This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Planet of the Apes (2001 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
Planet of the Apes (2001 film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The plot summary describes a "love triangle" between Wahlberg, Warren, and Bonham-Carter's characters, I think that is more speculation than something actually addressed in the movie. Similarly towards the end it says Estella Warren's character "loves" Wahlberg but I think that is also more speculation. It has been awhile since I've seen the movie so I could be wrong, but from what I remember there was at most just some subtle implication at attraction between Wahlberg and Warren and Wahlberg and Bonham-Carter, but not so strong as to call it a "love triangle" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.34.169 ( talk) 22:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
The film never addresses the existence of horses on an alien world. The space station carrying such animals seems unlikely, especially enough to form a viable breeding pool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.32.194 ( talk) 19:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it significant at all that in the original film, Charlton Heston (human) utters the line, "Take your hands off me, you damn dirty ape!", and in the 2001 remake, Michael Clarke Duncan (Ape) says, "Get your stinking paws off me, you damn dirty human!"? 92.20.25.100 ( talk) 21:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)Lance Tyrell
I'm deleting the attempts to explain away the ending of the film-- valiant effort, but it's pure speculation, trying to make sense out of nonsense. Noclevername 01:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
You realise this makes Thade the 'Missing Lincoln'.
Yes, I'll leave now. Please stop glaring at me. HalfShadow 02:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't nonsense, it has a very specific meaning. if you read the novel you'd know that. don't assume that just because you can't comprehend something, that it has no value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.151.167.253 ( talk) 14:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
"Lt. Colonel Alexander, at the beginning of the movie, clearly calls the super intelligent ape "Seamus" (pronounced "shay-mus," or "shame us"). This shows the corruption in ape society from the beginning (the crash of the Oberon) to modern (Thade's era) times. This is also shown with the name 'Calima' (the apes' name for the forbidden zone), later revealed to originate from a badly corroded sign on the Oberon: CAution, LIve aniMAls."
Is this really correct? Wasn't this chimp called CMOS and pronounced CMOS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.214.111 ( talk) 12:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Thou shaltst not worship general deaTh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.78.227.77 ( talk) 21:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The original comment about "Shame Us" is entirely wrong. The name is "Semos," which is an anagram of "Moses," since Semos led his people to freedom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.21.91 ( talk) 17:53, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Just a note: Peter Jackson's autobiography co-written by Brian Sibley has good details on his take on POTA, which would have been a sequel depicting the apes in the Renaissance. Ultimately Fox turned him down as he was more interested in King Kong and LOTR. Alientraveller ( talk) 09:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
That's great but I don't have that book. Wildroot ( talk) 16:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of November 15, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— Cirt ( talk) 07:05, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that you either integrate the ending criticisms into the previous paragraph or include examples of critics who criticised that aspect of the film. You do a good job of documenting that it was an issue by quoting two actors and the director, but I think you need to flesh out the opinions they're responding to first. Recognizance ( talk) 00:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I didn't see any mention of the fact that the ending does derive in part from the Pierre Boulle original. In his novel, the protagonist returns to Earth, many centuries after he left it (time dilation, you know) and finds apes in positions of authority, and we also realize that the characters in the framing story are apes. WHPratt ( talk) 13:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
No mention of the legal media kerfuffle between this production and Kevin Smith regarding Ape-Lincoln?
60.240.41.159 (
talk) 09:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to completely fix it, so I'll just note it here
The entire plot summary is wrong, and it looks like it was written by a middleschool-aged child at best. The plot is totally out of order and meshes scenes that were completely seperate in the film. Needs a rewrite badly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.121.165 ( talk) 03:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Ari decides to buy Leo and a female slave named Daena (Estella Warren) to have them work as servants in the house of her father, Senator Sandar (Charlton Heston) , her brother General Thade (Tim Roth), a Chimpanzee eager to rule the world, and Limbo (Paul Giamatti), an Orangutan.
