NationStates Jolt Archive

I read the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy trilogy before I ever even heard of the movie and the books are fantasticly hilarious! Then just the other day I saw the movie and it pretty well sucked so I was wondering what you guys think.

The radio show rocked.

The radio show rocked.
Took the words right out of my mouth.

I believe the HGTTG is perfect in every incarnation, from the original radio broadcast to the latest movie. Adam's is just too much of a genius for it not to be that way.

woops, I accidently put an apostrophe in his name. Oh well, can't edit it. I never heard the old radio show, did it stick to the books fairly well?

The book pwns the movie.

I read all the books before going to the movie, and the movie just couldn't compare. But I do think that the movie still was alright.

You only have three options:

The Book is good.
The Movie is bad.
I am ignorant.

Where is "They both suck" or "They both rock." What is the point of a poll if all the answers reflect only your views on the subject.

Anyways, I'd vote "They both suck."

Yes and do you have a point Posi? I don't know how they do stuff in Canada, but in America, that's how things are done. And it is a right proper poll consenting with all the poll requirements of America.
Being:
1. Has at least one completely biased view
2. All opposition to the totally biased view is proclaimed ignorant and stupid
3. This Biased view must be present in at least 3 choices. Example: It was (a.) stupid (b.) not worth my time (c.) as useful as Canada and/or French Guiana
4. There must be more than one option. What the option states or how biased the options are does not matter as long as there is more than one

See, my poll fits perfectly!

Yes and do you have a point Posi? I don't know how they do stuff in Canada, but in America, that's how things are done. And it is a right proper poll consenting with all the poll requirements of America.
Being:
1. Has at least one completely biased view
2. All opposition to the totally biased view is proclaimed ignorant and stupid
3. This Biased view must be present in at least 3 choices. Example: It was (a.) stupid (b.) not worth my time (c.) as useful as Canada and/or French Guiana
4. There must be more than one option. What the option states or how biased the options are does not matter as long as there is more than one

See, my poll fits perfectly!
In Canada we have basic prinicples such as:
1. Always include a joke option.
2. Support all sides of the issue except your own.
3. Alcoholism.
4. Have twice as many options as American polls.

there is no Movie rocks opion! thats what id of voted!

there is no Movie rocks opion! thats what id of voted!

Please return to explain yourself when less drunk/high. Thank you.

Please return to explain yourself when less drunk/high. Thank you.

My thoughts Exactly! In fact I'm both and I still have to very full-heartedly disagree with hi.....<passes out>

What about the BBC TV series? That wasnt bad, dispite the old blue screen effects that looked cheap.:p

I liked how they did the actually guide in the movie... though I do have one major grip with it.... They did not include the fact that the best way to annoy a Vogon was to feed it's Grandmother to the Bugblatter Beast of Traal... but apart from that the movie was good. Though personally I'd reccomend watching the movie and then reading the books. There is just so much more that couldn't or wasn't translated to the movie... also the plot difference in the movie was alight

I liked how they did the actually guide in the movie... though I do have one major grip with it.... They did not include the fact that the best way to annoy a Vogon was to feed it's Grandmother to the Bugblatter Beast of Traal... but apart from that the movie was good. Though personally I'd reccomend watching the movie and then reading the books. There is just so much more that couldn't or wasn't translated to the movie... also the plot difference in the movie was alight

I agree, they shouldn't have left that out. And the plot difference being alight is a so completely vast understatement it would be like saying that Hulk Hogan would most likely beat you in an arm wrestling contest! The main characters were mostly the same, the earth got blown up, and after that the movie is its entirely own creation with absolutely no similarities. And what's even more sickening is that Trillian and Arthur never have even an inkling of a relationship in the book. In fact, Trillian marries Zaphod. Yet, the movie is basically a romance movie between the two....sickening.

I never heard the old radio show, did it stick to the books fairly well?

