Planet of the Apes Film Fests

Full disclosure: I love talking ape movies. I absolutely love them. The only reason I’m unsure on the up-coming Planet of the Apes prequel/reboot/reimagining/possible bastardization is that the apes don’t talk. I had even begun the research to study the Planet of the Apes films as my PhD thesis when I abandoned academia. I adore these films.

Last year when a friend of mine invited me over to watch a film on his mondo-fantabulous home entertainment setup, he told me to pickup a blu-ray of whatever I wanted for my first HD giant screen experience and I chose the 1968 Planet of the Apes with Chuck Heston. I didn’t have to buy it though, I had purchased the Apes original series blu-ray boxed set months before owning a player.

Battle for the Planet of the Apes (the last of the original films) is the second most-purchased film in my collection having had it on vhs, 2 versions on dvd and then blu-ray (the first is Die Hard which I had to replace on vhs). And it’s my least favorite!

I thought about doing “A Case for…” but then I thought “screw that! This is Planet of the freakin’ Apes and you like it or I don’t even want know you!” Instead I put together a series of viewing parties that present the films and related content as a variety of experiences.

All told there were 5 original films (POTA, Beneath the POTA, Escape From the POTA, Conquest of the POTA and Battle for the POTA), a half-season TV series, a half-season animated series, the Tim Burton Remake and the up-coming Prequel. Option 1 is spoiler-free, the rest are not.

1) The Classic: 1,2,3,4,5

As originally released, this is the most popular viewing order. You get the two highest-budget films and both Heston appearances at the top. This is the order that is for the newbie and I warn you that you will lose attention as it gets to the last film.

My personal fav of the series is 4 and I find it difficult to keep going into that last one. The budget on 5 was not much more than that of a TV movie and it shows. Watching on blu-ray and a big screen you will start having the uninitiated questioning the make-up effects by 2. To cut costs, background apes were given pull-over masks instead of make-up but the wonders of 1080 make these cut corners obvious.

2) The Chronological: 3,4,5,1,2 or 3,4,1,2

The order for those who have already seen the series and want a different experience. This version puts the films in chronological order from the perspective of the apes. 3 opens with the three apes crash-landing on earth in the 1970s and telling our world a wild tale about war, a rebellious ape, and the final fate of some missing astronauts.

We watch as the apes take over our world and the human race becomes a slave species. We jump ahead 2,000 years to see the ultimate destiny of our world. Not nearly as hopeful a tale, it is my preferred viewing order.

The screenwriter of 4 was told it would be the final in the series so he created a story that would close it up as a loop. It works well to watch them that way and makes more narrative sense.

You’ve been through the series but still want more talking apes? Well there are the live-action and animated TV series. Both lasted less than half a season though and neither has an ending.

The live-action has it’s moments, and there is an episode with Marc “Beastmaster” Singer. The animated series features characters from 1 and 2 but doesn’t quite fit into the timeline set out in those films.

4) The Tim-Burton-is-All-Style-and-No-Substance: Remake and hopefully not Prequel

Tim Burton’s 2001 remake of POTA is a testament to how he just puts stuff together that looks impressive and doesn’t pay much attention to coherency, plot, characters, etc. It was an early sign of what post-Alice In Wonderland many more people have accepted – he’s a bit shite.

That said, it sure does look pretty. I got the blu-ray for $10 which I thought was fair for the best-looking talking apes so far. The ending will likely confuse and you will be left wondering what it meant. Well look no further than the commentary track by Burton who tells you with all pride that it means … absolutely nothing. He just thought it was an interesting visual and had no concern for the complete failure of the film to close on any sensible note.

5) Theoretical Trilogy: Prequel,1,2,3

If the prequel plays out like I think it might, it will make a new viewing order that is closer to the history told in 3 by Cornelius. I have heard rumour that the prequel will include the infamous first “no” which would drop it into the series fairly well (though I’m assuming that the prequel won’t reference the time-travelling apes of 3).

6) The Long-Staycation: The whole thing. 3,4,5,TV,1,2,Animated,Remake,Prequel,that episode of The Simpsons where Troy McClure is in POTA:The Musical, the fan-edit of POTA that makes it a Twilight Zone episode, and the grown-ups-only XXX parody Playmate of the Apes

As I said, the live-action and animated don’t fit easily into the series, but the original films had quite a few contradictions too so it can be forgiven. The biggest negative is that you get the best stuff early.