Okay, first, her father, Senator Sandar is not the character played by Heston. Thade is not her brother, but is the son of Heston's actual character. Thade and Limbo do not live in Senator Sandar's household. Even other parts of the article show this stuff is wrong. 76.226.128.97 ( talk) 22:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
The section on the characters looks like it was written by a child. Can someone fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.101.109 ( talk) 23:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
CALIMA May be a link to the the islamic idea of KALIMAH? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.73.121.59 ( talk) 10:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, this was a big enough deal for someone to revert, but I'll argue for it here: I changed the language surrounding the "Lincoln" Memorial to make it less deterministic based on the fact that while the edifice _looks_ like the Lincoln Memorial, it clearly isn't, nor can it be since Lincoln isn't the person memorialized nor does it appear humans have ever had a parallel timeline in which Lincoln was the person/being memorialized. Unless Thade has been renamed "Lincoln," it just isn't the Lincoln Memorial. Ommnomnomgulp ( talk) 23:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
At the risk of beating a dead horse, I'm going to reopen what appears to have been a rather intense discussion previously between Ommnomnomgulp ( talk · contribs) and SonOfThornhill ( talk · contribs). As it stands now, the latter user reverted a recent change I made in reference to the Lincoln Memorial issue. Let me see if I can clarify why I think this wording isn't desirable.
The two wordings that I'm bringing to dispute are the following:
Wording #1 implies that what was once the Lincoln Memorial has turned into a monument in honor of General Thade. At worst this sounds like Leo saw the Lincoln Memorial, and then it changed into a monument for General Thade. However, I think this isn't what was intended. Instead, the intended meaning is based on some assumptions about the nature of how the alternate reality came about—i.e., a replaced timeline instead of an alternate universe. I'm pretty sure that it's not possible to determine which was meant in the movie.
Wording #2 presents the scene from the viewer's perspective. Leo's computer shows him approaching Washington, D.C. He loses control of his craft and crash lands, skimming across what appears to be the reflecting pool, and coming to a halt on what appears to be the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. He looks up and sees that instead of a statue of Lincoln, there's a statue of General Thade, along with text mentioning General Thade's name. The wording in #2 makes this clear: all the clues lead the viewer to expect the Lincoln Memorial, but instead it turns out to be a monument for General Thade.
SonOfThornhill ( talk · contribs) suggested in his comment upon reversion of my edit that wording #1 was agreed on by the community. I'm in no way committed to wording #2—in fact, I can think of a number of other ways to phrase something clearer than #1—but I'm surprised that more people weren't opposed to wording #1.
So I'm asking for this issue to be reopened. I'm assuming there's more depth of discussion somewhere besides that between Ommnomnomgulp ( talk · contribs) and SonOfThornhill ( talk · contribs), which seems to have been more a war of personalities than discussion about what the two sentences imply to readers. — Firespeaker ( talk) 03:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The scene in question happens to be available currently on youtube, if needed for the discussion. — Firespeaker ( talk) 03:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
SonOfThornhill (
talk ·
contribs) says "The other wordings suggest that it is somehow an alternate earth or Washington DC. That is no where evident in the film or script." I assume this means that there's no evidence that it's an alternate Earth/DC, and not evidence of it being Earth or Washington, D.C. to start with, as the readout on Leo's screen gives evidence to these facts. In this case, the evidence that it's not the primary timeline/universe/reality's Earth is the very fact that it's a memorial to General Thade and not to Abraham Lincoln. But I believe I must be misunderstanding this argument somehow. I really hope the dispute resolution people can figure out our various perspectives at the same time and come up with a compromise. —
Firespeaker (
talk) 00:35, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't see what's wrong with the original wording, but if we must change, I think "He looks up at what appears to be the Lincoln Memorial only to find a monument of General Thade." It certainly does "appear to be" the Lincoln Memorial, and that's the entire point (such as it is) of the reference.-- Cúchullain t/ c 14:30, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
User:Ommnomnomgulp, User:SonOfThornhill: This issue has been opened for moderated discussion. I'm not sure if anyone else is welcome to contribute or not. User:Robert McClenon, could you clarify this for the benefit of others who have become involved? — Firespeaker ( talk) 07:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
The following statement currently appears in the plot summary:
General Thade and Colonel Attar march ape warriors in pursuit of the humans, gunning Daena down when she separates from the group, in a vain attempt to distract the army.
