I read the book a couple of years ago, but if I recall, I thought the movie was about the destructive nature of man and the dangers of religions fundamentalism while the book was about the dehumanizing nature of being in a cage and how quickly we can devolve into animals under the right conditions and the struggle to remain human in the face of inhumane treatment (the author was a POW).

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

I can see the POW aspect of it, I hadn't known that about the author! If I read it again, knowing that will give me a new way of seeing things.

If only smartphones were around in 1978 to record 10 year old me in grammar school having a deep profound philosophical discussion on this film with my classmates at lunch. This movie had such an impact on my young psyche that 20 years later I spent a weekend in Lake Powell Arizona where the spacecraft crash scene was shot. I'm 100% agaisnt book burning but the 2001 film remake should be incinerated and never mentioned again. Another great video Laura.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Oh cool! Yeah they had some cool shots filmed there. Definitely a movie that can spur a lot of interesting conversations.

@paulallenk4830

2 ай бұрын

@@WhytheBookWins If you have a few minutes Dr Zaius being interview on Turner Classic Movies is fun. kzread.info/dash/bejne/Zq6Gz8xyd7G2fZs.html

The Dr Zeus song from The Simpsons is based on Rock me Amadeus (Amadeus, Amadeus).

@55itsme

Ай бұрын

And it's such a catchy tune!

FWIW: I read the original novel MANY years ago. What has been a 'let down' for me is none of the movies I have seen -- the Tim Burton production being the most recent one -- really recreated the novel faithfully. Unfortunately, by now I suppose it would be pointless to make a faithful recreation of the novel. *EDIT→* I read the original novel DECADES AGO, so what I am about to say may be incorrect: In the novel, the original mission of 'Ulysses & Co.' was to go to the Alpha Centauri solar system, which is a little over 4 light years from Earth. At some point that mission was changed to go to Barnard's Star {or some other solar system} approximately 200 light years from Earth. In either case their spaceship accelerates to near the speed of light for much of the journey, which induces _time dilation._ {YES, _time dilation_ is a REAL THING.} By the time Ulysses returns to Earth with his wife and son, several centuries have passed since the time he departed Earth.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for commenting! You are right about the details of their travel.

@Allan_aka_RocKITEman

2 ай бұрын

@@WhytheBookWins>>> Thanks. The fact I remember ANY of that stuff after all these years is a minor miracle...🤭

Can you please do “Carrie” by Stephen King vs the movie that came out in 1976

Enjoy your channel. The best comparisons are where both are iconic. I’d love to see you do “To Kill a Mockingbird “.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

That's one I would like to cover as well! I think I keep putting it off because I have read the book and seen the movie multiple times so I keep choosing content I'm less familiar with.

Some bits and pieces about the 1968 Planet of The Apes film. After they crash land some very specific points were brought up. The ship's automatic controls were designed for the ship to land perfectly on solid ground. Which would make sense, if your crew was in hyper sleep. But somehow the ship splashed down in water perhaps hinting that the computer itself went mad (just guessing). All the astronauts were explorers, though it was never specified as to why they were sent into deep space. Landon didn't believe the time advancement theory as Taylor did, feeling they had only traveled a few months and Earth would have aged the same way. Taylor laughing at Landon for planting a small American flag felt ridiculous to Taylor who believed that Earth would have changed drastically after aging 2,000 years. Taylor is a seeker for something greater than mankind, his questions at the very beginning of the film about how humans treat one another. I had read the Canadian version of the book, known at the time as Monkey Planet as part of a school project. This was when the film came out. I was 15 years old and saw this in the theater so seeing the differences was really interesting. Loved your comparison video.

Man, you are awesome finding these! Never knew this was based on a book 😮 So hyped for the new movie coming out!

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Yeah I was surprised by this one too! It's thanks to someone's request that I knew about it!

Thank you for another great video! I too have fond memories of watching PoA marathons when I was a kid!

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Glad you liked the video 😀

Thanks for another great video! I had no idea this was a book and really enjoyed hearing your thoughts on both book and movie 😊

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Thanks! 🤗

Very enjoyable discussion. Thank you.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it! 😊

There is a comic based on Rod Serling's final draft before the rewrite called Planet of the Apes Visionaries. It has more connections to the book, but still has the same twist ending from the first film. It's very hard to get a physical copy so if you're interested get a digital copy.

Some of the sequels incorporate other elements of the book as well like the 4th shows humans using apes as servants

The only way to really appreciate to really Planet Of The Apes movies (and I'm not talking about the modern ones either) is to read the novel because the themes are very much similar to that of Orwell's Animal Farm. As for the Tim Burton film, whether you like it or not if you appreciate the novel then you'll appreciate film because it stuck to the spirit of the novel.

I think the 1968 film is the best adaption of a novel that involves major changes. Most of which improve the source material. The new twist, the production design of the apes civilization (clothes/architecture/guns) give it a much more fantastic SF look (and the bonus of Jerry Goldsmith's otherwordly score) that the book did not have, being set in present day. There is also a comic book adaption based on the original first draft screenplay by Rod Serling called "Planet of the Apes Visionaries". And I agree about the female chimps in POTA 2001. The makeup deemphazied their simian qualities to the point where they seemed half-human. And the eyebrows and lipstick just looked ridiculous.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'll have to check out that comic book version. And yeah, the female apes were so weird looking!

Love your vids.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

thanks 🤗

I remember liking the Franco version for the most part. Talk about art imitating life: The 1968 movie with amazing makeup vs the Wahlberg version 30 plus years later. A lot of good analogies in the original for sure.