There is some very cool apes side content. The Simpsons bit was great (and I just found out there are magnets of those characters which is on my ebay wishlist now). POTA was written by Rod Serling and a clever fan made a terrific fanedit of the film that cuts it to 20-odd minute Twilight Zone episode, black-and-white including opening narration and credits.

And not for all ages is the 2002 porn parody Playmate of the Apes. It was shot mostly outside and the apes live in what looks like a 1970s basement rec room. No talking apes are involved in the *ahem* action. It isn’t art, but it makes more narrative sense than the Burton film so it gets its place.

With the prequel still to come, these may have to be revised. The trailer looks good and I am a Franco fan so fingers crossed.

Get your stinkin’ paws on some damned ape movies.

Keith works in marketing, which isn’t nearly as evil as you think it is, and is wicked smart. Follow him on Twitter as CubReporterK.

He didn’t do any we-don’t-call-it-TBinnsing-anymore photos in this piece because the hottest woman in the whole series is Helena Bonham-Carter who looks like this:

I guess there’s Estella Warren in the remake, if she’s your type of girl.

And the first two films have Linda “You have one line in two films, let’s see if you can get it right this time” Harrison.

Because the first one was so terribly popular. (I just played my Irony card +2/+2 to all snide remarks.) This time however we have included a few surprises…now you can add the members of The Correctness to your deck! Join us for the exclusive sneak preview that has Magic fans everywhere declaring “Who the fuck are the Correctness?”

And there you have it, gamers. Remember when it comes to building your decks, it’s not about win or lose…it’s about Wizards of the Coast disposing of your disposable income.

Well gang, it’s confirmed, The Correctness will be at The Calgary Comic Expo Saturday June 18th at 6:00 pm for part two of the live Super hero Smackdown.

In addition to which Admin Rock will be selling his “Wares” in Artist Alley. You can’t miss him, he’s the Bruce McCollough-esque fellow standing near the mind blowing lego mosiacs.

And as a special bonus for you the Correct, yours truly will be headlining at Yuk Yuks, June 16th to the 18th. Your expo pass gets you two for one tickets. But here is your chance to get in for free…

In honor of the recent anniversary of the passing of Douglas Adams I am declaring a “Vogon Poetry” Competition. Do your worst. Make me wish I was being thrown out of an airlock. The most torturous Vogon poem gets two free tickets to see the show. Here’s a little number I whipped up for a similar contest a few years back just to get you started…

Reflections

Oh, slab of Mung,
That quivers egrubiously between my folds
Will you not creambulate lovingly toward my thigh?
Fiptious jelly that smells of cheese and musk
My thumb caresses thy curdled putressesses
Why do you mock your quimbling host?
I banish thee
I love thee
And ulpliciosuly spread thee on toast

Now write your own and see Tbinns do stand up live or…. (Dum Dum Dum) Tell me how good you thought poem was!

A Correctness State of the Union

First, a bit of history.

About a year and a half ago, after some social function or another (I believe it may well have been an evening of Settlers of Catan) just as the man/boy who would become known as Robbie Robtown was heading out my front door, I said to him…

“Hey, we should start an online humor magazine.”

This would be a repository of bits of humorous fiction and general weirdness that wouldn’t adapt easily to performance, and was better served in prose. I would have added “Like Cracked” at the time, had I known of the sites existence, and known it had evolved WAAAYY past being a shitty Mad magazine rip off

“Definitely” he replied heading home to silently ruminate on his singleness, as he often does.

A few days later, the question of what to call it came up Rob said “I always wanted to call a sketch troupe or an improv team THE CORRECTNESS”

That was the ENTIRE name discussion. I liked it right away. It had just the right tone of over the top self importance with just a dash of buffoonery. I went and got the domain registration.

Mere days later, Rob mentioned bringing Dave in as he was wise in the ways of website, and neither Rob nor I were. I had known Dave off and on for some time, I had done some Star trek based improv with him, and played Velma to his wife’s Daphne in a Scooby Doo play I wrote and performed with my sketch troupe. The comedy community here in Calgary is pretty small, we knew each other mostly by reputation. Plus, he had a habit of showing up in my vicinity for pretty much every geeky event that came through town.