I'm not sure what scene this is referring to, and can't seem to place it in the movie. Specifically, Daena survives through the whole movie (see mention of her in the last paragraph). Also, there is only one scene in the whole film in which any ape discharges a firearm (General Thade at the end), and it doesn't result in any casualties.
I would normally remove "gunning ... army" from the page, but there seem to be some pretty strong-minded guardians of this particular page, and I don't want to get into an edit war. It's also possible that I missed something in the movie, and I welcome demonstrations of this. — Firespeaker ( talk) 20:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
When is mention made in the movie (or script?) of the planet being called Ashlar? I realise this name is part of the franchise, but was it mentioned in this particular film? — Firespeaker ( talk) 20:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Which of the following should be the last sentence of the article clarification needed?
A. He looks up to see a statue of General Thade in what otherwise appears to be the Lincoln Memorial.
B. He looks up at the Lincoln Memorial, only to find a monument to General Thade
C. Leo crashes in front of what appears to be the Lincoln Memorial, only to find a monument honoring General Thade.
Express your position with a short reason in the Survey. You may propose another last sentence. Do not engage in back-and-forth discussion in the Survey. That is what the Threaded Discussion is for. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
D. He looks up at what appears to be the Lincoln Memorial, only to find a monument to General Thade. Scribolt ( talk) 08:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
E. In place of the Lincoln Memorial, there's a monument dedicated to General Thade. (Per Threaded discussion.) SonOfThornhill ( talk) 12:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
F. The spaceship skids to the front of the Lincoln Memorial…except it isn’t the Lincoln Memorial. It is a monument to General Thade. (Also, per threaded discussion.) SonOfThornhill ( talk) 12:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
B, which is the current wording. The words "appears to be" draw a conclusion that the structure is not and never was the Lincoln Memorial which is no where evident in the film. MOS:PLOT states, 'Plot summaries cannot engage in interpretation and should only present an obvious recap of the work'. Wording B is the only one that doesn't violate that. It is the most neutral wording while both A and C do by inserting the phrase "appears to be" drawing the conclusion it never was the Lincoln Memorial but just looks like it which is an interpretation. Sources support wording B [8] [9] [10] [11] , including the script [12]. There are no sources that support the interpretation that wordings A and C engage in. Anyone unfamiliar with the scene can view it on YouTube ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ZJ0F8Ik9E&t=1s). It is clear that Leo has returned to Earth and lands in Washington DC, he is not on an alternate Earth or Washington which is what wordings A and C infer. Whether the structure that honors Thade was once the Lincoln Memorial or not is unknown. Wording B remains neutral on this, referring to the structure as the Lincoln Memorial only as a point of reference for the audience, while A and C draw a conclusion that it is not and never was the Lincoln Memorial which is based only a personal interpretation not on what is shown in the film. SonOfThornhill ( talk) 12:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I am one of the original editors involved in this discussion (if I'm not meant to present my opinion here again, I'll be happy to delete it). I most prefer C, but A is okay too. The wording "looks up at the Lincoln Memorial" in B implies that the structure must be the Lincoln Memorial, even though it's then revealed that it is not [any longer / in that universe / whatever], so the B reading includes a contradiction. Either of the phrasings with "appears to be" (A and C) would be better, since they do not speak to whether it is the Lincoln Memorial or not, used to be or not, or is in another universe or not (or whatever)—it only speaks to how it initially appears to Leo (and the audience). Since it is unknown whether the structure that honours Thade was once the Lincoln Memorial or not, we can only say that it appears to be, not that it is. Wording A and C remain neutral on this, referring only to the appearance of the structure as similar to the Lincoln Memorial, while B draws a conclusion that it is actually the [unaltered] Lincoln Memorial in some way (e.g., if Leo were hallucinating), which was not shown in the film and is only one of many possible interpretations. Since any wording which refers simply to "the Lincoln Memorial" (as opposed to equating it only on the grounds of appearance) engages in extensive interpretation beyond what's there in the film, reading B should only receive attention as a last resort. — Firespeaker ( talk) 03:16, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Choices F or B are the best. 149.39.250.11 ( talk) 19:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I responded above that I support C. I understand that SonOfThornhill feels strongly that language like "appears to be" is an explicit statement that this is not the Lincoln Memorial and therefore is an "interpretation" in violation of MOS:PLOT. I disagree that this is the case. "Appears to be" is inclusive of all possible scenarios as to whether or not the structure was ever the Lincoln Memorial. I reiterate, if it in fact is or was the Lincoln Memorial, saying that it "appears to be" the Lincoln Memorial is accurate, rather than contradictory. Saying that it "appears to be" the Lincoln Memorial does not imply that it "is not and never was" the Lincoln Memorial, nor do I believe a typical speaker of the English language would infer that specific interpretation by reading it, and I definitely do not believe that such a phrasing itself consists of such an interpretation. I believe that the phrasing "appears to be" the Lincoln Memorial is consistent with SonOfThornhill's own stipulation that "Whether the structure that honors Thade was once the Lincoln Memorial or not is unknown." In addition, I found sources that specifically state that the structure is not, or is not necessarily, the Lincoln Memorial. 1) "In place of the Lincoln Memorial, there's a monument dedicated to [Thade]" [13] and 2) "The spaceship skids to the front of the Lincoln Memorial…except it isn’t the Lincoln Memorial!" [14]. The second source also asks, "Did Davidson travel into a parallel universe even though parallel universes are never mentioned in the movie?", thus admitting a possibility that SonOfThornhill stated should be excluded by any wording. -- DavidK93 ( talk) 04:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Apart from defending C as valid, I prefer C over B because, as Firespeaker indicated, B contains a counterfactual claim that the monument to Thade is the Lincoln Memorial. I prefer C over A because, in my opinion, A's phrasing that the structure "otherwise appears" to be the Lincoln Memorial leans against its ever having been the Lincoln Memorial, while C is more neutral. But in actuality, I find all three choices to be acceptable; at least B's reference to the Lincoln Memorial is in the context of Davidson's perception, and none of these choices includes the more definitive language that has previously been suggested or even present in the article, that the Lincoln Memorial "is now" a monument to Thade. -- DavidK93 ( talk) 04:22, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
And, yes, a third, separate thread. It should be noted that the wording of the RfC itself contains ambiguities. It asks us to consider "the last sentence of the article." But the last sentence of the article's Plot section is "A swarm of police officers, firefighters, and news reporters descend on Leo, all of whom are apes.", which isn't under consideration. Rather, choice B is currently the second-to-last sentence, A would replace it, and choice C would replace it and the sentence before it. None affect the last sentence, after current B. -- DavidK93 ( talk) 04:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I feel it is necessary to mention that this movie lacked the key features Burton's other movies are best known for: goth and creepiness. These sources may be used to expand the article with the info: [15], [16], [17]. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 10:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
"TRAINERS need to get the chimps early, because after the age of 8 or so, the animals are too strong to be used safely in showbiz. But chimps can live to be 60 years old. And it costs $10,000 a year to feed and care for a chimp. There’s an overpopulation of captive chimps and a dearth of sanctuaries for the primates. According to PETA, too many former screen stars end up in squalor in subpar retirement spots. They point to Chubbs, who played a cadet trainee in Tim Burton’s 2001 film “Planet of the Apes” and ended up living amid garbage, maggots and feces at a roadside attraction in Amarillo, Texas." -- https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-aug-27-et-brief27-story.html -- TRS ( talk) 01:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Planet of the Apes (2001 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
Planet of the Apes (2001 film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The plot summary describes a "love triangle" between Wahlberg, Warren, and Bonham-Carter's characters, I think that is more speculation than something actually addressed in the movie. Similarly towards the end it says Estella Warren's character "loves" Wahlberg but I think that is also more speculation. It has been awhile since I've seen the movie so I could be wrong, but from what I remember there was at most just some subtle implication at attraction between Wahlberg and Warren and Wahlberg and Bonham-Carter, but not so strong as to call it a "love triangle" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.34.169 ( talk) 22:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
