NationStates Jolt Archive

Has anyone seen this movie yet? If so, was it any good? I have seen some of the previews and just by looking at those, it doesn't look like it will live up to most expectations. Should those of us who haven't seen it spend our money on it?

I haven't seen it, but every review I've heard (even my own Columbus' "It's Movie Time!"...great show) says that if you've only read the books you'll probably be disappointed. However, it's important to keep in mind that Hitchhiker was a radio serial, a tv series, and others before it became Adams' "trilogy of five books". The story is well-adapted to any medium as long as the audience don't expect something from one medium they get from another.

In other words, movies aren't the same as books. I think as long as the viewer is cognizant of that and looking for a funny movie, rather than a good book, when buying a ticket, they'll have a smashing good time.

And be sure to bring your towel.

I haven't seen it yet, but I've heared that it's ok. I'm going to see it tomorrow, so I'll tell you if it's any good.

I saw the movie earlier today, and I actually think that it's one of those where you'd have to have read the books first. it's a cute movie though, and the scenes with the improbability machine alone are worth it. (I want to go see it again, this time with a pair of red-blue 3d glasses for certain scenes that look like they might have been useful.)

I actually just got back from it. I thought it was really funny, and very well done.

Then again, I haven't read the book (although I definitely plan to now). My friend who I went with, who has read the book, said they left out some of the really funny parts.

But he still liked it, and it gets my thumbs up...it's definitely worth seeing.

douglas adams' family seems to believe he would have been happy with it. and hey, they have falling whales, it has to be good :) . I'm planning to see, but not compare it to the book too much.

Nah I'm saving all my enthusiasm for May 19.

Nah I'm saving all my enthusiasm for May 19.

You know it!!

Nah I'm saving all my enthusiasm for May 19.

You speak the truth my brother!

*Shoots blaster in the air, and waves around lightsaber*

"Jedi Power! Jedi Power! Jedi Power!"

(Now I just gotta find a Sith so I can burn a yoda in his yard)

I saw it last night and it was great. I can't wait for the next one... Are they doing all 5 books separately? Ford cracked me up... "Do you want a hug?"

"Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so."

I'm seeing it tomorrow, can't wait. I don't know anyone who's seen it, but the New York Times Reviiew was pretty good. I love this story so much that even if the movie is bad, it will still be entertaining.

It's good, it's very funny. Don't expect it to be the same as the books. The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy is more about a general theme than a rigid storyline and this movie captures that very well.

42!

Saw it earlier tonight...It was one of the wierdest movies I've ever seen, probaly because the first I heard of it was when a friend asked me to go see it with them and couple others. But it was still a cool movie, some really funny scenes...Good stuff...

Saw it earlier tonight...It was one of the wierdest movies I've ever seen, probaly because the first I heard of it was when a friend asked me to go see it with them and couple others. But it was still a cool movie, some really funny scenes...Good stuff...
*slaps TDC*
GO READ THE BOOKS! NOW! Or get hold of the radio serial if you can. It's for your health!

everyone always says the book is better because it makes them look more intellectual and superior. if you actually asked someone why or referred to a certain section in the book, i doubt they would be able to respond with an acute answer.

anyways, in my opinion, the movie doesn't look too great. plus, it has that an excuse for an actor in it. i do not know his name, but, then again, i do not know many actor's names. it's something i don't trouble myself with.

Has anyone seen this movie yet? If so, was it any good? I have seen some of the previews and just by looking at those, it doesn't look like it will live up to most expectations. Should those of us who haven't seen it spend our money on it?

Five reasons why the answer is YES:

1. "So Long And Thanks For All The Fish" intro. Singing dolphins...
2. Alan Rickman was born to voice Marvin.
3. The Improbability Drive scenes.
4. The sperm whale (thanks, Bill Bailey).
5. It's H2G2, for crying out loud.

And for those "holding out" till May 19, I leave this message.