Zira's attraction to Ulysse in the book didn't seem to be thought out very well. A lot of the book seems to play up the irony of the role-reversal, but an ape falling in love with a man? Preposterous! 😊

I saw the Tim Burton movie opening day in the theater, and I pretty much agree with your thoughts 💯%

about the man being brainwashed I think it's implied in the book that the apes did the same thing to him as in the movie (the scene in the lab with Cornelius)

@WhytheBookWins

Ай бұрын

Oohh, that would make sense. But then it's odd Ulysses in the book didn't make a bigger deal about realizing his friend had the procedure done?

The new Planet of the Apes series is SO SO SO GOOD!!!

I loved the book and the ending is awesome.

Love this movie series. The book im still lukewarm to. You know there’s a comic adaptation of the Rod Serling original script?

@WhytheBookWins

Ай бұрын

Agreed, I'm pretty lukewarm on the book. And yeah I heard about the comic! That would be cool to own.

I heard the Dr.Zaius Simpson's song in my head when I clicked on this video. Cheers!

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

it's so good 😆

POTA is one of my favorite books of all time. Also, I always liked how Escape from The Planet Of the Apes is basically the plot of the book, invert the humans for apes.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Oh cool! I need to go back and watch all of them!

I really recommand you watch the latest trilogy. Very good story, great acting and really great moral debate in the latest 2. Sure it has nothing to do with the book or the originall movies in therms of lore but it is a great addition

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

I'll have to check them out!

the new trilogy was so damn good! I highly recommend revisting them

You might have a point about eoruope being deacdes ahead in anmall rights considering as far back as the 40s and 30s a certain square stached man implemented some laws to treat animals better

The remake was okay, The original will always be the best one. (Imho). Do you think you may talk about The Secret Garden in the future

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Yeah agreed, the original is amazing! And I hadn't really thought of doing that one but I will look into it!

im so excited for this no clue it was based on a book i was like what

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Yeah this is another surprising one. Hope you liked the video! 🙂

I never knew Planet of the Apes was a book. I heard of the movie though.

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

Yeah I was surprised when I saw it was based on a book!

@Why the Book Wins (Chimpanzees, Gorillas, Orangutans, and Gibbons are not Monkeys)! 😵Most Primates fall into two categories: Great Apes and Monkeys. There are many differences between the two...But the easiest way to tell if a Primate is a Monkey or a Great Ape is by whether or not they have a TAIL. Chimpanzees, Gorillas, Orangutans, and Gibbons all do not have Tails - Making them Apes! Also, In Pierre Boulle's 1963 novel "La Planète des singes" the main protagonist name was "Ulysse Mérou". Not Taylor! 🤫

@WhytheBookWins

Ай бұрын

Yup, at the start of the video I say that his name was Ulysses in the book but that I would just refer to him as Taylor.

So a few things I did not like about this video is when you constantly call a monkey an ape and an ape a monkey, they are not the same, simple differentiator factors are monkeys are small and have tails while apes are big and do not have tails. It would be like saying that a tiger and a caracal are related just because they're superfamily mostly known as cats. Yes humans are apes and apes and monkeys are in the Hominoidea superfamily but monkeys and apes are different in family, subfamily, tribe and genus. The similarities end at superfamily but everything else is different same to a caracal and a tiger.

@WhytheBookWins

27 күн бұрын

thanks for sharing!

OG wasnt about animal rights it’s about racism and slavery

Wow your are really missing out not wanting to watch the new films. Not sure why you think it has nothing to do with the others, but it does greatly. It's literally filling in the gap of the 68 film. Of how the humans destroyed themselves and how the apes got the ability to take over. Because let's face it the book has nothing to do with the films. It's just the concept in which the movie story was made.

The Tim Burton movie is not connected to the original film. That movie isn't terrible but it isn't good either. Pretty forgettable. If you watch the rest of the films in the original series make sure you watch the unrated version for Conquest. The original ending for that movie is way better than the theatrical cut's ending. Check out the new films. They're so great.

@WhytheBookWins

Ай бұрын

yeah so many people are raving about the new trilogy! I need to watch them as well as catch up on the old ones again.

Clever fake out at the beginning, fooling the viewer into thinkng you're dismissing the original film rather than the Tim Burton!

@WhytheBookWins

18 күн бұрын

Lol I know it's misleading, but I hoped it would keep people watching...

@noneofyourbusiness4616

17 күн бұрын

@@WhytheBookWins It worked on me!

the book is bad and the film is a thousand times the book is poorly written it doesn't say anything in any case the film is a thousand times better

You need to research your source material before before making videos apes aren’t monkeys which you stated numerous times throughout the video terrible

@WhytheBookWins

2 ай бұрын

thanks for the feedback!

@KasumiKenshirou

2 ай бұрын

It looks like the word used in the French title can mean either "monkey" or "ape". (But I don't speak French so I could be mistaken.) And apparently the book was originally released in the UK with the title "Monkey Planet", then changed to match the movie once it came out. (The movie's title was taken from the US release of the novel.) I haven't read the book so I don't know what species the non-human characters are. The ones in the movies are definitely apes, though.

@kd6844

2 ай бұрын

Refer to them generally as “primates” then? Whatever

@silverphoenix4934

2 ай бұрын

La planete des singes (monkey's planet in french there's no word for ape). You could have been more tactful

@AS-ri1mb

Ай бұрын

YOU need to do your research. The book refers to them as monkeys multiple times. This may not be accurate, but that’s that.