The film never addresses the existence of horses on an alien world. The space station carrying such animals seems unlikely, especially enough to form a viable breeding pool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.32.194 ( talk) 19:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it significant at all that in the original film, Charlton Heston (human) utters the line, "Take your hands off me, you damn dirty ape!", and in the 2001 remake, Michael Clarke Duncan (Ape) says, "Get your stinking paws off me, you damn dirty human!"? 92.20.25.100 ( talk) 21:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)Lance Tyrell
I'm deleting the attempts to explain away the ending of the film-- valiant effort, but it's pure speculation, trying to make sense out of nonsense. Noclevername 01:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
You realise this makes Thade the 'Missing Lincoln'.
Yes, I'll leave now. Please stop glaring at me. HalfShadow 02:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't nonsense, it has a very specific meaning. if you read the novel you'd know that. don't assume that just because you can't comprehend something, that it has no value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.151.167.253 ( talk) 14:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
"Lt. Colonel Alexander, at the beginning of the movie, clearly calls the super intelligent ape "Seamus" (pronounced "shay-mus," or "shame us"). This shows the corruption in ape society from the beginning (the crash of the Oberon) to modern (Thade's era) times. This is also shown with the name 'Calima' (the apes' name for the forbidden zone), later revealed to originate from a badly corroded sign on the Oberon: CAution, LIve aniMAls."
Is this really correct? Wasn't this chimp called CMOS and pronounced CMOS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.214.111 ( talk) 12:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Thou shaltst not worship general deaTh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.78.227.77 ( talk) 21:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The original comment about "Shame Us" is entirely wrong. The name is "Semos," which is an anagram of "Moses," since Semos led his people to freedom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.21.91 ( talk) 17:53, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Just a note: Peter Jackson's autobiography co-written by Brian Sibley has good details on his take on POTA, which would have been a sequel depicting the apes in the Renaissance. Ultimately Fox turned him down as he was more interested in King Kong and LOTR. Alientraveller ( talk) 09:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
That's great but I don't have that book. Wildroot ( talk) 16:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of November 15, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— Cirt ( talk) 07:05, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that you either integrate the ending criticisms into the previous paragraph or include examples of critics who criticised that aspect of the film. You do a good job of documenting that it was an issue by quoting two actors and the director, but I think you need to flesh out the opinions they're responding to first. Recognizance ( talk) 00:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I didn't see any mention of the fact that the ending does derive in part from the Pierre Boulle original. In his novel, the protagonist returns to Earth, many centuries after he left it (time dilation, you know) and finds apes in positions of authority, and we also realize that the characters in the framing story are apes. WHPratt ( talk) 13:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
No mention of the legal media kerfuffle between this production and Kevin Smith regarding Ape-Lincoln?
60.240.41.159 (
talk) 09:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to completely fix it, so I'll just note it here
The entire plot summary is wrong, and it looks like it was written by a middleschool-aged child at best. The plot is totally out of order and meshes scenes that were completely seperate in the film. Needs a rewrite badly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.121.165 ( talk) 03:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Ari decides to buy Leo and a female slave named Daena (Estella Warren) to have them work as servants in the house of her father, Senator Sandar (Charlton Heston) , her brother General Thade (Tim Roth), a Chimpanzee eager to rule the world, and Limbo (Paul Giamatti), an Orangutan.
