Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy [spoiler alert]

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Peterborough, Ontario, Canada.
    Posts
    1,142

    Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy [spoiler alert]

    Went to see The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy last night with Mrs. Queeg. This isn't a full-on review, but rather my impressions from a first viewing. First off, I should say that Mrs. Queeg and I are big Douglas Adams fans and we weren't expecting to get our socks blown off by this film. Adam's writing style was so completely out there that anyone trying to bring his vision to the screen was in for a challenge. So, when I learned that the late Dougie himself had a hand in writing the screenplay I was cautiously optimistic.

    My overall rating: *** (out of 5)

    Some observations:

    Everything in this movie is over-the-top. Fabulous. Captures Adam's writing very well. Visual style, dialog, weirdness, goofyness, madcap humour -- all excellently done. Unfortunately, a third to half of the story doesn't exist in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book. That's right. Even though Douglas Adam co-wrote the screenplay, they just plain fabricated half of the damn story. Those of you who are Adam's fans and see this film will go, "What the f***? Where the hell is this coming from?" And you'll say it again and again.

    That being said ...

    The Heart of Gold was fantastic. A big, round, goofy-looking spaceship. Not exactly how I pictured it in the book, but it worked well. Unfortunately, it looked too much like Marvin's head ...

    Marvin the Paranoid Android. Alan Rickman (IIRC) did a great job as the voice of Marvin, but that big head of his was distracting. Mind you, Mrs. Queeg thought it was very cute and a good contrast to Marvin's depressed persona.

    Zaphod, Arthur, Ford, Trillian, Slartibarfast. Superb casting. The actor who played Arthur didn't quite play him as bumbling and lost as I would have expected, but he did a great job. Zaphod was as hilarious as you would expect, but the "head" thing was odd. I wish they had actually just done away with it completely. But as I said above, there are some strange story twists and Zaphod's head becomes a plot device. Ford Prefect was played to perfection. When he shows up at Arthur's house at the beginning, I was in stitches. Just picture a lush with a shopping cart full of beer. And then at the pub--glug glug glug. Good stuff, with a little movie creative license, but close to the story. Trillian and Slartifbartfast: I swear they pulled these characters out of my brain, their appearance and mannerisms that is, and put them in this movie. Again, a wonderful acting job.

    Vogons. Holy crap do they look cool. Er, friggin ugly, I mean. They couldn't have done a better job with the Vogons. From their ships to their appearance, to their disposition. Good stuff. I particularly liked the bureaucratic obsession they have, although I don't recall this being a Vogon trait in the book (I haven't read it in a while, so some finer details may be lost on me). Regardless, it worked well.

    The Htchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. The book itself. Excellent use of interludes during the film from the Guide. Funny animations to go along with them too. I was really hoping these bits would make it into the film and wasn't disappointed.

    Anyway, I've babbled enough. From the above it would appear that the movie should get higher than 3 stars. And you'd be right. There wasn't much I disliked about it. However, there are whole big chunks of this movie that I can't recall being in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book. Big sections. Like a good third or so of the film. So, it's hard for me to comment on those parts, particularly the John Malkovich character. I have no idea who the crap he is supposed to be other than Zaphod's opponent during his Presidential campaign. Maybe this guy was briefly mentioned in the book (or a later one) but I don't remember him. Oh well.

    LQ
    Drunken DM and the Speak with Dead spell: "No, I'm not the limed-over skeleton of the abbot, and no this special key in my boney fingers does not open the door to the secret treasury! ... Oh crap."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Somewhere behind a sand dune
    Posts
    2,263
    the opponent to Zaphod was something they added to the film. as to Zaphod signing off on Earth being destroyed, that was adapted from the old radio plays (tho the reason was altered).
    A brave little theory, and actually quite coherent for a system of five or seven dimensions -- if only we lived in one.

    Academician Prokhor Zakharov, "Now We Are Alone"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    182
    Unfortunately, a third to half of the story doesn't exist in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book. That's right. Even though Douglas Adam co-wrote the screenplay, they just plain fabricated half of the damn story. Those of you who are Adam's fans and see this film will go, "What the f***? Where the hell is this coming from?" And you'll say it again and again.
    Maybe for the occasional reader...but....the true Hitchhiker's cognoscenti know that when the story is introduced into a new media, it must somehow contradict all previous versions. This is true for the radio, TV, novels, audio tape, stage play, computer game, and now the cinema.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Herts UK
    Posts
    133
    Just remember that the radio play came first, then the original screenplay, then the book, then the novel, then the TV show, and lastly, the film.

    I'll certainly be posting my 2p worth once I have seen it.