Nope. It came first, and thus the question is whether the books stuck to it, rather than the other way around. They shared a common plot up until the point where second book finishes, and then go their separate ways, although there were a few variations along the way (and there were a couple of other minor variations along the way on the LP releases that likewise came before the novels). To further complicate matters the BBC recently also produced radio versions of the last three books, ignoring completely all the events of the second radio series...

lol, what if you have only seen the movie and you thought it was good???

or are those people nonexistant?

acutally, I first saw the movie and liked it, and now I'm reading the books and so far they are just as great.

lol, what if you have only seen the movie and you thought it was good???

or are those people nonexistant?

acutally, I first saw the movie and liked it, and now I'm reading the books and so far they are just as great.

Do those books use capital letters at the start of every sentence?

I love how the poll does not include the option, "I love the books and I love the movie."

I do, in fact, love both.

The radio show rocked.

Yep, that too.

In fact, I also liked the BBC mini-series.

I read the books first, then saw the movie. The movie wouldn't have been nearly as good if I didn't have an idea of what was happening - I enjoyed it, and think the books are great. Your poll does not help much though, not enough options.

Yep, that too.

In fact, I also liked the BBC mini-series.

As a BBC series, rather than an American produced one, it wasn't a mini-series. Six episodes was pretty standard length for such outputs of the time: for example, Fawlty Towers was two series of six episodes, not two mini-series... but then again, was Hitchhikers re-edited and shown as three episodes in the US?

As a BBC series, rather than an American produced one, it wasn't a mini-series. Six episodes was pretty standard length for such outputs of the time: for example, Fawlty Towers was two series of six episodes, not two mini-series... but then again, was Hitchhikers re-edited and shown as three episodes in the US?
It aired in six parts in Canada.

"So long and thanks for all the fish."

The main characters were mostly the same, the earth got blown up, and after that the movie is its entirely own creation with absolutely no similarities. And what's even more sickening is that Trillian and Arthur never have even an inkling of a relationship in the book. In fact, Trillian marries Zaphod. Yet, the movie is basically a romance movie between the two....sickening.

Douglass Adams changed things up with The Guide in every incarnation... that's what makes it so great. It's not so much "a" story as it is an "idea" that comes out different depending on how you look at it.

And the Trillian/Arthur story was entirely Adams' idea. He said he always wanted to get them together in the books, but by the time he got around to trying the best he could do was give them a child together by artificial means.

Writing the film was an opportunity for him to (yet again) rediscover The Guide. He meant it to be the same for us. Getting hung up on how it "wasn't like the books" is to doom it from the start.

As a BBC series, rather than an American produced one, it wasn't a mini-series. Six episodes was pretty standard length for such outputs of the time: for example, Fawlty Towers was two series of six episodes, not two mini-series... but then again, was Hitchhikers re-edited and shown as three episodes in the US?

Well, six episodes means "mini-series" to me, even if at some time and place such mini-series happened to be the norm. :)

As for how it aired in the US, I don't know. I own the DVDs, which follow the BBC format.

Douglass Adams changed things up with The Guide in every incarnation... that's what makes it so great. It's not so much "a" story as it is an "idea" that comes out different depending on how you look at it.

And the Trillian/Arthur story was entirely Adams' idea. He said he always wanted to get them together in the books, but by the time he got around to trying the best he could do was give them a child together by artificial means.

Writing the film was an opportunity for him to (yet again) rediscover The Guide. He meant it to be the same for us. Getting hung up on how it "wasn't like the books" is to doom it from the start.

You do know that Douglas Adams has been dead for several years now, yeah? I actually don't know anything about the movie, except that it's fairly recent (within the past year or so) and the great DA has been dead for at least 4 years, maybe longer. Kinda doesn't add up... I mean, maybe someone who knew him or like read his journal or something could've written the script, or found it in his desk, or something, but he wasn't there for the filming and directing of this thing.

I mean, maybe someone who knew him or like read his journal or something could've written the script, or found it in his desk, or something, but he wasn't there for the filming and directing of this thing.

He was, however, there for the twenty odd years of work he put in trying to get the film made though, yes?

I mean, maybe someone who knew him or like read his journal or something could've written the script, or found it in his desk, or something, but he wasn't there for the filming and directing of this thing.

