How did New York become a desert?
-
haristas — 11 years ago(July 13, 2014 08:24 AM)
My contention is simply that an all out nuclear holocaust and what I mean is if every ballistic nuclear missile was fired and exploded all over the world would not be enough to change the climate and topography of the North American continent in a mere two thousand years as seen in the original 1968 film. The destruction of the moon by an asteroid strike and a resulting meteor bombardment of the world's surface would more probably do it, but I doubt much higher life forms, such as apes, humans and horses, would survive such a catastrophe. Plant and ocean life would be pretty stressed too! On the other hand, a nuclear holocaust that leaves apes, humans and horses (and other life forms) still alive, but changes the northeast of the US into the southwestern US desert, is rather hard to believe too. As a kid back in the sixties, I was able to suspend my disbelief, but now as a fifty-five year old, it's a bit of a strain. The filmmakers of these new movies should try to come up with a more plausible scenario. I wonder if they will?
-
nick_r_m — 11 years ago(July 15, 2014 08:19 AM)
Are you kidding?
Even a volcano erupting on the other side of the world can have noticeable affects on climate. I dont know how you can come to the conclusion that every nuke in the world wouldnt have that affect on the climate/topography. Its simply ludicrous. -
haristas — 11 years ago(July 16, 2014 07:51 AM)
What's ludicrous is a nuclear holocaust creating the type of topography we see in the original movie where it's supposed to be the American northeast. It was shot in northern Arizona in the US southwest where the topography of that land took millions of years of erosion to create. PLANET OF THE APES is set a mere two thousand years in the future.
No, I'm not kidding. Get educated. -
NeedysBoy — 11 years ago(July 16, 2014 09:01 AM)
haristas writes: "What's ludicrous is a nuclear holocaust creating the type of topography we see"
You may be thinking too literally.
The point is humans destroyed their civilization and altered the environment.
It's not history it's a movie, a work of art.
"Maybe it's another dimension. Or, you know, just really deep." Needy -
NeedysBoy — 11 years ago(July 18, 2014 09:28 AM)
haristas writes: "Yes, I am thinking, literally."
Wait a minute!
I don't think that's a good idea. A film is a work of art, and art often has significance beyond the literal.
I hate to be obvious, but I guess this has to be said: the desert represents desolation. In the film, we find out that it represents the lost civilization beneath it. The exact scientific details don't matter as much as what the desert represents.
"Maybe it's another dimension. Or, you know, just really deep." Needy -
Humphrey_Fish — 11 years ago(July 19, 2014 02:10 AM)
The destruction of the moon by an asteroid strike
The Moon could not be destroyed by an asteroid strike. The nuclear war makes as much sense as that.
Quien es mas macho?Benedict CumberbatchORicardo Montalban -
Dragonsouls — 11 years ago(July 19, 2014 08:47 PM)
It was nuked by humans. This is why the forbidden zone was closed off to apes. The human overseers that lived underground still had old day weapons and no ape wanted part of it for the sake of their civilization. Like Zaus predicted, man is dangerous because of technology and in the end a human nuked the world yet again.
-
Fletcherj119 — 11 years ago(July 20, 2014 05:53 AM)
The apes don't know about the mutants. The reason for the Forbidden Zone is to prevent any apes from discovering the ruins of NYC. If it were known that man once had their own civilization, it would invalidate what was written in the sacred scrolls.
-
BobbyDupea — 11 years ago(November 20, 2014 08:47 AM)
It doesn't matter what we know NOW about how nuclear war would change the landscape or not change the landscape. In the movie, it is literally true that Taylor knew immediately when he saw what he saw at the end that humans had destroyed the landscape (and human civilization) through nuclear war. The Forbidden Zone was off limits primarily because it was radioactive, not to keep apes from discoving that humans had a more advanced civilization earlier. That's why the Zone covered a wide area - which the movie makes clear. It covered an area much larger than the area where the object Taylor saw at the end was located.
Dr. Zadius' statements to Taylor about what happened to humans in the past strongly suggest that the area bacame a desert through nuclear war - and/or other catastrophic events caused by humans that degraded the environment.
My real name is Jeff -
joekiddlouischama — 9 years ago(July 24, 2016 10:57 PM)
What the subject says. I can see the landscape changing over the course of a few hundred thousand years, but in only 2,000 years? What happened to change the landscape so fast?
Realistically, the issue is less that
New York became a desert
and more that Taylor comes across the
Statue of Liberty's ruins
in any event. The film is obviously shot in the American Southwestno other landscape on earth features those exact types of rock formations, and they are iconographically identified with that region regardless. Thus they would have been nowhere near New York.
But there is no greater American icon than the Statue of Liberty, and the fatalism suggested by its fall is symbolically powerful. Therefore, what we have is a classic case of artistic imperatives trumping realism, in terms of locations as well as landscapes. Given that we are talking about a film featuring
talking-and-walking apes
, those artistic licenses are acceptable.
From the perspective of location and region, running into the ruins of the iconic "Hollywood" sign would have been a little more plausible, but that usage would have seemed more like an in-joke, and it would not have fit the film's serious-straight tone, sober mood, and sophisticated themes.
Realistically, how does an
astronaut like Taylor prove to be a crack shot with a semiautomatic rifle, picking off a gorilla at far range and from a low, upward angle with barely any time to aim, just turning and firing accurately?
That act also represents dramatic license, although one that constitutes a very commonplace movie convention (one that evidently informs pro-gun advocates who believe that if we were all carrying guns like in movies, we would instantly and cleanly kill any mass shooter that we come across, thus resolving the matter).
Even if Taylor possessed a military background and happened to be an elite marksman, he at least would have needed to duck down behind a ridge and spend several seconds aiming in order to
nail that gorilla from such a long distance
.
But it is a movie -
JamesA-1102 — 9 years ago(July 25, 2016 03:35 PM)
The film is obviously shot in the American Southwestno other landscape on earth features those exact types of rock formations, and they are iconographically identified with that region regardless. Thus they would have been nowhere near New York.
Except the film takes place 2,000 years in the future after a nuclear war has destroyed most of the planet. Or did you miss that part?