Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

[YT Edit] Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) (Patreon)

Published:
2025-05-07 02:22:07
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Videos

  • 463072122.mp4

Downloads

Content

Hey guys! Here is the YT edit for "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" which will premiere shortly!

Files

Comments

GomezAddams

The apes were able to turn the whole planet into a banana republic because they were so skilled at guerilla warfare. 🌍🐵🍌😁

Chris Thom

That'll be all. You can see yourself out.

Tim Weaver

I liked the concept of how the apes revolted that original series described. I'm hoping the current pota universe not limited by fx budget will adhere closer to the boulle novel. We shall see

Story Archer

Every time I watch you two, it always occurs to me, at least once, what an amazing sister-in-law Cassie would be...

Just Plain Bob

It seems unlikely that they’ll adhere to the original novel since they’ve already discarded the events leading to the apes taking over in the book, in favor of the simian flu explanation.

Tim Weaver

Its a difficult series to predict as the latest movie went in a direction ( + timeJump) I mean if it were up to be directing the scripts I'd love a UFO to show up to show the apes how technology works..u know the same benefit that early man had :)

Just Plain Bob

I would love to see a faithful adaptation of the original book, complete with the framing device of the young simian couple being revealed as the readers of the story (and not humans, as we’re misled to believe - the original “twist” in the book). Elements of it were used throughout the original series but, ultimately, it’s a more cerebral and contemplative film than Hollywood would be likely to make, given the size of the required budget. I just don’t think the box office would support it - for that kinda cost people would expect explosions and laser pistols and all the modern trappings of junk sci-fi.

Tim Weaver

Well Bob we will likely have cass n Carly's kids doing reactions b4 the next reboot is given a twirl lol Its the forming of society that I'm most interested in. What is most wild to me is rise got me from the jump with such phenomenal mocap from Serkis I forget Its all CGI. Its a rather neat trick.

Thoko

100 Gorillas vs 1 Man

Thoko

I think Carly recently got married, or is about to get married. Sorry bud.

TheSingulatarian

You really should go back and watch Battle for the Planet of the Apes. Dawn is basically the remake.

Clarence Newman

Yeah, and we're still mad that she didn't put him on a poll first.

Thoko

Nah Carly should have used the "Pick-A-Flick Drawing" format that Cassie recently introduced, to give all us guys a chance to be chosen

Walter

bravo

Richard Maurer

“I thought chimps were vegetarians” - oh Cassie, Never search chimpanzees hunting videos. Of all the apes chimps and humans eat the most meat, Orangutans eat some meat, gorillas almost none, only occasionally eating insects. Chimps and humans are also the only apes known to engage in cannibalism.

Joe J

One step closer to "The End of the Planet of the Apes", Lol.

Story Archer

LOL - a man can dream, can't he? Nah, if that's true then I couldn't be happier for her, she damn sure deserves a better man than me. But still - don't you think it would be fun to have someone like Cassie as your sister in law? That whole family would be a joy to marry into.

Clay F

Ha, good one

Clay F

Humans aren't apes but they great apes. Humans (Homo sapiens) are the last surviving species of the genus Homo. They are great apes characterized by their hairlessness, bipedalism, and high intelligence.

Richard Maurer

Yes they are. Genetically proven. Chimps are more closely related to humans than they are to gorillas. The term ‘great ape’ refers to all non-gibbon apes - humans, chimps, bonobos, orangutans and gorillas. But all are still considered apes in general.

Milton Reduxed

@ Richard, The fact the physical human body has a relation to apes and other animals doesn't mean humans are apes Humans are also related to rocks in that our bodies are made of the same elements like carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and nitrogen. Doesn't mean humans are rocks 70% of the human body is water, doesn't mean humans are walking puddles

Milton Reduxed

@ Clay, The fact humans are more highly developed than apes means natural scientists assume humans therefore developed from apes, based on the fallacy everything develops upwards. Apes are actually a decadent offshoot of humanity, humans who developed downwards rather than upwards

Richard Maurer

Milton - your replies don’t have any actual science included, so don’t expect me to take them seriously. Humans and chimps share sequential retrovirus insertion in a number places in our DNA - there are hundreds of these genetic insertions for each retrovirus type. And the odds of a single retrovirus type sharing the same place in the DNA of two completely UNRELATED lineages? 1 in 5.88 X 10 to the power of 1418 To give this number some context there are ( as a generous estimate ) 1 X 10 to the power of 82 atoms in the universe. So the idea we are not closely related to chimps is absurd. (Yes I looked the numbers up - the rest I was already familiar with).

