. !@#$ movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terrible POS movie

  48. get him! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Why must it always be mankind that is responsible, even for the rise of the apes?

    You know for once it would be nice if the mollusks were the bad guy, screwing things up for humans. Gastropods could evolve to have hi-tech bio-warfare labs in their shells, they retreat and then re-emerge with an exotic neurotoxin precisely tailored to the threat. Then! Fed up with being trodden on and being cooked in French cuisine they turn on mankind by turning chimps into hyper-intelligent evil psychopaths! Only to find that the now dominant chimps evolve a taste for escargots au beurre d'ail.

    What are you some sort of closet $cientologist?!!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  49. Soylent Green is Monkeys! by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    Would have been a much better ending.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  50. Re:Warning: RETCON! by Straif · · Score: 1

    I guess you missed the part where the drug doesn't make the humans dumb but DEAD. Not much of a rebellion needed when you're enemy manages to kill himself off.

    At the end the apes seemed happy enough to just sit around in the trees.

    --
    Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
  51. Planet of the Lab Rats by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    Surely statistically, given the number of experiments done with lab-rats we're much more likely to produce a race of super-intelligent lab rats. Rats would also have more of a desire to wipe out humanity... after all we keep giving them cancer. I'm holding onto my movie-fund budget until Hollywood releases "Planet of the lab rats"

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Planet of the Lab Rats by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Surely statistically, given the number of experiments done with lab-rats we're much more likely to produce a race of super-intelligent lab rats.

      Rats would also have more of a desire to wipe out humanity... after all we keep giving them cancer. I'm holding onto my movie-fund budget until Hollywood releases "Planet of the lab rats"

      We've already had Ben and Willard (and a remake of Willard). That's enough.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  52. Quotes? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    The original Planet of the Apes had a lot going for it: a compelling lead, an interesting story, a convincing world, a couple of good quotable catch phrases, and of course the not-really-all-that-surprising twist ending.

    Beyond "you damn dirty apes", what other good quotes were there?

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  53. Franco by mr_resident · · Score: 1

    I think it's easy to buy James Franco as a stoner because James Franco IS A STONER!

    Anyone see his eyes-swollen-shut, dry-mouthed performance in the aptly named "Your Highness"?

    Come on, Jimmy. Save it for the weekend!

  54. *SPOILER ALERT* - Worst BioMed company ever by fermat1313 · · Score: 1

    This comment has several spoilers, so be warned.

    I was surprised to not see any comments on /. about the portrayal of science in general, and medical research companies specifically. The biomed company portrayed in this film has to be the worst company with some of the worst practices and leadership ever shown in a movie. I was amazed at the incompetency of the company. Some incredible items were:

    - Immediately ending a very expensive and potentially profitable research product because of one unexpected result (the chimp's rampage at the beginning), apparently without any attempt to locate a root cause.

    - Not tracking their medication samples so researchers can just steal medication for home trials (REALLY?)

    - Completely inadequate security measures

    - This isn't the company, but Franco's character shows a complete lack of respect for proper testing procedure, for medical ethics or for anything else that a good researcher would be very careful about.

    Overall, science and technology companies really got the short end of the stick in this movie. That said, I can pick nits with almost every film. It was entertaining and fun. Definitely worth seeing in my opinion.

    1. Re:*SPOILER ALERT* - Worst BioMed company ever by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Splice. In fact, the whole film sounds a little bit like Splice, with less icky moral implications and more ape-smashing action.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    2. Re:*SPOILER ALERT* - Worst BioMed company ever by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Not sure about the Franco ethics thing (haven't seen the movie, just read synopses here) but if you are referring to testing an untried drug on his father... It wouldn't surprise me one bit. I've had about five family members with the disease, and it just isn't fun. For anyone involved.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  55. If Only the Monkey Had Visited a Chiropractor... by LibRT · · Score: 1

    Waiting for Dr Bob to chime in to inform us that, had the little monkey just had the proper adjustment, none of this would have ever happened...

  56. "Now, I like Transformers 3 just fine" by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    This is the kind of disclaimer that should be right at the top.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  57. Go to Tottenham in London... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... to see the real Planet of the Apes...

    They are destroying our country, thanks to idiots like you who believe "We're all the same"...

  58. Is it okay for kids? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    I am planning to see it tomorrow with my kids. The youngest is seven. I noticed it is PG-13. He won't get upset by a little violence, but I don't want him seeing anything really gory. Would you take a seven year-old to see it?

    1. Re:Is it okay for kids? by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 1

      You will know in the first 15 minutes.

      The movie starts with a chase in Africa; that's a good taste for what most of the action feels like: fast and fleeing. The apes are chased and captured; it's energetic and sympathetic, but not unexpected (considering it's a movie about apes)

      But one of the more intense moments occurs shortly after that with the lab chimp "Bright Eyes" seemingly going crazy and you don't know what's going on. Has the medicine made her crazy? Has she been mistreated? Should we feel sympathy for this out of control ape? It's not explained until (START SPOILER) Bright Eyes is killed, and you realize she was protecting her new baby.

      I consider the gore minimal, but here's all of the gore I recall:
      * Apes are shot, but you see very little blood (their fur hides it). Two are major plot points where you feel the significance of the shots, despite insignifiicant gore.
      * A scene where an ape defends someone by biting the assailant on the ear and causes a small bit of blood.
      * A scene where someone who is very sick is discovered dead on the bed with a bit of blood around him.
      * Three sneezes where blood comes out (3 different times).
      * A bad man is killed, but the body is not fully shown on screen (you see some very pinkish / reddish skin but no blood or direct view of the body).

      Lots of chases. Lots of running. But most everything is expected from the situation. So if the 7 year old gets through the "Bright Eyes" scene, it's less likely they'll be shocked later on.

      Overall I think a seven year old may be bored. Caesar has conversations in sign language. He teaches apes to share (with cookies). He longs for home in his cell. He has trouble being accepted by the other apes. There are long stretches which might have bored me as a young kid. But as an adult, I really liked the movie.

  59. Re:Greetings by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    You rock.

  60. Slashdot: Giving People Chances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot: Giving 12 year olds a chance to upload their English Essay since ... a long time ago.

  61. Re:Greetings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that's two of us. Here's a preview. Coming to a theatre near you soon!

  62. Re:Warning: RETCON! by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    The original story is that a disease killed off all the cats and dogs and such. So we took in apes as pets. Then we started using and treating them more and more as helpers, laborers, and eventually, slaves. Apes became more numerous, more intelligent, familiar with human tools and machinery, and angry. Humans became weak, dependent, and lazy. When the uprising started, humans were caught with their pants down facing a dumber force, but one that was numerous, in their homes, and physically superior.

    I think you forgot about the part where two Chimps from the future escape back in time (Escape from the Planet of the Apes) just as the planet explodes from the Omega Bomb (Beneath the Planet of the Apes), and they have a child which is adopted by a circus owner, and that child grows up to become the leader of the enslaved Apes.

  63. Our Review by TonyJr4 · · Score: 1

    I don't usually self promote but here is our review of “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”

    Hopefully is it more entertaining than this review

  64. don't forget charlton heston in the original by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it didn't hurt to have an actor with his intellect to establish rapport with the apes. and he had sterling nra credentials.

  65. Poeple can be that mean by transami · · Score: 1

    Look around. You think people can't be cruel and uncaring to apes. Look at what they do to other humans!

    I think this movie was great. Among one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. The only thing I hated about it was the last line of the dialog. They should of cut that last line and let Caesar have the last say.

    --
    :T:R:A:N:S: