I just finished watching this movie and enjoyed watching it, although some things didn't make sense, like horses and them being slower than the running apes in the final battle. I understood the ending, but all those explanations confused me. This is the ending as I see it. Leo goes back through the electromagnetic storm and somehow gets sent to Earth today, but with the difference that Thade has overthrown the human race and now the apes rule the Earth. How did Thade get there? Leo didn't kill him and I suppose that apes and humans left living there didn't kill him. So he had plenty of time to figure out how to escape it (although this seems highly unlikely to me, but whatever). Then he finds one of those pods that Leo came with that are still in the spaceship and learns to use them (they were made for an ape to use them anyway). So as Leo was the first of the two to go through the storm, he was the last, or in this case the second one to get out of it. I figured that's how it works since Pericles was the first, Leo the second, and Oberon the last, but they came in different times, with Oberon being the first one to land. Anyway, Thade comes some time before Leo, probably around 150 years ago (because of the Lincoln statue being redone) and manages to lead apes into victory like his ancestor. When Leo arrives there circa 150 years later, he finds himself in almost the same position as on the previous planet.
I'd like to hear opinions on this as well as some corrections about my interpretation, if there were any mistakes.
I just finished watching this movie and enjoyed watching it, although some things didn't make sense, like horses and them being slower than the running apes in the final battle.
Yeah, the horses bit is a bit unexplained. Maybe they had a stables on the Oberon that was edited out of the film before it got to the cinemas. Maybe there were to be space chariots. Maybe a brain fart moment. ;)
Leo didn't kill him and I suppose that apes and humans left living there didn't kill him. So he had plenty of time to figure out how to escape it (although this seems highly unlikely to me, but whatever).
There's always the chance that he had some followers back in the city who went and got him out. Maybe a coup or counter-revolution. Maybe the new peace and love crowd led by Ari felt sorry for Thade and let him out, with predictable consequences. But, him getting out isn't that hard to imagine.
Then he finds one of those pods that Leo came with that are still in the spaceship and learns to use them (they were made for an ape to use them anyway).
Well, it's possible that there were other pods on the Oberon. Mind you, Thade knew about Leo's pod that was under the water (he killed two apes to ensure it was kept a secret). People then say how did he get it out of the water, seeing that apes, as depicted in the film, are scared of water? Well, he could have had human slaves (or hired help) to do it for him. Still leaves how he fixed it and got it to fly, but we have to let that one go (worked fine in Escape from the Planet of the Apes).
The rest of your post is about right. Maybe an argument could be had about what time exactly Thade turned up on Earth, but it's all conjecture.
reply share
I would have to disagree with it working "fine" in Escape....lots more logic problems than in this flick.
Yeah, I probably should have elaborated more and used quote marks like you on that word. When I wrote that and in other threads where I have made a similar observation, I had in my mind that some people are quite fine with the "problems" in other Apes films, but when similar is done in this film, it's panned. So, in this instance, if getting a spaceship to work in Escape is OK with them, then why not in this film with Thade and the pod? Just seems inconsistent. Still, your challenge is correct and I should have explained myself a bit better.
That said, in Escape the main focus should really be in the story that deals with the 40th Century apes turning up in 20th Century Earth. The spaceship and getting it to fly is merely a plot device that helps the story along. If one focuses too much on such issues as getting the spaceship to fly, then one misses the wider point of the film, particularly as the film from the outset is meant to be taken as science fiction, with its liberties and all that's inherent with the genre. That's not to say that the audience should be expected to swallow too much of this, especially if it goes against the story's logic. Still, taken in the context of Escape's story, I don't think that the spaceship and how Milo got it out of the lake, fixed it and got it to fly should be that troubling, all things considered. That's what I meant by "fine", particularly in relation to Apes fans who are fine with it in Escape but have an issue with it here.
This isn't to say that one shouldn't point out these things, fine or not. Some fun can be had with such things and can keep us sad obsessives cases happy. ;) It's just that such trivial things shouldn't be used to damn a whole film, particularly science fiction films of an allegorical nature (not saying you are doing this, BTW). Anyway, Burton's film had much bigger issues that mere plot conveniences, but that's another story.
reply share
That said, in Escape the main focus should really be in the story that deals with the 40th Century apes turning up in 20th Century Earth. The spaceship and getting it to fly is merely a plot device that helps the story along. If one focuses too much on such issues as getting the spaceship to fly, then one misses the wider point of the film, particularly as the film from the outset is meant to be taken as science fiction, with its liberties and all that's inherent with the genre. That's not to say that the audience should be expected to swallow too much of this, especially if it goes against the story's logic. Still, taken in the context of Escape's story, I don't think that the spaceship and how Milo got it out of the lake, fixed it and got it to fly should be that troubling, all things considered. That's what I meant by "fine", particularly in relation to Apes fans who are fine with it in Escape but have an issue with it here.
yes..I agree. No film can stand up to too much scrutiny. It has lots of social comment that is still relevant today, more humor than the last one which audiences loved, even if the photography suffers from being a little non-cinematic compared to the 2 previous films. My main issue with the Milo stuff is that it's right in the begining where the film starts off from. If they had included the opening scene inside the Icarus cockpit that was filmed but never shown, I would have also nit-picked about seeing 3 chairs with the ape-o-naunts when there was only 2 in the original film. So I was deprived of that. ha ha ha.
This isn't to say that one shouldn't point out these things, fine or not. Some fun can be had with such things and can keep us sad obsessives cases happy. ;) It's just that such trivial things shouldn't be used to damn a whole film, particularly science fiction films of an allegorical nature (not saying you are doing this, BTW). Anyway, Burton's film had much bigger issues that mere plot conveniences, but that's another story.
Oh I agree. I don't mind healthy debates, it is fun and stimulating. I get turned off by threads that get personal and insulting. I have issues with Burton's film as well, but to be fair every film has its merits as well. Some people fail to see those and get too hot headed. Best to just lock the cell door on those. :) happy new year
A GOOD MAN ALWAYS KNOWS HIS LIMITATIONS!
reply share