No, but he was directly responsible for the conceptual work on the screenplay, as well as much of the substantive writing. If you want to complain about direction, acting, special effects, or any other aspect of production, fine... You can even complain about the script if you want, as long as your complaint is NOT "it was not true to the work of Douglass Adams." It was. He wrote it.

I think this poll needs more options.

Douglass Adams changed things up with The Guide in every incarnation... that's what makes it so great. It's not so much "a" story as it is an "idea" that comes out different depending on how you look at it.

And the Trillian/Arthur story was entirely Adams' idea. He said he always wanted to get them together in the books, but by the time he got around to trying the best he could do was give them a child together by artificial means.

Writing the film was an opportunity for him to (yet again) rediscover The Guide. He meant it to be the same for us. Getting hung up on how it "wasn't like the books" is to doom it from the start.

Exactly. HHGTG went from radio series to books to records to more books to TV show to more records to more books to movie (whew), and Douglas Adams (who wrote the original draft of the movie screenplay) liked to brag that every single form it appeared in contradicted every other form. It wouldn't have been a proper Hitchhiker's movie if it had followed the books!

(Besides, how can anyone not love Marvin being voiced by Alan Rickman? That's perfect casting if I've ever heard it.)

Exactly. HHGTG went from radio series to books to records to more books to TV show to more records to more books to movie (whew), and Douglas Adams (who wrote the original draft of the movie screenplay) liked to brag that every single form it appeared in contradicted every other form.

You have left 'computer game' off your list there.

Douglass Adams changed things up with The Guide in every incarnation... that's what makes it so great. It's not so much "a" story as it is an "idea" that comes out different depending on how you look at it.

And the Trillian/Arthur story was entirely Adams' idea. He said he always wanted to get them together in the books, but by the time he got around to trying the best he could do was give them a child together by artificial means.

Writing the film was an opportunity for him to (yet again) rediscover The Guide. He meant it to be the same for us. Getting hung up on how it "wasn't like the books" is to doom it from the start.
Yeh. But for all that, the movie still bit. One snigger - just one brief titter in a vast expanse of time spent poorly entertained, at best. And none of this "Oh it's always different" nonsense. I went in with no great expectations and fully cognizant of the variances that had cropped up from one format to another. It really is simply that it was just an awful film.

You have left 'computer game' off your list there.

Oops, you're quite right. I'd entirely forgotten about the computer game. I should really play that again sometime...

Yeh. But for all that, the movie still bit. One snigger - just one brief titter in a vast expanse of time spent poorly entertained, at best. And none of this "Oh it's always different" nonsense. I went in with no great expectations and fully cognizant of the variances that had cropped up from one format to another. It really is simply that it was just an awful film.

That's a very subjective opinion. My girlfriend and I laughed from beginning to end.

That's a very subjective opinion. My girlfriend and I laughed from beginning to end.
And had I been acting on yours and your girlfriends' endorsement of the film when I went to see it, I'd have been triply disappointed.

And had I been acting on yours and your girlfriends' endorsement of the film when I went to see it, I'd have been triply disappointed.

Fine.

But I think we would all be curious about what it is you didn't like, as opposed to your simple assertion that it was a horrible film. For all we know, you were just in a bad mood that evening, or for some other reason would not have enjoyed it no matter what the filmmaker's had done.

So enlighten us. What should have been done differently? What didn't you like?

Fine.

But I think we would all be curious about what it is you didn't like, as opposed to your simple assertion that it was a horrible film. For all we know, you were just in a bad mood that evening, or for some other reason would not have enjoyed it no matter what the filmmaker's had done.

So enlighten us. What should have been done differently? What didn't you like?
It should have been amusing. It wasn't. And you're better off asking me what I did like, as it pains me to recall two hours of non-enjoyment, though the thoroughly unhip, uncool, and pronouncedly unfunny redux of Zaphod Breeblebrox certainly ranks highly - and I mean 'rank', as in 'rancid'. Putrefied. Rotten. Bad. Off.

Slartibartfarst. Only well-cast member of the ensemble. The singular giggle the film elicited from me was in seeing a workman painting Ayers Rock.