Okay, first, her father, Senator Sandar is not the character played by Heston. Thade is not her brother, but is the son of Heston's actual character. Thade and Limbo do not live in Senator Sandar's household. Even other parts of the article show this stuff is wrong. 76.226.128.97 ( talk) 22:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
The section on the characters looks like it was written by a child. Can someone fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.101.109 ( talk) 23:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
CALIMA May be a link to the the islamic idea of KALIMAH? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.73.121.59 ( talk) 10:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, this was a big enough deal for someone to revert, but I'll argue for it here: I changed the language surrounding the "Lincoln" Memorial to make it less deterministic based on the fact that while the edifice _looks_ like the Lincoln Memorial, it clearly isn't, nor can it be since Lincoln isn't the person memorialized nor does it appear humans have ever had a parallel timeline in which Lincoln was the person/being memorialized. Unless Thade has been renamed "Lincoln," it just isn't the Lincoln Memorial. Ommnomnomgulp ( talk) 23:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
At the risk of beating a dead horse, I'm going to reopen what appears to have been a rather intense discussion previously between Ommnomnomgulp ( talk · contribs) and SonOfThornhill ( talk · contribs). As it stands now, the latter user reverted a recent change I made in reference to the Lincoln Memorial issue. Let me see if I can clarify why I think this wording isn't desirable.
The two wordings that I'm bringing to dispute are the following:
Wording #1 implies that what was once the Lincoln Memorial has turned into a monument in honor of General Thade. At worst this sounds like Leo saw the Lincoln Memorial, and then it changed into a monument for General Thade. However, I think this isn't what was intended. Instead, the intended meaning is based on some assumptions about the nature of how the alternate reality came about—i.e., a replaced timeline instead of an alternate universe. I'm pretty sure that it's not possible to determine which was meant in the movie.
Wording #2 presents the scene from the viewer's perspective. Leo's computer shows him approaching Washington, D.C. He loses control of his craft and crash lands, skimming across what appears to be the reflecting pool, and coming to a halt on what appears to be the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. He looks up and sees that instead of a statue of Lincoln, there's a statue of General Thade, along with text mentioning General Thade's name. The wording in #2 makes this clear: all the clues lead the viewer to expect the Lincoln Memorial, but instead it turns out to be a monument for General Thade.
SonOfThornhill ( talk · contribs) suggested in his comment upon reversion of my edit that wording #1 was agreed on by the community. I'm in no way committed to wording #2—in fact, I can think of a number of other ways to phrase something clearer than #1—but I'm surprised that more people weren't opposed to wording #1.
So I'm asking for this issue to be reopened. I'm assuming there's more depth of discussion somewhere besides that between Ommnomnomgulp ( talk · contribs) and SonOfThornhill ( talk · contribs), which seems to have been more a war of personalities than discussion about what the two sentences imply to readers. — Firespeaker ( talk) 03:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The scene in question happens to be available currently on youtube, if needed for the discussion. — Firespeaker ( talk) 03:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
SonOfThornhill (
talk ·
contribs) says "The other wordings suggest that it is somehow an alternate earth or Washington DC. That is no where evident in the film or script." I assume this means that there's no evidence that it's an alternate Earth/DC, and not evidence of it being Earth or Washington, D.C. to start with, as the readout on Leo's screen gives evidence to these facts. In this case, the evidence that it's not the primary timeline/universe/reality's Earth is the very fact that it's a memorial to General Thade and not to Abraham Lincoln. But I believe I must be misunderstanding this argument somehow. I really hope the dispute resolution people can figure out our various perspectives at the same time and come up with a compromise. —
Firespeaker (
talk) 00:35, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't see what's wrong with the original wording, but if we must change, I think "He looks up at what appears to be the Lincoln Memorial only to find a monument of General Thade." It certainly does "appear to be" the Lincoln Memorial, and that's the entire point (such as it is) of the reference.-- Cúchullain t/ c 14:30, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
User:Ommnomnomgulp, User:SonOfThornhill: This issue has been opened for moderated discussion. I'm not sure if anyone else is welcome to contribute or not. User:Robert McClenon, could you clarify this for the benefit of others who have become involved? — Firespeaker ( talk) 07:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
The following statement currently appears in the plot summary:
General Thade and Colonel Attar march ape warriors in pursuit of the humans, gunning Daena down when she separates from the group, in a vain attempt to distract the army.
