A Conversation for The h2g2 Hitchhikers Movie News Page

I've seen it

Post 1

The Tea Totaller

The film opened in Australia today, and I have just returned from the first showing at a nearby cinema.

I quite enjoyed it, but believe it justifies neither the raves some have given it nor the criticism of others. It is a pleasant film, quite amusing, and that's it.

For myself, I prefer the books. I love the way he puts words together and see the other media (the radio and TV series as well as the film) as compromises to the ultimate form of expression - the printed word.

Of course, that is just me.


I've seen it

Post 2

fords - number 1 all over heaven

The trouble with the film it has to appeal to a wider audience but I'm really looking forward to seeing it today and think I'll love it all the same smiley - biggrin


I've seen it

Post 3

SuperMoo: Now With Even More Online-ness

...well for one so lazy as to have not yet read the books (but really want to...) I think it was definately a teaser...and more...I really liked it...I mean it didn't strike me as something that they had broken the budget enough to break a record or anything...but they definately spent time on it...it seemed... ...well balenced I'd say...and this is from the mouth of someone geeky enough to a)paint a shirt with his screenname on it and the Flag of The Evil Army of H2G2...and b)to coax his friend into doing the same...and I would have brought a towel had the first two things not taken so much time that I ran out of time to do anything but grab some money and dawn my shirt...


I've seen it

Post 4

Zarquon's Singing Fish! - in transition

I get to see it today! smiley - biggrin I've already seen a half hour DVD about the show which came out with the Sunday Times. People at the office are waiting for a report from me before they go to see it - fools - they should know I'm biased.

smiley - fishsmiley - musicalnote


I've seen it

Post 5

psycho42

I was quite disappointed. Too much on Humma Kuvula and the Trillian/Arthur love story and too little with Zaphod and Arthur and Zaphod and his second head. It had funny parts and the cast was chosen wonderfully. I would definitly take the books, radio series, and tv series over this movie anytime. It was upsetting to have waited so long for the movie and then be let down. I think those who have not read the books will enjoy it. . .it is definitly a good comedy/sci-fi film. I just do not think it fits with the rest of hitchhiker's.
Just my opinionsmiley - smiley
~Psycho


I've seen it

Post 6

Zarquon's Singing Fish! - in transition

Well, I have to say that I thought the love interest was a positive thing. It was handled very lightly and provided some nice 'glue' for the film. Knowing the originals so well, I was always going to view this film with some suspicion, however I have to say that the bits that worked especially well were Sam Rockwell as Zaphod - the two heads worked particularly well - and I thought no-one could hold a candle to Mark Wing-Davey (although I thought he probably had a touch more charisma). I was prepared not to like Marvin, but Alan Rickman was brilliant. Arthur - I'm still not sure about - his character is very different to Simon Jones, but I think it works. Ford - again, I'm still not sure of. The Vogons - again mixed - the bureaucratic bit was nicely handled - especially about them taking a break for lunch!

Overall my impressions were that the film was a bit slow in parts while other bits were really excellent. Oh yes - the book - I liked Stephen Fry's voice, but I missed the busy-ness of the original graphics - it was a little bit simplistic for my taste.

The dolphins were good, though.

smiley - fishsmiley - musicalnote


I've seen it

Post 7

Naturally Argumentative

For the most part I was happy with the love story in it. There always seemed to be *something* between Arthur and Trillian in the other versions, and the film kept this up without making it the main point. ALthough that bit at the end annoyed me.

The actors all seemed pretty much perfect for their parts, especially Sam Rockwell who managed to keep Zaphod pompous, arrogant, irritating and somehow utterly loveable despite it.

Also, Bill Bailey as the sperm whale. One of my favourite bits in every version, and done brilliantly again, although with Adams' dialogue to work with it would make me laugh no matter what.


I've seen it

Post 8

BuffBillsFan

Saw it Friday night here in the US. Audience seemed to like it. I thought it was uneven. If you saw it, you'll probably recognize the references. If you didn't, I don't think there are any spoilers below.

First the good stuff:
- References/readings from The Guide were great. Best parts of the movie. Stephen Fry's narration and reading were right on, and the visuals fit.
- Casting was right on. Each actor fit their character well. And for folks who are not fans of GWBush (don't blame me - I didn't vote for him), Sam Rockwell couln't have used a better guide for the idiotic parts of Zephod
- Visuals were great. Special effects were complex where needed, and simple when complexity wasn't needed.
- Zaphod's 2nd head - nice touch, I did not expect them to do it that way.

Now the not as good:
- Arthur and Trillian scenes. Though both characters were played well, their scenes just hung. Got to the point that when I saw them get on screen I would hope for another reference to The Guide.
- Zaphod after the operation. C'mon - I know he's supposed to be an idiot on a number of levels, but that was too much.
- I know it had to be fit into a 2 hour movie, but there were waaaay to many shortcuts taken. Although there were many fine bits in the movie, and it tied together in a manner of speaking, it seemed like the movie was a series of skits. Some of the better parts of the book were in there, but too much was missing.
- Too much of the big aliens - the book is full of a wide variety of aliens, but the first ones seen (besides Ford and Zaphod) were basically the only ones shown.
- Marvin's time on screen was wasted. Voiced very well, but he just didn't seem to be there.

I'm glad I saw it, and will probably catch it another time or two (or 12) when it hits cable. This might be another situation like LOTR, where it is impossible to give it justice without a lot of screen time.

I think it is time to go back and read the book, listen to the BBC Radio broadcast, and maybe watch the TV mini-series.


I've seen it

Post 9

clzoomer- a bit woobly

I'm depressed. Marvin depressed. I had a free ticket for the advance media opening here and had to work so I gave it away. I've had to work every day since (well into the evenings) until today. smiley - sadface

One ray of sunshine, tonight I will finally get to see it!!
smiley - smiley


I've seen it

Post 10

SuperMoo: Now With Even More Online-ness

it's no use...smiley - laugh


I've seen it

Post 11

magickmark

I enjoyed the film. Although different from the radio/books/TV show/game, remember so are they to each other.

Every time Douglas revisited the story he changed it so keep an open mind and enjoy the film for what it is, not what it is not!

Having said that I did wonder about the plot involving Humma Kavula. All it seemed to do was fill in time without adding to the overall story. All it relly did was allow for the POV gun to be introduced into the plot.

Apparently it was written by Douglas but I wonder if he had still been around if it would have gotten into the film, knowing how much he would edit down elements he felt were just wasting time.

Apart from that I felt the story covered the same plot area of the first book/radio/tv show/game. It updated some of the ideas (a backup of the Earth, brilliant, who these days would not have a backup of an importaint program ready to bring back online at a moments notice?).

And it also tied up some of the loose ends from earlier versions without spoiling the intergrity of the later books.

As to the romance between Trillian and Arthur, Dougals did hint at it in 'Mostly Harmless'.

Also I enjoyed the tributes to the earlier versions, see if you can spot them.

So overall I feel it to be a worthy addition to the over all Hitch Hikkers universe.

PS Don't leave before the end of the credits


I've seen it

Post 12

jane_s000

It's all very well saying you will stick with the books but they (at least the first two) are not the originals of course, it was a novelisation. If you really are a purist at heart you should be listening to the radio series or reading the radio scripts (currently cheap at www.thebookpeople.com). BTW, does anyone know where I can get a copy of the song - preferably the sheet music?


I've seen it

Post 13

Penny for the Gosho?

Is the soundtrack CD out yet?


I've seen it

Post 14

Dr E Vibenstein (One step further and I would have been there.)

Yes, I saw it in the shops last week, even before the film came out. smiley - ok


I've seen it

Post 15

Jemstone

I saw it today and did enjoy it. I knew some changes had been made to the screen play by DNA so I went in with an open mind. I spotted one tribute (I think) - when they were in the room full of aliens in the queue to get Trillian released from prison there was an android in there who looked just like Marvin from the TV series! Was that one or did I imagine it?

I hope they do more films, let's just hope they stick to the original story where possible.
smiley - magic


I've seen it

Post 16

Dr E Vibenstein (One step further and I would have been there.)

Yup, that was the original Marvin. smiley - smiley


I've seen it

Post 17

Penny for the Gosho?

The original story being the radio series, it's unlikely they'll come anywhere near that, and the film has already diverged from the books. The point of view gun is something new that's going to be an important part of the plot in the sequel, IMO.


I've seen it

Post 18

UberGek {Oo-behr Geek}

As many people here mentioned, it had it's ups and downs. The Whale and Petunias were fabulous! The love story a bit much. I did think the casting worked very well. Although Trillian seemed a lot more ditzy that I would have liked. Myabe ditzy isn't the right word... I felt like I was watching a bad acting job on her part. That's a bit harsh but something about her just didn't feel quite right to me. I loved Martin as Arthur!!! Zaphod was great but I would have liked to see him with two HEADS no just a flip-face thing... I just like Mos Def in general.

It did feel rushed at times and so much was missing but that's always the case when you take an amazing novel and try to put it on the big screen. DNA did say that everytime they did a new version of the story that it was a little bit different. I was never expecting it to be just like the book. That's not possible. Each of us in our heads has a different version.

One thing that I really did miss was the referance to humans always saying the most obvious thing. "What a sunny day!" "My, aren't you tall!" "Are you still here?" and so on...

CL, you'll have to give us your feedback, being in entertainment and all... smiley - winkeye


I've seen it

Post 19

Jemstone

Ubergek, I totally agree with you on your comment about Trillian. She didn't seem to pin down the essence of Trillian (IMHO) and I had exactly the same thought as you - it felt like bad acting. I also wasn't keen on Zaphod after they removed one of his heads - Zaphod is craxy adn kind fo annoying anyway, but the removal of the head for me, removed his fun crazy part and just left him annoying!

That said, I did still enjoy it and will try to remember the better bits!
smiley - magic


I've seen it

Post 20

UberGek {Oo-behr Geek}

Jemstone, I agree with your comments on Zaphod as well. He did get a bit more annoying than just zany at times. Personally, I think he should have played up the egotistical-yet-unsure-of-self thing... You know? Ah well...

Are they planing on makeing the rest of the trilogy into movies? It would be intersting to see where the plot goes...


Key: Complain about this post