***LUCASFILM CANNOT ANSWER YOUR CALL RIGHT NOW, AND YOU ARE IN A QUEUE. MEANWHILE, ENJOY THIS SURREAL...SPACE...THINGY BY THAT WEIRD BRITISH BLOKE.***

Until next time, folks...

DON'T PANIC

Are they doing all 5 books separately?

I hope so, however there may be a snag. Douglas Adams had a big say in the scriptwriting, etc. for the movie before passing on in 2001. Let's hope they do the sequels - IMHO, Restaurant is the best of the five.

"So you're not from Guildford then?"

I saw it, and let me just say this: If you liked Star Trek V, you'll love Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Seriously, all it was missing was Paris Hilton.

I read the second book (restaurant) so this was all new but layed out the characters nicely.

It was amazing. Mos Def is intense and should therefore act more.

P.S. I love the British

P.P.S. Everytime I see a movie that features the British somehow, I suddenly love the British.

I thought it was good. I especially liked the Vogons, even though they left out one of the best parts of the book (the part where they're talking to the Vogon that's throwing them out of the airlock). I expected Mos Def to be not that great of an actor, but he surprised me. The man is very funny.

I haven't seen it, but every review I've heard (even my own Columbus' "It's Movie Time!"...great show) says that if you've only read the books you'll probably be disappointed. However, it's important to keep in mind that Hitchhiker was a radio serial, a tv series, and others before it became Adams' "trilogy of five books". The story is well-adapted to any medium as long as the audience don't expect something from one medium they get from another.

My boss told me about it and he told meabout all its lives.
Sounds very funny. :)

I saw the first showing here at 1 minute p ast midnight.

If you've heard the radio serial, seen the tv show and read the books, you'll think the movie is mostly hilarious. :)

I have a few minor quibbles here and there (I thought Zaphod was played too foolishly -- the character was actually smarter in previous incarnations) but beyond that, it was quite fun.

Has anyone seen this movie yet? If so, was it any good? I have seen some of the previews and just by looking at those, it doesn't look like it will live up to most expectations. Should those of us who haven't seen it spend our money on it?

I saw it last night. It's good, it's funny, it's somewhat cheesy.

I'm not sure if I liked it or not. Maybe I saw the BBC version too many times... but the audience seemed to love it. (About 60 people for the 10 PM show in Milford, CT.)

everyone always says the book is better because it makes them look more intellectual and superior. if you actually asked someone why or referred to a certain section in the book, i doubt they would be able to respond with an acute answer.

anyways, in my opinion, the movie doesn't look too great. plus, it has that an excuse for an actor in it. i do not know his name, but, then again, i do not know many actor's names. it's something i don't trouble myself with.

The book is always better because it gives you a much more in depth insight into the characters, what they are thinking and how they behave. Not to mention the books are the originals, and so the movie is tampering with something already good, possibly leaving out key bits.

The book is always better because it gives you a much more in depth insight into the characters, what they are thinking and how they behave. Not to mention the books are the originals, and so the movie is tampering with something already good, possibly leaving out key bits.

Actually, Hitchhiker's started as a radio drama, then became a book, then a TV series, then a video game, and now a movie. ;)

PS: RIP Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001).

DON'T PANIC
*panics* :eek:

Actually, Hitchhiker's started as a radio drama, then became a book, then a TV series, then a video game, and now a movie. ;)

PS: RIP Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001).

I know that.... I was speaking in general.

I saw the film tonight and to be honest I wasn't overly impressed.

It had some good gags in it and some very nice surrealist humour but it lacked connection - there was no overall plot and few connections just misplaced scenes shoved in at random. Although certain scenes (if put into isolation) were superbly crafted, the film itself was sloppy and badly put together. The Guide references, some of the best bits in the book, seemed badly placed and often broke up the flow of the movie at terribly inappropriate moments.

The acting was of a generally good quality as were the graphics (the world factory was wow) so, by the standards of what comes out of Hollywood, it was quite a good film overall.