I'm not sure what scene this is referring to, and can't seem to place it in the movie. Specifically, Daena survives through the whole movie (see mention of her in the last paragraph). Also, there is only one scene in the whole film in which any ape discharges a firearm (General Thade at the end), and it doesn't result in any casualties.
I would normally remove "gunning ... army" from the page, but there seem to be some pretty strong-minded guardians of this particular page, and I don't want to get into an edit war. It's also possible that I missed something in the movie, and I welcome demonstrations of this. — Firespeaker ( talk) 20:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
When is mention made in the movie (or script?) of the planet being called Ashlar? I realise this name is part of the franchise, but was it mentioned in this particular film? — Firespeaker ( talk) 20:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Which of the following should be the last sentence of the article clarification needed?
A. He looks up to see a statue of General Thade in what otherwise appears to be the Lincoln Memorial.
B. He looks up at the Lincoln Memorial, only to find a monument to General Thade
C. Leo crashes in front of what appears to be the Lincoln Memorial, only to find a monument honoring General Thade.
Express your position with a short reason in the Survey. You may propose another last sentence. Do not engage in back-and-forth discussion in the Survey. That is what the Threaded Discussion is for. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
D. He looks up at what appears to be the Lincoln Memorial, only to find a monument to General Thade. Scribolt ( talk) 08:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
E. In place of the Lincoln Memorial, there's a monument dedicated to General Thade. (Per Threaded discussion.) SonOfThornhill ( talk) 12:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
F. The spaceship skids to the front of the Lincoln Memorial…except it isn’t the Lincoln Memorial. It is a monument to General Thade. (Also, per threaded discussion.) SonOfThornhill ( talk) 12:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
B, which is the current wording. The words "appears to be" draw a conclusion that the structure is not and never was the Lincoln Memorial which is no where evident in the film. MOS:PLOT states, 'Plot summaries cannot engage in interpretation and should only present an obvious recap of the work'. Wording B is the only one that doesn't violate that. It is the most neutral wording while both A and C do by inserting the phrase "appears to be" drawing the conclusion it never was the Lincoln Memorial but just looks like it which is an interpretation. Sources support wording B [8] [9] [10] [11] , including the script [12]. There are no sources that support the interpretation that wordings A and C engage in. Anyone unfamiliar with the scene can view it on YouTube ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ZJ0F8Ik9E&t=1s). It is clear that Leo has returned to Earth and lands in Washington DC, he is not on an alternate Earth or Washington which is what wordings A and C infer. Whether the structure that honors Thade was once the Lincoln Memorial or not is unknown. Wording B remains neutral on this, referring to the structure as the Lincoln Memorial only as a point of reference for the audience, while A and C draw a conclusion that it is not and never was the Lincoln Memorial which is based only a personal interpretation not on what is shown in the film. SonOfThornhill ( talk) 12:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I am one of the original editors involved in this discussion (if I'm not meant to present my opinion here again, I'll be happy to delete it). I most prefer C, but A is okay too. The wording "looks up at the Lincoln Memorial" in B implies that the structure must be the Lincoln Memorial, even though it's then revealed that it is not [any longer / in that universe / whatever], so the B reading includes a contradiction. Either of the phrasings with "appears to be" (A and C) would be better, since they do not speak to whether it is the Lincoln Memorial or not, used to be or not, or is in another universe or not (or whatever)—it only speaks to how it initially appears to Leo (and the audience). Since it is unknown whether the structure that honours Thade was once the Lincoln Memorial or not, we can only say that it appears to be, not that it is. Wording A and C remain neutral on this, referring only to the appearance of the structure as similar to the Lincoln Memorial, while B draws a conclusion that it is actually the [unaltered] Lincoln Memorial in some way (e.g., if Leo were hallucinating), which