Story Archer

I may have missed it - did the ladies ever put together that 'that symbol' was the window from Caesar's room?

Milton Reduxed

I didn't say humans and apes aren't related; Humans are related to all animals as well as the plant and mineral kingdoms, I said humans aren't apes

Clarence Newman

Don't mean to throw a spanner in the works, guys, but Dwayne Johnson is clearly a Rock.

Richard Maurer

Clearly they are Milton. Your argument seems to be “ I don’t want to believe it, therefore it’s not true” You’re basically saying wolves are related to canids, but are not canids at this point. This isn’t a subjective opinion like which movie is better, it’s an objective scientific fact. Obviously I can’t convince you otherwise but that doesn’t change the fact that you’re wrong.

Richard Maurer

Yes they did, but they were rather quiet about it.

Milton Reduxed

Humans are not apes, that's why you don't see humans in cages at the zoo like you will see apes. It's why you wouldn't take your baby to a veterinarian. Humans are not apes

Richard Maurer

lol unfortunately facts don’t care about your feelings. In other words that’s just your pride talking.

Thoko

Sure, both Cassie and Carly seem like very sweet people. Maybe there's still a chance for you to become an in law. Cassie and Carly have a brother. I'm not sure if he's into dudes but its worth a try

Thoko

I don't bother too much with debating evolution, because there are too many underlying assumptions. Its only a matter of time before something in evolutionary theory implodes and we're told an entirely different story about our origins. This kind of implosion recently happened in the scientific field of cosmology.

Richard Maurer

Milton - without evidence to back it up., it’s your opinion , which of course you’re free to have, but it won’t change the science.

Richard Maurer

Thoko - while science never makes claims to be absolute truth evolution is one the sciences with the most amount of conclusive evidence there is. For evolution to be proven false it would also mean molecular biology was false which would mean modern medicine would not work. So , realistically, evolution cannot be proven false because we already know it’s real and it works.

Thoko

Richard, you're missing the point. I never said that evolution is false. I said that it has assumptions within it that could be incorrect. Just like cosmology was not proven "false" either. Your response shows exactly what is wrong with science and discussions around science. If anyone like myself is like "your theory might be 10% wrong" people like you are always like "this guy just said we're 100% wrong! he doesn't know what he's talking about! He must believe in flat earth, too!"

Milton Reduxed

@ Richard, The Science™️ doesn't even claim humans are apes. They are separate species

Richard Maurer

Milton - Ape isn’t a species, it’s a sub-group in the primate clade . Humans are one species of ape, chimpanzees are another species. Both species, and also bonobos, share a common ancestor, This isn’t really a discussion you can win - all you can do make statements without anything to back them up, all of them easily refuted. Not sure why you’re so invested in this but it seems pointless. There are many good videos by actual scientists on YouTube if you’d like learn more. It’s been fun but I’m getting bored now.

Richard Maurer

Thoko - that’s not what I said either. You’ just moved the goalposts in your second comment. Your first comment said that evolutionary theory could “implode “ and we’re told a “entirely different theory” - this could only mean that evolution in its entirety would be proven untrue - what I’m telling you is the chances of that happening are near zero, because so much working proven science is based on evolutionary theory. Small parts of evolution could be proven untrue (and have been in the past) But a “ entirely new theory “ will not be happening.

Clay F

Milton relies on colloquial uses of terms. In contrast, modern biologists and primatologists refer to apes that are not human as "non-human" apes.

Clay F

Yep, that's a Thoko technique = "moving the goalposts" + gibberish. And don't believe him when says or implies he doesn't believe in wild conspiracy theories. Thoko on 9/11: The hijacked planes were on “auto-pilot … and somebody directed the planes remotely into the towers.”