Thanks to Dave and his single minded sense of purpose and fast Lego building reflexes, he site was up and running, complete with its first article on June 30th 2009. It was an Article on whether or not Indiana Jones deserved another sequel.

That added a layer I wasn’t thinking of, a kind of repository of pop culture punditry. But I liked it. I liked that it could be one of Rob’s weird and wonderful essays one day, some sort of acidly opinionated (in a good way) top ten list by Dave the next, and some obscure bit of microfiction, or a self made motivational poster by me the day after. I highly recommend taking a look at some of those early articles in the archives, there is some really good stuff in there, and I really dug the direction it was heading in. It was shitloads of fun, and it shows in the writing.

Robbie Robtown, Tbinns, and Admin Rock were rockin the internetz

Well, kind of. Nobody was reading us except friends and family, and a few obscure outsiders. We didn’t care.

Then, one day, an argument starts about who would win in a fight between Batman and Wolverine in a talkback. A topic my wife instigated, surprisingly enough. She suggested we turn it into a series of articles. Dave, being a) the only guy among us who like sports and b) the only guy with even the faintest hint of an organized mind started drawing up brackets to make it into a tournament.

Then, on a whim, he figured “ehhhh what the hell” and submitted it to Fark.

Well, I didn’t even know what Fark WAS when we made the main page. I don’t think I even realized it was a big deal until I saw the numbers. When people I hadn’t seen in years were sending me messages congratulating me on the green light I started to get the idea that this was not an easy thing to achieve and we were VERY lucky. So lucky in fact it shut our server down. (Or “Farked” it, as they would say, those board posting scallywags!) Somebody over at Fark liked us.

Many of the fark readers however, did not. I knew people were passionate about their favourite superheroes, and I knew the anonymity of the web community could create some really hostile characters but I don’t think ANY of us were prepared for the sheer amount of piss and venom in the comments section

That changed our game significantly. Or at least mine…I can’t speak for the others. I think Rob REALLY stuck to his guns and is to be commended for it. But as for me? Well…if I didn’t crave the approval of complete strangers for no good reason, I never would have gone into comedy. And here they were, 20, 0000 hits and more all streaming in to read the article, waiting to pounce on every bit of missed continuity. I felt tremendous pressure to do what I had done for YEARS in my stand up act…cave to the audience. Give them what they want, WORRY about what they want.

The Smackdown became strictly regimented, every Friday, hopefully before noon, we get the Smackdown up and Fark ready, submit it and wallow in abuse and adulation. The point, we thought, was to get people in with the Smackdown, then hopefully a handful of them would enjoy the site, and stick around for the stuff we REALLY wanted to do. ( It’s the same reason I do impressions in my act.) And to a certain extent, it worked. I think we have some regular readers who came over from Fark. And thanks for coming and sticking with us, and once again a huge thanks to Fark for the coveted greenlights. Unfortunately The Smackdown quickly became THE thing on the site, with all of the other little bits of wonderful weirdness falling to the wayside.

But this last go round, with the super team smack down something changed. We still got greenlights, but rather on the less traveled geek page. That was just fine by us, we are still grateful to get the nod at all..but even some of our most ardent defenders were starting to get bored. Telling us we were not even trying anymore. And to a certain extent, I think that was true.

For myself, anyway…I was trapped in a tight box of public opinion… having to really comb over who could do what to whom, and catch up on long lines of continuity, just to please an un-pleasable audience. My heart wasn’t in it … I just wasn’t having fun with it anymore, and it showed in the writing. Only when I said “Fuck it, screw continuity, screw everything else, I just want to have fun with this.” did I start enjoying it again. (See my entry in the X-men vs. Avengers finals)

As of right now, and for whatever reason, the finals of our latest tournament has not been greenlit, and after the initial disappointment I began to feel something like relief. Like I am free of this giant responsibility to please people I haven’t even met, and hopefully never will.

So ideally this means that The Correctness, or at least my part of it will take this opportunity to return to its roots. Just be a goofy little comedy website that occasionally comes up with gold, sometimes falls a tad short but almost always entertains on some level or another.

