Talk:Mr. MacDonald (Planet of the Apes)

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Film

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles

Re: "San Diego"

The book adaptations of the movies, not to mention the graphic novel adaptations, say Central City, NOT "San Diego" or "Ape Management". The relevant scenes were filmed in Century City (IMDb and articles included with the graphic novels support this), over a hundred miles from San Diego. I do not know where 69.122.210.59 got their information. Zephyrad (talk) 06:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is untrue. The term "Central City" is NOT from the adaptations. It's from the TV series and is the name of the apes' city, where Zaius and Urko work. You are simply incorrect. The term "Ape Management" is spoken onscreen, and is in fact where it takes place, and other stories, including Revolution on the Planet of the Apes, set the story in San Diego. Central City has no connection whatsoever to the films. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.210.59 (talk) 14:17, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Central City is never mentioned in any of the films or their novel or comic adaptations. 69.122.210.59 is correct in his assertions. Central City is the apes' city from the TV series, and was never mentioned before that series aired. San Diego has been named as the site of Ape Management (in, as stated, Revolution on the Planet of the Apes), and Breck is, in fact, the governor of California. --comment added by rassmguy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rassmguy (talk • contribs) 19:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The MacDonald brothers

According to the Promotional Herald issued for Battle, Hari Rhodes had a previous commitment and could not appear in the film which is why it was recast. The article can be seen here: http://www.mediamercenary.com/POTAimages/Heralds/Herald5p3.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.244.75.51 (talk • contribs)

To be fair, Rhodes isn't named in the article you've cited, and they don't say what "prior commitment" the actor Stoker replaced had, either. Do you know any details about Rhodes's career at this point? Can you tell us where he was? What he was committed to do, presuming they meant Rhodes? This would help. Zephyrad (talk) 18:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, why would they promote an actor who wasn't appearing in their film and a possibly competing film. And I don't know any of the details of Rhodes career at the time or overall. But there is no evidence that any other actor was cast in the role of MacDonald other than Hari Rhodes. It is his charater (from Conquest) that appears in early drafts of the script. So it is logical to conclude that he is the actor referred to in the article and the casting of Austin Stoker is why the character was changed to the brother of the original character. Even if Stoker was replacing some other actor who was cast in the interim (and there is no record of this occuring); Hari Rhodes, for whatever reason, was unable to appear in Battle. This is a very minor point. I don't understand why you are making such a big deal about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.244.75.51 (talk) 07:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the same token, why would the studio diss an actor who had performed well, but was unable to repeat their role? This wouldn't look so good for the studio. You admit you don't have information, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and you don't seem to allow for anyone else's inferences or conclusions but your own. That is among my concerns here. Zephyrad (talk) 14:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my conclusion, 'Planet of the Apes Revisited' by Joe Russo also reflects this account on page 210. As does an interview with Austin Stoker in the Simian Scrolls fanzine. And they weren't dissing Rhodes but the point of the article was to promote Austin Stoker. Still it is a minor point so I fail to understand why you are making such a big deal about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.244.75.51 (talk) 16:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]