Milton Reduxed

@ Clay, ''Each of these ape groups contains multiple distinct species. For example, there are several different species of orangutans, gorillas, and chimpanzees''

Richard Maurer

Milton- you forgot one ape species - humans

Milton Reduxed

Let's not get started on 9/11 and the pentagon particularly... But the one consistent in The Science™️is that scientific consensus of the day always changes. The consensus in 100 years will inevitably be different than now. The people of the present day always think they are correct, until the poles shift and people say, 'In the past people thought foolish things, but NOW we've got it sussed...' The theory of evolution is questionable: That apes developed upwards into African humans, that Africans developed upwards into Asians & Europeans. So believe it if you want, but don't hold onto it too tightly as ideas will inevitably be different in the future

Milton Reduxed

Considering you're so hot on trusting The Science™️, should you not be using the term homo sapien? Anyone who calls humans apes doesn't understand what a human being is. You can ally yourself with the materialists of the day if you want to, and take your cues from them, I choose to listen to wiser minds

Richard Maurer

I understand what apes are. Do you understand the what mammals are? Animals that are have hair and produce milk to feed their young. Something that our species has in common with every other mammal, and no other animal class has these characteristics. So if we are not apes in the order of primates what order of mammals do we belong to? Are we canines? felines? whales? We should just agree to disagree, neither of us will ever change the others mind.

Milton Reduxed

The human being is distinguished from all animals. As I said physical human bodies have similarities to rocks, plants, and animals. But a human being is also different to all of these

Richard Maurer

The theory of evolution is questionable - well yes, but not really.

Milton Reduxed

Well I question whether dirt randomly formed itself into living beings that stood up and became conscious; I question the notion more thought lies behind a child's finger-painting than behind the infinite beauty & complexity in the organisation of the universe. But you are free to believe these modern narratives if you wish

Richard Maurer

You’re talking about abiogenesis, not evolution. How life got started is not the same as how it evolves.

Richard Maurer

Milton - I really don’t see why you want to keep going with this. You’re not changing my mind (probably not anyone else’s either). As I said before let’s just agree to disagree. It’s become a pointless discussion.

Milton Reduxed

@ Richard, You replied to my last post twice, if you don't want to keep going then why keep posting new OPs & replying? First time I've heard the word abiogenesis and didn't realise all the materialists who subscribe to the Darwinian narrative of evolution don't believe in life being randomly formed in the first place

Milton Reduxed

The human being is spectacularly different from animals. You cannot see the miracle right in front of you and think it's just a matter of the passing of time that animals would inevitably, randomly, develop upwards to the heights of humanity, but then fail to answer the question honestly, 'why then did no other animal do so given the same time and the same circumstances?'

Milton Reduxed

If having the last word is so important to you, then go ahead

TheSingulatarian

Humans are a species of "Great Ape". The only one that can swim for some reason.

Richard Maurer

Great ape just means any ape that’s not a gibbon, so, yeah.

James M

I have to say I was more impressed with the acting by Kim Hunter and Roddy McDowall than by what I see here. I get that this is more flashy and paced like a contemporary film (too fast to give you time to think because then you might realize how little substance is here... but I digress). I just feel the original "Planet of the Apes" and "Escape from the Planet of the Apes" allowed the actors to act. For me that's a lot more meaningful than people and CGI apes firing automatic weapons and shouting.

Thoko

Richard, Milton has a good point about humans being different from other animals. At the end of the day, classification of animals is always going to be considerably subjective rather than objective. Classification of animals is not like a law of physics that we simply observe in nature and then write it down. It is a construct of scientific and intellectual thought and therefore is really a philosophical debate to some extent because there are deeper questions such as WHY are we classifying creatures. If the point is to appease some important person at Harvard or some other university, then sure, you can go with the status quo. But if you want scientific discourse to actually be useful to human beings when they are having other discussions about animals, then classifications of animals should not be done on the basis of DNA. They should be done in a way that best serves the reality that we have to deal with every day. The reality that we are trying to solve through science. If the scientific classifications lead us away from conclusions that are useful, then the classifications are fundamentally flawed. For example, how is it useful for us to put some tiny mouse-sized rodent in the same group as an elephant? The current classifications are kinda messed up.

Richard Maurer

Thoko - All animals species are different from other animals species. The classification of species before genetics was traditionally done through physical differences which while useful, was limited, but that was all they had at the time. Genetics has changed the classifications of animals somewhat, but has mostly proved the previous science was correct. For instance completely reinforcing that humans and other apes are very closely related. You mention we should be using “some other system” but don’t actually know what system that is? Wow, that’s so helpful, instead of genetics, which we already know works, let’s look for some imaginary system………for what reason exactly?