However did it match my expectations? No, it wasnt as nearly funny as I had hoped and considering the primary function of the film was comedy, I consider this to be a pretty big flaw.

now i just went and saw it, and i didn't think that it was that bad of a movie. i laughed a lot more than the other people in the theatre, who apparently didn't find Marvin at all amusing most of the time. now i thought that some of it was like, just shoved in your face if you didn't know what was going on, like holy crap, who the heck is Slartibartfast???!??!?

but the thing is, with a radio show and a book, you have a hundred different versions of Hitchhikers, we each have our own Arthur Dent in our brain, our own Zaphod. with the movie, there is no more imagination on the audiences behalf. In the movie theres no choice but for the Vogons to be hunchbacks, Marvin to be short, Trillian to be a brunette and Zaphod to be blonde. That kinda takes some of the magic out of it.

i hope the movie is as good as the book

The movie was great, and I loved it AS A STANDALONE MOVIE. In much the way that I loved I, Robot, AS A STANDALONE MOVIE. However, when compared to the books, I do have to say that it deviated too much for my taste, since I don't have the edge of accepting that the books themselves are a deviation (I mean, I know it, but I haven't heard the original, so I don't know it). Not nearly as far off as I, RObot, though - I think Douglas Adams would have liked the movie, although I, Robot would have Asimov wanting the name changed, so that people wouldn't falsely identify it with his work.

It was very good. Stuck to the books as well as it could, and I can't wait until they adapt Starship Titanic. That started by being mentioned in the fourth book then was made a game. Later on, another man wrote it into a book (In Adam's universe)

The movie was great, and I loved it AS A STANDALONE MOVIE. In much the way that I loved I, Robot, AS A STANDALONE MOVIE. However, when compared to the books, I do have to say that it deviated too much for my taste, since I don't have the edge of accepting that the books themselves are a deviation (I mean, I know it, but I haven't heard the original, so I don't know it). Not nearly as far off as I, RObot, though - I think Douglas Adams would have liked the movie, although I, Robot would have Asimov wanting the name changed, so that people wouldn't falsely identify it with his work.

IRobot just sucked.

Love the book, hated the movie. Just came back from it. It was funny here and there, but really...you can't take a classic and turn it into a blockbuster hit.

I decided to go to the movie with a good attitude about it, expecting it to be pretty different but maybe funny anyways, and I was very suprised! It matches up with the book more than Harry Potter (another book-movie with british people o_0) in the beginning, and the jokes are insane, especially the Guide excerpts. It strays quite a bit towards the end, but nearly all of the straying is just adding onto what was already there. In my opinion, they did a lot more character building with Trillian (I always pictured her as being quite a bit out of Arthur's reach), which was good. I went with a group of friends, most of which had read the books, with one exception. The one who had practically memorized the book (he happened to remember what Magrathea's landscape was like, as well as the exact words that angered those two warring tribes [watch the credits]) was pretty disappointed, which, i suppose, shows that uber-uber-uber (repeat "uber" 42 times) fans won't like it. The one of us who hadn't read the book absolutely loved it, as did I.

"Ford"
"Yes, Arthur"
"I think I'm a sofa."
"I know how you feel."
That one made it for me.

Overall, it was very good. But I'm still going to think of Zaphod as a big guy with two heads side-by-side, and black hair.

If you saw it, read on by highlighting. spolier otherwise.
When I first saw Zaphod, i completely assumed that they had to edit out the whole 2 heads thing. Imagine my suprise when they stuck the 2nd one UNDER the first!

It rocked. Not a perfect adaptation, but it ROCKED.

Mostly harmless. They missed Mostly Harmless.

It's still a very good movie, but that right there would have made all the difference, hammered home just how little the universe cares about any one person better than any number of Vogons ever could.

Mostly harmless. They missed Mostly Harmless.

It's still a very good movie, but that right there would have made all the difference, hammered home just how little the universe cares about any one person better than any number of Vogons ever could.
While I think "mostly harmless" is just about as important as 'Don't Panic' I have come to this, still in formation, understanding of the film...