That said, it’s not the end of the smackdown, but I think we’ll stay away from comic books for a little while. And if the council of the wise at Fark deem us worthy of a link once again on something non tournament related, well that would be just fine too.

Nor does this mean you can no longer insult us, in an artful fashion. We kind of dig it. We’re weird like that. And as for that last insult contest, personally I think it’s a tie between spcMIKE and Iron Patriot.

So go to it you two…insult us like you’ve never insulted anyone before in the comment section…it might be the last competition you see on here for awhile.

Bob had spent most of his adult life trying to convince his friends, family and even total strangers that he was not an end table. By the time his 45th Birthday rolled around he was pretty sure he’d managed to convince them all of this irrefutable fact. Unfortunately his birthday party proved him wrong.

His cousin Ellen tried to hide underneath him when she thought it was supposed to be a surprise party.

When he unwrapped his gifts, he found that he had received 8 sets of coasters, 2 coffee table books, and a can of Endust.

He knew it was all for naught when they tried to cut the cake on his lap.

As he cried quietly to himself in a corner, his wife of 17 years absently tried to put her drink on his head. He snatched it away, downed it in a single gulp…and shuffled off to bed.

A Glossary of Terms that have yet to, but ought to come into everyday usage. Today’s Correctness Glossary term:

DEXTER : (DEXter) v. 1.) to harm, mutilate or kill someone who richly and deeply deserves it.

EXAMPLE: Did you hear about that guy who left his baby in the car to die while he was in the Casino? Someone ought to Dexter the shit out of that guy

Pretty straightforward I think. Go ahead and make your own examples below. Or let me know if the chick who plays his sister (and is his real life wife) is hot or not, because I can’t quite tell and I keep flip-flopping on the issue.

Oh, wait, just thought of another one…

“Sexist bloggers who treat women like objects ought to be Dextered.”

In our most recent poll, we decided to appeal to your desire for travel. Where DID you want to go?

Almost half of you showed your old school rock roots and demanded to go to Paradise City, while the older fans just wanted to go home already. Then it was the bridge and river crowd filling out the top half. Either we have no American fans, or those that are simply hate baseball.

The results follow

 Loading ...

Check out this week’s poll to that side over there, and vote your conscience!

Note (This is a repost of the original.)

Exciting news gamers! We have a sneak preview of the upcoming MTG Correctness expansion pack! Now you can create entire decks of Correctness to amaze and dazzle your friends with. Tournament play is about to be taken to a whole new level. And by that of course we mean these are not in the least bit legal in tournaments. Or actual games. But we have put in a call about the expansion to Wizards of the Coast, and we expect to hear from them any day now.

Well, not them personally but certainly their lawyers

So get your counter dice ready, your mountain dew at hand and turn Rush up on the Ipod fellow nerds, as we proudly present a few samples from Magic :The Gathering the Correctness Expansion

————————————————-
Comments (2)

NotVictoria said on 02-03-2010
NotVictoria

Tee-Hee! Love the Tiger woods one.

Tomass said on 03-03-2010
Tomass

Funny shit but a small point of geek error.

Re: Cthulhu – There is already a MTG game mechanic called “Madness”. Maybe “Insanity” is another option.

If you care there is an explanation of the “Madness” rule here

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/feature/7

Sorry I’m a geek I can’t help myself it needed to be said.

Part one of a series of articles in which the Correctness recasts some our favourite comic book heroines, and reclaims them from some performances that left…some room for improvement. This week, we tackle Superman’s REAL weakness, Ms. Lois Lane.

Who is Being Replaced? Kate Bosworth

Superman Returns was, I think we can all agree, a bit of a misfire. It had a number of problems (Superman lifting a kryptonite continent into the sky after being stabbed by kryptonite being a big one for me) but it had its share of good things too.(Plane sequence was awesome)Many internet pundits complained about Kate Bosworth’s Lois, said she was bland and possessed none of the fire Lois really needs. In a way she became, fairly or unfairly, a microcosm of everyone’s problem with the movie. Pretty, but ultimately empty and unmoving. Personally, I didn’t think she was horrible, but I do think she was miscast. So let’s see if we can do any better…

PLEASE NOTE: I will not be recasting Erica Durance because I do not give a shit about Smallville. There, I said it. The Justice League are not hunky douchebags. Superman 90210 can suck my balls.