Not worth $30 admission for two. Not by a long shot.

It should have been amusing. It wasn't.That doesn't tell me anything.

Honestly, you're coming across like every other person I've met who "dislikes" the film: at some point, you decided to dislike it, whether because it makes you feel "superior" to be a "fan of the book, but not the film," or just because it seems to be the trend. You're not giving me reasons.

And you're better off asking me what I did like, as it pains me to recall two hours of non-enjoyment, though the thoroughly unhip, uncool, and pronouncedly unfunny redux of Zaphod Breeblebrox certainly ranks highly.
I'll admit that this would not have been my preferred interpretation of Zaphod (in a number of ways), but I found that once you just decided to go with the flow as far as he is concerned, he does not seriously hurt the film... and, in fact, he is possessed of a humor that is decidedly all his own. Also, on a second viewing at home, on DVD, I found that he was much more enjoyable. I think he frustrated me on the first viewing largely because he acts as the constant foil, preventing the action of the movie from progressing in a straightforward way. But then again, who ever said The Guide should be straightforward??

Not worth $30 admission for two. Not by a long shot.Wow, you must be going to some real first-class theatre. I guess if I'd paid $15 a ticket, I'd have expected more, too. But the most expensive theater I've ever been to only charges $8.50.

Honestly, you're coming across like every other person I've met who "dislikes" the film: at some point, you decided to dislike it, whether because it makes you feel "superior" to be a "fan of the book, but not the film," or just because it seems to be the trend. You're not giving me reasons.

Well seeing as you apparently, intrinsically know what goes on inside my head, and what I decide to like and dislike and why, it really does beg the question:

Why'd you even bother fucking asking?

Wow, you must be going to some real first-class theatre.

First-class all the way, baby. It's all fast cars, loose women, fifteen-dollar movies and even cement ponds with this certified hepcat.

Well seeing as you apparently, intrinsically know what goes on inside my head, and what I decide to like and dislike and why, it really does beg the question:

Why'd you even bother fucking asking?

Well, if you could fucking tell me what's going on inside your head, I would not have to go making assumptions. Instead, you are only interested in providing various rephrasings of the sentence, "that movie sucked."

Well, if you could fucking tell me what's going on inside your head, I would not have to go making assumptions. Instead, you are only interested in providing various rephrasings of the sentence, "that movie sucked."
Well, maybe I don't fucking FEEL LIKE telling you what's going on inside my head - maybe you oughtta just DROP IT - the movie was a boring piece of shit that you're now deciding to fucking harass me over.

Way to win people over, jerk. I'm not so surprised it appealed to you.

the movie sucked.. cant be assed reading the books... not enough time.

Way to win people over, jerk.
Who's trying to win anyone over? I was (originally) hoping for an honest discussion of the merits of the film... or lack thereof, as you would have it. I was curious as to what people find so objectionable, other than the fact that it's "not the book."

You're the one who's making it personal.
I'm not so surprised it appealed to you.

........... What does that even mean? :confused:

That movie sucked big time. I mean, what the hell were they thinking?!?

*shakes fist*

Oh I just love the diversity of the options. Thank god you're not like, trying to force your opinion onto us. Obviously I'm not going to vote, cause I greatly enjoyed the movie. Oddly enough, this option is not included. Asswipe.

The THGTTG theme song>>>>>>>>>>>most other theme songs.

i too read the books first. don't think i've seen "the" movie. there was a made for pbs mini-series that came out sometime between 'resteraunt at the end of the universe' and 'so long and thanks for all the fish'. which was when i saw it. basicly a lot of butchering of material to fit the alloted time space, but not too messed up otherwise. then after the third book, and i'd read it, i finaly got to hear a recording of the bbc radio play that adams had himself had something to do with. possibly directing or producing or something.

then came the book, meaning of liff. i'm not sure what came after that.

then a few years ago, ten was it? something like that, i was saddend to hear he'd had a fatal stroke.

this movie you're talking about i'm guessing was made recently or more recently then his passing.

well other then the pbs mini series based on the first two books, well that was the only visual incarnation of his works i'm familiar with, so i'm guessing this movie pretty much has to be something i haven't seen and thus can't very well judge.

there was a fan website with a roll playing forum a couple of years ago. i'm guessing that may still be arround. i'd forgotten about it till just now. i had set out to be a cousin of slartybartfarst on there, but that was before i was off line for a year, so i'm not even sure if it still exists or not.

nope. can't say as i've seen the movie. not that i know of.