was not shown in the film and is only one of many possible interpretations. Since any wording which refers simply to "the Lincoln Memorial" (as opposed to equating it only on the grounds of appearance) engages in extensive interpretation beyond what's there in the film, reading B should only receive attention as a last resort. — Firespeaker ( talk) 03:16, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Choices F or B are the best. 149.39.250.11 ( talk) 19:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I responded above that I support C. I understand that SonOfThornhill feels strongly that language like "appears to be" is an explicit statement that this is not the Lincoln Memorial and therefore is an "interpretation" in violation of MOS:PLOT. I disagree that this is the case. "Appears to be" is inclusive of all possible scenarios as to whether or not the structure was ever the Lincoln Memorial. I reiterate, if it in fact is or was the Lincoln Memorial, saying that it "appears to be" the Lincoln Memorial is accurate, rather than contradictory. Saying that it "appears to be" the Lincoln Memorial does not imply that it "is not and never was" the Lincoln Memorial, nor do I believe a typical speaker of the English language would infer that specific interpretation by reading it, and I definitely do not believe that such a phrasing itself consists of such an interpretation. I believe that the phrasing "appears to be" the Lincoln Memorial is consistent with SonOfThornhill's own stipulation that "Whether the structure that honors Thade was once the Lincoln Memorial or not is unknown." In addition, I found sources that specifically state that the structure is not, or is not necessarily, the Lincoln Memorial. 1) "In place of the Lincoln Memorial, there's a monument dedicated to [Thade]" [13] and 2) "The spaceship skids to the front of the Lincoln Memorial…except it isn’t the Lincoln Memorial!" [14]. The second source also asks, "Did Davidson travel into a parallel universe even though parallel universes are never mentioned in the movie?", thus admitting a possibility that SonOfThornhill stated should be excluded by any wording. -- DavidK93 ( talk) 04:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Apart from defending C as valid, I prefer C over B because, as Firespeaker indicated, B contains a counterfactual claim that the monument to Thade is the Lincoln Memorial. I prefer C over A because, in my opinion, A's phrasing that the structure "otherwise appears" to be the Lincoln Memorial leans against its ever having been the Lincoln Memorial, while C is more neutral. But in actuality, I find all three choices to be acceptable; at least B's reference to the Lincoln Memorial is in the context of Davidson's perception, and none of these choices includes the more definitive language that has previously been suggested or even present in the article, that the Lincoln Memorial "is now" a monument to Thade. -- DavidK93 ( talk) 04:22, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
And, yes, a third, separate thread. It should be noted that the wording of the RfC itself contains ambiguities. It asks us to consider "the last sentence of the article." But the last sentence of the article's Plot section is "A swarm of police officers, firefighters, and news reporters descend on Leo, all of whom are apes.", which isn't under consideration. Rather, choice B is currently the second-to-last sentence, A would replace it, and choice C would replace it and the sentence before it. None affect the last sentence, after current B. -- DavidK93 ( talk) 04:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I feel it is necessary to mention that this movie lacked the key features Burton's other movies are best known for: goth and creepiness. These sources may be used to expand the article with the info: [15], [16], [17]. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 10:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
"TRAINERS need to get the chimps early, because after the age of 8 or so, the animals are too strong to be used safely in showbiz. But chimps can live to be 60 years old. And it costs $10,000 a year to feed and care for a chimp. There’s an overpopulation of captive chimps and a dearth of sanctuaries for the primates. According to PETA, too many former screen stars end up in squalor in subpar retirement spots. They point to Chubbs, who played a cadet trainee in Tim Burton’s 2001 film “Planet of the Apes” and ended up living amid garbage, maggots and feces at a roadside attraction in Amarillo, Texas." -- https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-aug-27-et-brief27-story.html -- TRS ( talk) 01:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)