HONORABLE MENTIONS:

Here’s a few people who probably could have done better with the part, but for one reason or another, didn’t quite make the Top 3

Grace Park

If they can cast Kingpin as an African American then I have no problem giving the part of Lois to Grace Park, who has tons of Geek Cred, and displayed plenty of sassy attitude during her run on Battlestar Galactica. She can pull off the action sequences and the romance sequences equally well and I think she’s a great choice for a fresh take on the character.

Jennifer Connolly

She might be a little sick of playing the female love interest for insanely strong beings, but she is a damned good actress and let’s face it, still rather breathtaking. She has the right look for either a period piece (see the Rocketeer) or more contemporary version. Some might argue she is a little old for a “reimagining”, but I think with a good Superman in the same age bracket, we’d have something pretty memorable on our hands.

Natalie Portman

Yes, yes, the nerds and their weird, sick Natalie Portman obsession, but dreadful Star Wars work aside, she can act, she’s smart, sexy, and I can completely buy her charging into deep shit to get the story. She might be a little on the petite side, but I think she makes up for it with pure sass. To be honest with you, I don’t think she would have made my list had it not been for the Natalie Raps thing on SNL. “I never said I was a role model.” That sounds like Lois to me.

The “If I Had A Time Machine Award” goes to…

Pheobe Cates circa 1983

Giggidy.

Giggidy.

Goo.

The downside of course is that a Superman of that era would likely be Matthew Broderick, or worse Arnold Schwartzenegger. On the other hand, I’m sure there would be lots of excuses to put Lois in a bikini. You take the good, you take the bad.

THE TOP THREE

#3 Anne Hathaway

Here she is, the only reason you rented Havoc. She’s been nominated for Oscars, showed us her depth (and a couple of other things) in Brokeback Mountain and Rachel Getting Married, and she has performed as Viola in Shakespeare in the Park in NYC. There is no doubt Ms. Hathaway has the chops, but she’s also got the right look, and Bride Wars aside, her career is white hot right now. She adds a touch of class to even the silliest movies she does, and many a drooling nerd would slap down 15 bucks to see her as Lois.

#2 Zooey Deschanell

I want you all to do me a favour. Go to your local bookstore and hunt around in the bargain bin for a copy of the Secret. Then, follow whatever it tells you about focusing your wishing power to make stuff happen. Then close your eyes and wish like a motherfucker for a stylized 1930′s Fleischer-esque Superman movie starring Jon Hamm and Zooey Deschanell, featuring a tricked out steampunk Brainiac as the villain.

WISH HARDER!!!!!

and my Number 1 Choice for a recast of Lois Lane

#1 Olivia Wilde

Is that, or is that not a face that would bring Superman to his knees? She plays a strong professional woman every week on House, and with that dark hair she almost LOOKS like something out of a Bruce Timm cartoon.
She’s like Megan Fox with 75% more brains and 100% less skank. I mean LOOK at her…

To my mind if she is hot enough to marry a Prince, she is certainly hot enough for Superman.

So, who did I miss? Am I way off? Let me know what you think below, and stay tuned next week when we tackle recasting Mary Jane Watson

File under: Awkward Usage, Modern language, “Literally”

Hello, Modern Language Users:

Um, hey, gosh guys, I’m not sure how to put this. You know when you say things like “That was literally the biggest meal ever”, or “That was literally off the hizzy”? You know what I’m talking about? Yeah, about that…

Yeah, um, I’m no Grammar Nazi, I mean, not anymore, and I certainly enjoy the flexibility of writing in this casual style. It’s just that I think what you think “literally” means isn’t what it means? Ya know?

If something is literal, it exists or occurs precisely as the phrase you use to describe the event or object. This is in opposition to something being “figurative” , and we (and by we, I mean, apes who can read the printed word) quite often use the word “literally” to explain the subtle irony of something having the attributes of being figurative (metaphorical, non-real), but having occurred precisely as the metaphorical device describes it. Now, I think some of you use “literally” in a hyperbolic way, so let me provide an example.