Richard Maurer

I moved my response because it was under the wrong post (this one) but for clarity’s sake I will explain - you said Humans are great apes. Then I said great apes are any ape that isn’t a gibbon , so, yes.. Then you answered nope(?) and the Wikipedia link above - which listed the great apes - the only species of ape it doesn’t list are gibbons - so yes, we’re both right.

Richard Maurer

By the way many “non-materialist” scientists (and laymen) believe in evolution, abiogenesis, or both. Don’t make assumptions about people you don’t know.

Milton Reduxed

That's correct, but I assumed you were talking about the Darwinian, survival of the fittest, theory of evolution. Spiritualists don't believe beings develop randomly but with intention, and they don't believe in the same stages of development materialists do i.e apes developing into humans

Richard Maurer

Without getting into religion, I will just say that many people believe in a god (or gods) but also believe in science including evolution and abiogenesis. They are not mutually exclusive.

Milton Reduxed

Yes but that doesn't mean they believe the same narrative of human evolution, in the Darwinian principles that drive development, or the theory that apes are the human ancestor I would say that believing in the Spirit and abiogenesis are mutually exclusive because believing in the Spirit means believing in life existing behind seemingly inanimate objects, and outside of physical forms. To a spiritualist everything is living, even rocks. A materialist does not see rocks as living because rocks don't have any physical metabolic functions

Richard Maurer

You’re talking about belief. Without evidence anyone’s person’s beliefs are as valid as any other’s beliefs. Since the supernatural is by definition without evidence all beliefs about it are equally valid.

Thoko

Fine Richard, I'll spell it out for you since it is still not clear for you. In fields like biology the goal is often to be able to accomplish outcomes such as medicine for humans or veterinary science to help animals. We use classifications like "diabetic" in order to inform doctors about commonalities that are shared between people who have similar conditions in order to be able to apply similar treatments and research programs to those people collectively. In science, we also want to be able to target groups of creatures for various purposes such as academic research, biological research, applied medicine and along the way we might find that certain groups of animals can be grouped together in various ways that make sense to what we are trying to actually accomplish with our science. Having a classification just so that kids can learn it in school and teach it to the next generation of kids is pretty meaningless. Therefore, if we want to be able to study monkeys for the purposes of improving the lives of monkeys, then it is probably meaningless to have a classification that includes humans since the needs and behaviours of monkeys are not terribly similar to the needs and behaviours of humans. It makes sense for behavioural scientists to have their own classification and other scientists to have theirs rather than to have one generalised classification that is not useful to any field of science.

Richard Maurer

Or we could just continue to use genetics for classifications, since we already know that works. I bet that’s what is going to happen, since it actually works and that

Milton Reduxed

The Darwinian narrative of evolution is also a belief

Richard Maurer

Evolution is a science with overwhelming evidence to back it up, not a belief with nothing to back it up but faith.

Thoko

If "it works" why are scientists planning to throw us all out of our jobs so that the machines can take over and discover all the cures? Seems like things aren't working so well after all, huh? Aside from vaccines, which prevent rather than cure illnesses, how many diseases have we actually cured? Not many, if any. And yet we were promised that the latest discoveries in genetics were going to result in all sorts of personalised medicines etc that would revolutionise the health care industry. That plan went to utter shit. Instead the companies just sold our genetic information to the FBI instead of using it to find cures. Because it failed. The genetic information was not as useful as people thought. Great for catching serial killers though!

Richard Maurer

“Scientists are planning to throw us all out of our jobs” - do you read the “stuff” that you write? What a joke.

YodatheHobbit

Did you go to the bathroom each time and miss every single dramatic scene in this movie? 😵‍💫 On the other hand, if you haven't seen it and are judging a movie only by "what you see here", in a YouTube reaction edit, that's the problem.

Thoko

Bro, I'm a computer scientist. This is my field dumb ass. Just take the L

Richard Maurer

LOL - sure you are….And even if you were a “computer scientist” that doesn’t mean you know anything about genetics or biology. Nice try though.

Richard Maurer

By the way insulting people is a violation of the rules here, besides, after the silly arguments you’ve made you probably shouldn’t be calling other people “dumb ass”.