=^^=
.../\...

I loved the all. All of them, I say, all of them!
:fluffle:

*sobs*
The first ten million years were the worst. And the second ten million: they were the worst, too. The third ten million I didn't enjoy at all. After that, I went into a bit of a decline. :D

Get your hands of me, I'm not drunk!

woops, I accidently put an apostrophe in his name. Oh well, can't edit it. I never heard the old radio show, did it stick to the books fairly well?

And your ignorance is revealed.... The Radio Show is the ORIGINAL... The real question is "How well did the book stick to the radio show?" since the book was written later... However, Adams never made duplicate work in any medium, each iteration of HHGT trilogy, by radio, book, TV or movie, has itself been a unique new telling of the story.

You do know that Douglas Adams has been dead for several years now, yeah? I actually don't know anything about the movie, except that it's fairly recent (within the past year or so) and the great DA has been dead for at least 4 years, maybe longer. Kinda doesn't add up... I mean, maybe someone who knew him or like read his journal or something could've written the script, or found it in his desk, or something, but he wasn't there for the filming and directing of this thing.

It takes longer than a year for a movie to be made..... Adams himself was the one who began writting this incarnation of a HHGTTG screenplay before he died...

Well, maybe I don't fucking FEEL LIKE telling you what's going on inside my head - maybe you oughtta just DROP IT - the movie was a boring piece of shit that you're now deciding to fucking harass me over.

Way to win people over, jerk. I'm not so surprised it appealed to you.

IOW, you just want to screem over and over again in new renditions of the sentence "the movie sucked" annoying other people, but are too lame to bother to provide an iterations of actual REASONS who you feel this way, and since someone else would like to hear them, but you refuse on countless occassions (considering a "reason" to be some kind of reiteration of the term "it sucked"), and merely restating the nothing you've stated before, while sidestepping any attempt to actually provide the person with an insight into your view of the movie), and you label THEM as a jerk?

The radio show rocked.
yep.......pretty much.

I like the books, my kids and I read them a lot.

The movie was okay if you look at it right, which is not expecting much out of it at all.........I thought it hit some of the good stuff, enough to make people call to borrow my books (that I refuse to loan out)

LOL

:D

I own the old tapes from every episode of the radio show, I have the book, I own the 'extended' CD version of the radio show (which I listen too every night), and I own the movie.

Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy is the best peice of writing. Ever.

I have had shirts custom made to display the ultimate answer and the Guides cover advice. I love Douglas Adams.

Unfortunately the poll wasn't much use to me, so I decline to vote. The books were hilarious, but he hit writers block in the last two boks, so I didn't think they were great. I thought the movie was hilarious. I'm Irish, living in the states, and when things like the little mice said 'bollox' when they were about to be squashed, we erupted, but the rest of the audience were silent, made it even funnier. The slapping bit cracked me up and the Magrathea scenes were absolutely fantastic.

I played the BBC game too, will look for the link...

OK, here's the link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/hitchhikers/game.shtml

The poll is fataly flawed for not including the original radio prrograms or the BBC TV series.

The books are really great. I've seen the movie as well, and I wouldn't say that it sucked too badly (except that they totally messed up the idea of Zahphod's two heads and seriously miscasted Arthur, and some things weren't that swell either), but it's clearly inferior to the books.

What none of you realize is that preceding the movie, the computer game, the series, the books, the other books and the radio play was:

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: An amusing outline told to a pretty though somewhat lemur-eyed young woman Douglas Adams struck up a conversation with while waiting to use the occupied water closet at a small bistro somewhere near Cardiff. All efforts to make her already impressive ocular organs google with barely restrained admiration failed utterly, and Douglas was forced to return, somewhat mournfully, to his now limp and still uninteresting nicoise salad.