A lot of jokes where gone, a lot of popular ones. (My favorite being the dialog between Arthur and the construction worker that gets the worker to lie down in front of the tractor). The woman who finished the script left by Adams was a textbook screenwriter, and I think she cut down heavily on the dialog to get things moving and brought out the love story. These are the things that they teach you so that no movie looks any different from the last because the last one made money and the people who allow to make movies are really concerned about that (reasonably so to some degree, considering the cost of making a movie...). I don't like that style, but no one called me so there's that...

However, on the leaving out famous jokes-you know them. You've heard them in their itterations, hearing them again would have limited value. You know where they go, go back to where they made you laugh. There where enough signposts in the film that they wheren't needed.

My real disappointment (aside from being able to name the chapters in screenwriting technique as they happened, but thats being pissy) was that the dialog, while snappy and dry in some places, didn't really match the precident set by earlier versions. No matter what version that was done, the dialog was always snappy and dry and almost became like a signature. I thought the set design was great, it looked good and moved briskly (chapter 3, Pacing), the dialog wasn't as witty which is where I felt myself wishing it was funnier.

Overall I'd give it a passing grade. If they keep going I'd like to see them get a snappier screenwriter. Having two intros seemed a little weird, the first-which was a little ham-handed, stole the thunder from the second.

Making Zaphod a commentary on American politics was a little too much. I don't know enough about English politics or the books to say that he wasn't being very direct in the other versions, but that directness here seemed a little forced.

Good with flaws.

Without critiquing it too much, I thought it was good. I really didn't think it would be, but they managed to squeeze in about as much from the books as they could into a two hour movie.

I'd say a 7 out of 10

I grew up with the books, watched the miniseries at age 8, and have listened to the radio plays numerous times on vinyl, quoted the good bits incessently, and thought the movie was fantastic, both of the times I have seen it.

Sure, they left out some of the bits we've come to know and love, but there were some new things chucked in; thus folks who know their Guide six ways from tuesday have something new to enjoy. For instance, there was no reference to penguins or a horde of screaming monkeys waving the complete works of Shakespeare during any improbability drive sequence, and I didn't hear any complaints from the groups I saw the film with.

I didn't agree with some of the dialogue changes they made, such as explaining why you always need to know where your towel is, but I do agree with most of them. Also, I reckon they did Trillian a lot better this time round, and Zaphod was a nice critique on modern politics in general.

There is no way they could have made everyone happy in making this film, but I believe they did a very good job, and would recommend it to anyone over age 8. The caveat is due to the fact they mightn't understand some of the jokes.

5 stars.

"So long and thanks for all the fish..." duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh...(can't remember all the words)... *music continues in background*

LOVED THE THEME SONG! LOVED IT, LOVED IT, LOVED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The two things I didn't like:

The killing of the crabs. Poor little things... :( They seemed so happy all the time... :(

Shooting Marvin in the back of the head. That was a cheep trick! Poor guy already has enough problems (with being left to fend for himself for several hundred million years and all; see Resteraunt at the End of the Universe) without the stinkin' vogons giving him a gigantic hole in the back of his head. I sincerely hope somebody fixed that up when they got back to the Heart of Gold, or heads WILL ROLL! :D

I saw it a few hours ago and was reasonably happy with it. I expected it to be far worse yet it still captured some of the humour. I think they should have kept more original infinite improbability scenes but oh well, we can't have everything.

It's worth a watch.

Love the book, hated the movie. Just came back from it. It was funny here and there, but really...you can't take a classic and turn it into a blockbuster hit.
Lord of the Rings

1. The Whale song. Can't beat the whale song.
2. Alan Rickman is perfect for Marvin.
3. The falling sperm whale "I wonder if the ground will be friends with me" was a great sequence.
4. The Guide bits were funny and well done.
5. That improbibility drive bit where they turn into yarn creatures and get animated. Ace.
6. Overall solid acting.

Great film. One thing I didn't like was how they underplayed Zaphod's two heads and three arms. I realize it would be very expensive, but they should have had them visible at all times, he shouldn't look normally human.