If my girlfriend left me- I’m sorry- If I had a girlfriend and she left me, I could say “So and so left me, and I fell to pieces, figuratively” to describe my distraught emotional state. However, if my girlfriend left me and notified me by planting a live grenade in my anus, with my dying breath I could gather the bloody ribbons of my violently redistributed internal organs and utter the phrase- again note the subtle irony here- “So and so left me, and I LITERALLY fell to pieces.”.

See how that works? Now, contextually, it seems a bit like when we say “literally” we are exaggerating the outcome, and the feeling of hyperbole carries over to how some of you charming-but-tediously-retarded folks use the word in other contexts. “Literally” is not used to emphasize the scale or importance of something, it is simply contextually linked to such events when used correctly. It seems to emphasize something because of the unlikelihood of an event which is metaphorical or figurative being played out in real life.

So, just to clarify, because I know some of you kids go a bit squinty when we talk language, here is an alternative example:

When you say “that was literally the biggest meal ever that I just ate”, what you mean is ‘That was figuratively the biggest meal ever”, or even more probably you mean “that was a very large meal”. However, if you just consumed LITERALLY the biggest meal ever (“Evar” for those of you who are LOLcats) the fact that you are alive and aren’t hospitalized from a burst stomach or, say, the crushing gravitational pull of the largest meal ever suggests to me that you did not mean “literally”. Oh, and backtracking a bit, I meant “probably” literally, not subjectively- like, there is a greater probability that you mean “That was a very large meal.”.

I recently heard someone say “this [party] is literally off the hizzy”.

There is so little meaning embedded in that arrangement of words that even Roland Barthes would be hard pressed to defend your inexplicable linguistic construct.

Do I even dare break this down? I do? Okay, I will.

“This [party]“: Fine. We understand that the party is the subject of your clause, well done. A verb should complete this. In fact, you didn’t even say the word “party”, but you implied it with gestures. You could have meant “this wonderful evening” or “this happenstance meeting of a doe-eyed brunette woman and you, Rob, only you” instead of “party”, but we basically get that you are referring to the events of the night in general.

“This [party] is“: Also fine, “is” is an intransitive verb. You are about to tell me in what state the “party” exists, or how it is to be. I might add here that we loosely understand that the “party” is inclusive the people, place and mood of the event, so however we describe the party next is referring to the sum of these things as if they were a single subject.

“This [party] is literally“: So far so good, whatever the party “literally” is, it had better not be a metaphor or conceit of any kind.

“This [party] is literally off the hizzy“. STOP. NO. HOLD THE FIGURATIVE PHONE. You have eradicated all meaning from your words. You might as well speak in gibberish. Let’s break this down again

“off the hizzy“: This is a slang adaptation of “off the hook”, as in “the phone is off the hook” as in “this event is of enough importance that the phone, so as not disturb our important event, has been taken off of it’s telephone cradle or “hook”.

As the mechanics say, “well, here’s your problem right here”:

“This [party] is literally off the hizzy“: You are telling me that this party, which, firstly, you never actually clarified was specifically what you were referring to because you didn’t say party, and secondly, which is a collection of people in a place enjoying festivities, has been removed, in its entirety, people, location, and all, from what I am to understand, only colloquially, is a large hook (or cradle) like a telephone has.

Not only have you used a slang phrase to describe the state of existence of the sum of the things that make up this party, but you have implied that it is somehow being transported atop some kind of giant telephone.

You. Don’t. Mean. Literally.

You could have just said “This party is off the hizzy.” and I would have understood this as a metaphorical construction. We’re all used to that sort of thing. “Our love is the ocean.” or “This is heaven.” are metaphors we understand. If you say “Our love is literally the ocean” that becomes uniquely inexplicable, and if you say “this is literally heaven” then you have shaken the last of my Judeo-Christian faith by exposing me to the outstanding shittiness of heaven on a day to day basis.

Now, I may not be an expert per se, and God knows a discussion of my extensive use of the parenthetical comma  could fill an entire essay, but I can read a dictionary, and I do know what “literally” means, and to quote Inigo Montoya, “I do not think that word means what you think it means.”.

Anyways, you guys, I hope that clears some things up, because I have literally had it up to here with your incorrect usage of the word “literally” and I am literally going to lose it, and I am literally going to kill you if you don’t stop it, because you are literally an amoebic shit stain if you can’t get this.

Fun bonus puzzle: Figure out what I actually meant in my last sentence!