IOW, you just want to screem over and over again in new renditions of the sentence "the movie sucked" annoying other people, but are too lame to bother to provide an iterations of actual REASONS who you feel this way, and since someone else would like to hear them, but you refuse on countless occassions (considering a "reason" to be some kind of reiteration of the term "it sucked"), and merely restating the nothing you've stated before, while sidestepping any attempt to actually provide the person with an insight into your view of the movie), and you label THEM as a jerk?
It was 4 AM in the frickin' morning, what am I, some film critic AI?

Get bent, Mr. High Expectations.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the book - a brilliant mix of British comedy and science fiction. One of the best forms of imported British entertainment that I have come across (along with Monty Python and possibly Doctor Who)

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the movie - a stereotypical Hollywood movie, with a few interesting science fiction bits. Revenge of the Sith was much, much better... in fact, The Phantom Menace is probably the Star Wars movie most comparable to the tHGttG movie. :(

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the BBC TV series - a reasonably close interpretation of the book/radio show, with one rather funny gag that I have most unfortunately not found in other tGHttG media. ("I always thought there was something fundementally wrong with the universe")

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the radio show - unfortunately, I've never come across it. Ditto with the computer game, which was long before my time.

You only have three options:

The Book is good.
The Movie is bad.
I am ignorant.

Where is "They both suck" or "They both rock." What is the point of a poll if all the answers reflect only your views on the subject.



I assume (probably quite wrongly) that everyone is aware that there are 4 incarnations of the Hitchikers Guide To The Galaxy story (not counting the game, im not sure what that is like)

Radio Series
Books (The Trilogy In Five Parts)
TV Series
Film

They ALL contradict each other in many places.

They are all F.G.I.T (read: unbelievably amazing, the direct translation includes obscenities)

I rate them (well, I have not heard the radio series) in this order

1) Books, far and away
2) TV Series, very very good
3) Film, good in its way, also has STEPHEN FRY!!!! WHOOO!!!

The radio show rocked.
Agreed. I have the scripts.

I played the Infocom text game on a Sanyo PC (using Sanyo DOS) back in the mid 1980s. Unfortunately the disks are lost, but IIRC somewhere on the 'Net someone has re-written it in Java and has it for online play.

I have and have read all 5 books of the trilogy plus "Young Zaphod plays it Safe"

I also have all 5 "books" as read by Douglas on CD.

The movie was cool as long as you understood it was not supposed to follow the book in any meaningful sense.

The BBC TV show, for all it's 2 headed cheesyness, is probably my 3rd favorite. Books/Audio, BBC Radio, BBC TV, Movie.

Books = great.
Film = not so great.

Douglas Adams once described the process of making a movie as being like 'trying to cook a steak by having a procession of people coming into the room and breathing on it'.
Having seen the film, my opinion is that a Frenchman would have sent the steak back to the kitchen because it hadn't been cooked enough.

Yes and do you have a point Posi? I don't know how they do stuff in Canada, but in America, that's how things are done. And it is a right proper poll consenting with all the poll requirements of America.
Being:
1. Has at least one completely biased view
2. All opposition to the totally biased view is proclaimed ignorant and stupid
3. This Biased view must be present in at least 3 choices. Example: It was (a.) stupid (b.) not worth my time (c.) as useful as Canada and/or French Guiana
4. There must be more than one option. What the option states or how biased the options are does not matter as long as there is more than one

See, my poll fits perfectly!

You'll go far on this forum.

I thought the old BBC version was very good.

woops, I accidently put an apostrophe in his name. Oh well, can't edit it. I never heard the old radio show, did it stick to the books fairly well?

As I have not gone through the whole thread, this may well already have been said.

Wrong way round.

h2g2 was first and foremost a radio program broadcast by the BBC on Radio 4. The books were spin offs from that. Did the books follow the radio programs fairly well? Yes, as far as two completely different media can capture the same ideas.