    Cheers

    Tas
    "Wherever you go....there you are!"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    King of Prussia, PA USA
    Posts
    786
    Quote Originally Posted by jkp1187
    Maybe for the occasional reader...but....the true Hitchhiker's cognoscenti know that when the story is introduced into a new media, it must somehow contradict all previous versions. This is true for the radio, TV, novels, audio tape, stage play, computer game, and now the cinema.
    I once went to a talk given by Kevin Smith at Retgurs (?) University in Camden, NJ, just after he wrote a screenplay for (then was released from) the then-untitled Superman movie. He said that the reason that new characters, plot ideas, monsters, etc. get created when a project goes from book to movie is because of merchandising... the person who created the character gets a cut. So if I write a movie of, say, Asimov's "Foundation" books, I don't get a cut of merch of R. Daneel Olivaw, as I didn't create him... but if I make up a new character in the film named Bob Brandysnifter, then I get a cut off of his merch.

    As Mr. Smith put it... "Trust me, there is NO decision in Hollywood that doesn't have to do with someone making money."

    (sigh)
    Hugh Casey
    My Online Journal

    "Oh, bother," said the Borg, "We've assimilated Pooh."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Peterborough, Ontario, Canada.
    Posts
    1,142
    Quote Originally Posted by jkp1187
    Maybe for the occasional reader...but....the true Hitchhiker's cognoscenti know that when the story is introduced into a new media, it must somehow contradict all previous versions. This is true for the radio, TV, novels, audio tape, stage play, computer game, and now the cinema.
    I'm certainly not a true Hitchhiker's cognoscenti as you put it (what a term, $5 for you. ), but I do know when a good story suffers from bad additions regardless of media form.

    LQ

    P.S. I don't mean this to seem overly snarky. I got the impression I was being dissed as a mere fan and occassional reader of Adams. I was grumpy this morning when I wrote it!
    Last edited by Liquidator Queeg; 05-02-2005 at 12:51 PM.
    Drunken DM and the Speak with Dead spell: "No, I'm not the limed-over skeleton of the abbot, and no this special key in my boney fingers does not open the door to the secret treasury! ... Oh crap."

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    11S MS 9888 1055
    Posts
    3,221
    I had the good fortune of seeing this movie. Although that I did think that some things were missing, or could have been done better, I wouldn't say that this is a waste of $7. Overall, I think it was done decently well, however I feel that the people who went, atleast in my area, didn't get some of the humor. I say this cause I saw about a dozen people walk out of the film, some of them just scratching their heads.

    Now if they would only run this on TV here in the States. Didn't they do something like that in the UK? (I think I saw something like that on KTEH54 (PBS Santa Clara, CA))

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Casey
    I once went to a talk given by Kevin Smith at Retgurs (?) University in Camden, NJ, just after he wrote a screenplay for (then was released from) the then-untitled Superman movie. He said that the reason that new characters, plot ideas, monsters, etc. get created when a project goes from book to movie is because of merchandising... the person who created the character gets a cut. So if I write a movie of, say, Asimov's "Foundation" books, I don't get a cut of merch of R. Daneel Olivaw, as I didn't create him... but if I make up a new character in the film named Bob Brandysnifter, then I get a cut off of his merch.

    As Mr. Smith put it... "Trust me, there is NO decision in Hollywood that doesn't have to do with someone making money."

    (sigh)

    That may be the case, but the information I had, seemed to indicate that John Malkovich's new character, and this additional plot, was created by Douglas Adams before his death specifically for the movie.

    OK, I could accept that this may have been altered since that point, and am no way disagreeing with your rather succint note about the power of the almighty dollar (?). But felt it was worth mentioning.
    DanG/Darth Gurden
    The Voice of Reason and Sith Lord

    “Putting the FUNK! back into Dysfunctional!”

    Coming soon. The USS Ganymede NCC-80107
    "Ad astrae per scientia" (To the stars through knowledge)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    3,462
    .. but what I want to know is how you got Mrs Queeg into the Cinema Naked? And why she left the house at all! Shouldn't she be at home chewing your tube grubs?

    Well I'm going to see the movie tommorrow night, and it's annoying that almost everyone seems to have seen it already Hopefully they haven't ruined it too much, but I am not THAT big of a fan that I will likelly noticed the changes.
    Ta Muchly

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Peterborough, Ontario, Canada.
    Posts
    1,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Tobian
    .. but what I want to know is how you got Mrs Queeg into the Cinema Naked? And why she left the house at all! Shouldn't she be at home chewing your tube grubs?
    LOL!

    Mrs. Queeg is one of these enlightened Ferengi females. Y'know, wears clothes, makes good latinum, makes Queeg chew (and cook) all the meals. Plus, if the Queegster tried to keep her naked at home all the time (not a bad idea at all), she'd beat the living tar out of him! Besides, she always buys Queeg beer. Ah, equality, it's a tradeoff.

    We now resume our regularly scheduled thread.

    Enjoy the movie!

    LQ
    Drunken DM and the Speak with Dead spell: "No, I'm not the limed-over skeleton of the abbot, and no this special key in my boney fingers does not open the door to the secret treasury! ... Oh crap."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •