# Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...



## The Master™

Okay, I wasn't really looking forward to this... Given that I've read the books several times, got the radio show on tape and the original TV series on VHS...

However, the film is really very good - if a little short... And NO RESTAURANT AT THE END OF THE UNIVERSE!!!  

There are some very fine comedic parts and no small number of things that, maybe only those with a British sense of humour would appreciate...  

But all in all, I enjoyed it and would recommend anyone with 110 minutes spare in their lives, to get out there and watch it!!!

Those who have a hankering for the original series should keep an eye out for the TV series should see if they can spot the original Martian ("Your Plastic Pal Whose Fun To Be With!!!") and the TV series Arthur Dent...  

Only a 7/10...


----------



## Princess Ivy

well, i'm off to see it, for better or worse, tonight.


----------



## sierradawn2466

oh my god! i loved the movie...well...in it's own right...the books were the best books ever...but take away the little changes and the movie could stand on it's own...the one thing that really bugged me was that they left out a majority of the hitchhiker's guide entries...and it was also weird that they put things from the 5th book into the first movie...then again it explains things to an audience not familiar with the books i guess...AND WHAT WAS UP WITH RANDOM CHICK?!?! i don't remember a military type girl in the books...that's really weird...anyway...enough comparing....on it's own it was a really good movie...


----------



## ommigosh

To my surprise, I really quite liked the film.  Although it doesn't really stick all that closely to the original radio series or book (and they didn't always follow the same route as each other either!) it is still very entertaining and feels like it could have been written by DNA himself.

A lot of the original jokes are a bit rushed and lose impact which is a pity (they should have either left them out or done them properly) but there is still plenty to laugh at (both new stuff and new stuff).

The vogons are excellent (bumbling, bureaucratic, and appalling shots). Arthur and Zaphod are superbly played and Magrathea and Slartibartfast are spot on.
The special effects are pitched just right - not overly relied on and somehow a bit quaint at times. It was nice to see the use of a simpole earthly quarry as a setting for an alien planet (in homage to countless low budget sf films of the past?).

Even the predicatable love interest (added for the movie) between Arthur and Trillian doesn't detract too much from the enjoyment.

Great to hear the original theme tune being used in the movie although the annoying dolphin song at the start was not my cup of tea. The Heart of Gold as it flits through improbability changes is just great and it was lovely to see that they used Douglas Adams face as the very final image during the last transformation.


----------



## Eradius Lore

i thought the books and the radio series where brilliant. the series was a bit poor but what the hell i bought it on dvd but the film . i havent seen such rubbish in my life, none of the charicters fitted with any of the others, the only thing that fitted was that you see marvin on the vogon homeworld. there was just to much hollywood influance in it, there was only one funny part in the whole film right at the end the rest is trash. a true work of genius has been destroyed and dont get me started on that dam dolphin song at the start


----------



## Princess Ivy

so, thats a thumbs down then?


----------



## Eradius Lore

yep


----------



## Rane Longfox

It wasn't brilliant, and should have been better, but I actually quite enjoyed it. I thought the casting was very good, as I had anticipated, and the visual effects were great. The jury is still out on that one for me...


----------



## TheManInTheBowlerHat

Eradius Lore said:
			
		

> i thought the books and the radio series where brilliant. the series was a bit poor but what the hell i bought it on dvd but the film . i havent seen such rubbish in my life, none of the charicters fitted with any of the others, the only thing that fitted was that you see marvin on the vogon homeworld. there was just to much hollywood influance in it, there was only one funny part in the whole film right at the end the rest is trash. a true work of genius has been destroyed and dont get me started on that dam dolphin song at the start


 
I couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## Tyranus

I loved the books, they were just great. The movie, though good, was flawed. It was still funny, but it didn't really follow the book. I would have loved the intrduction of the movie to be same as the book but it wasn't. Hopefully if they make the sequels they will follow the books. It was still good though so I do recomend it.


----------



## polymorphikos

The dolphin song is the stuff that dreams are made of, and H2G2 across books and films is inconsistency incarnate. Arthur bugged me slightly and they lost a few chances for some nice surprise revelations. Other than that, it was pretty damn funny.

I wish the film were my first encounter with it, so that I might appreciate it purely on its own merits.


----------



## Princess Ivy

I saw this with a friend, who has never read the books (eyes boggle). she thought it was fantastic.
myself, i'm not so sure. they left so much out. and added so much in? the book is relativelly short, so why on earth couldn't they just follow the actual story? three things that really bugged me
*********SPOILERS*******************
1. why is there a need to justify ford rescuing arthur? adams never felt it nessessary.
2.why the need to have a romance with arthur and trillian? he was treated as the underdog who needed to get the girl. in the book each character was stand alone, no need to be proped up by some silly plot device.
3. why that silly almost conspiracy to rescue zaphod? it had no relevance to anything other than the movie, and fizzled out in the end.

they were obviously setting something up for the follow up, which i'm already shuddering about.
good point, the bloke who played zaphod was very good at ott, but why make him stupid? and stephen fry was excellent as the narrator/book.

i'm undecided about whether this was sucessful or not. in a way i liked it. i'll watch it again and cogitate a little. re-read the book (any excuse), and probably not make up my mind in the future.


----------



## Princess Ivy

and the dolphin song, no feelings one way or the other


----------



## Raven

I suppose the first thing to say is that, lacking any knowledge of which changes were made by DNA himself and which after his death, none of us can possibly say for sure which he would have 'approved of', since we don't even know which ones he _made_.

Secondly, I'm gonna be lazy and repost a review I posted on another board.



> The film has its flaws, more of which in a moment, but it has its good points too.
> 
> First, the set and costume design, the effects, the cinematography, and just in general the whole look of the film. Near perfect, IMO. It recalls the TV series in places, but has a style of its own too. The Vogons and their ships are terrific - ugly and brutish. The Guide is perfect too - not too hi-tech, with many nods to the TV version. Everything in this department works. This, I reckon, Douglas Adams would have loved.
> 
> Second, the casting. Sam Rockwell as Zaphod grew on me after an initial doubt. He has an insane but undeniably charming grin, which helps. The major problem is that he lacks chemistry with Martin Freeman. He still exhibits genial contempt for Arthur, and there's obviously supposed to be friction between them, but it doesn't come off very well. Still, he fills the role well.
> 
> Martin Freeman does his usual schtick. He is onto a loser from the start, in a sense, because no-one will ever match Simon Jones' Arthur: a masterful depiction of bemused but stiff Englishness, a man who looks vaguely uncomfortable in his own skin. Freeman only gets close with one line - "I'm English, I know how to queue!" (It doesn't help that Jones gets a cameo, reminding us of the definitive Arthur.) But he does OK.
> 
> Zooey Deschanel works fairly well. She's pretty without being stunning, which is what Trillian should be. It's important to note, as I realised early on, that Trillian in the film is basically actually a composite of Trillian and Fenchurch. Once you accept this, the role works better.
> 
> Mos Def as Ford is a disaster.
> 
> The secondary casting, however, is perfect. Alan Rickman as Marvin nearly steals the film, Bill Nighy as Slartibartfast is terrific, Stephen Fry as the Guide is an obvious but hugely successful piece of casting, even Bill Bailey as the whale is incredible. If only they hadn't cast Mos Def as Ford...
> 
> Now, the plot. It's important to realise that this is a different version. One of the problems, in fact, is that the first fifteen minutes or so sticks too closely to the book (apart from a strange musical number with dolphins), and appears to be an abridged summary with most of the best lines cut (though there are still a few classics - "none at all", "I don't know, is it the sort of thing you're likely to say?", "aren't we supposed to lie down with a paper bag over our heads?").
> 
> Until we get on board the _Heart of Gold_, then, you get the impression you're watching an inferior version of the TV series. But the plot then gets into its stride, and goes its own way. New characters, new arcs, new lines even. And I actually quite liked the new story, for what it is.
> 
> The script lacks the clever, sharp wit of the original, and doesn't revel in surreal conceptual digressions in the way we would expect from DNA. (OTOH, in the latter case that wouldn't have worked well in a film anyway.) But it is just much less... whimsical than the other versions, which is a shame.
> 
> There are one or two nice nods to the TV series - the original Marvin appears in a queue, and Simon Jones plays the recorded announcement from Magrathea.
> 
> Overall, I'd say the film was well worth seeing, and Mos Def aside (did I mention he's a disaster as Ford?), is as good as could have been expected.



Third, I think that complaining that Zaphod is stupid is, well, stupid. Zaphod _is_ pretty dim, in his way: that way being that he seldom thinks things through and is careless. Where he is stupid in the film, this is largley why (for example, signing the order to destroy Earth without reading it). 

Also, in the film, he loses one of his brains for a time, which doesn't help. But overall, he's still smart enough to get elected President of the Galaxy, steal the _Heart of Gold_, find Magrathea, etc.


----------



## The Master™

Zaphod isn't stupid in any way - he is a self-styled EGO-MANIAC!!!

He must have been smart to steal Heart of Gold!!! And let's not forget he shares 3 of the same mothers with Ford and Ford is smart!!! Okay, if you remember from the book, Zaphod was voted Galactic President 'cos all the voters thought they were voting for the Worst Dressed Sentient Being in the Universe!!! 

There's a thing... If Ford chose his name to live on Earth, what was his true name???


----------



## Princess Ivy

The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy said:
			
		

> Ford Prefect's original name is only pronouncable in an obscure betelgeusian dialect, now virtuallly extinct since the Great Collapsing Hrung Disaster of Gal./Sid/Year 03758 which wiped out all the old Praxibetel communities on Betelgeuse seven............
> .....................Because Ford never learned to say his original name, his father eventually died of shame, which is still a terminal disease in some parts of the galaxy. The other kids at school  nicknamed him Ix, which in the language of Betelgeuse Five translates as 'boy who is not able satisfactorily to explain what a Hrung is, nor why it should choose to collapse on Betelgeuse Seven'.


is that any help?


----------



## TheManInTheBowlerHat

Zaphod was horribly f**ked up. He wasn't *cool*! He was supposed to be cool! Cool as in 'what's the most non-chalant chair I can be found working in' cool, not 'southern cowboy with a mental disorder' cool, which frankly I don't find very cool. Trillian was terrible too - the point was missed by several thousand miles - the relationship between Arthur and Trillian was _real_ in the books/radio series, in the film however it was so ... hollywood - it just made me want to vomit.


----------



## The Master™

Look, BowlerHat dude, don't beat around the bush - SAY WHAT YOU MEAN!!! Jeez, there is nothing worse than someone pussy-footing about!!! 

You have an amazing way with words, and there ain't a lot else can be said...

And Ivy, thanks for that sweety... I need to read the books again...


----------



## Raven

ManInTheBowlerHat - in the books, there _was_ no relationship between Arthur and Trillian, because although he loved her, it was unrequited. 

But film-Trillian, as I said above, is a very different character, much more like Fenchurch than Trillian (quirky artist-type rather than rational scientist-type). There is at least a basis for a relationship there that simply doesn't exist in the books.

As for Zaphod, at least Zaphod was much cooler than Ford. Now film-Ford, that was not a cool guy. Can you imagine anyone describing film-Ford as a 'hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is'?


----------



## TheManInTheBowlerHat

The Master™ said:
			
		

> Look, BowlerHat dude, don't beat around the bush - SAY WHAT YOU MEAN!!! Jeez, there is nothing worse than someone pussy-footing about!!!


 
People get very touchy on the subject of opinions - you've got to have like, decorum.  



			
				The Master™ said:
			
		

> You have an amazing way with words, and there ain't a lot else can be said...


 
Hurrah! You're my new best freind.


----------



## TheManInTheBowlerHat

Raven said:
			
		

> As for Zaphod, at least Zaphod was much cooler than Ford. Now film-Ford, that was not a cool guy. Can you imagine anyone describing film-Ford as a 'hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is'?


 
Yes - they managed to turn Ford into such a dork! He was all over the place!


----------



## Princess Ivy

i'm re-reading the book, and just to note, 1. zaphod had two heads, with two brains, not one brain split into two faces. 2. zaphod wasn't voted in by mass vote, the imperial council is not a democracy. he was voted in by the council only!

i think though, raven, that they may very well have confused fen with trillian. she does seem more a composite character in the film.

i wish hollywood could just leave well enough alone!


----------



## Raven

Ivy: well, DNA always said the different versions of H2G2 were supposed to be alternate versions, not the same story in different formats. As such, it seems unlikely that even his original script 'left well enough alone', and any deviances from the book can be explained as part of the 'alternate version'. 

Heck, some people complained bitterly about aspects of the conversion from radio to book...


----------



## monkeydude

I found it very funny, but didn't find myself much into the story like I am with the books. Maybe it is because it is so short.


----------



## Hypes

I went into the movie armed with few expectations and my trusty towel and I came out quite pleased, actually. I greatly enjoyed the movie, though I do feel they failed to exploit a lot of the opportunities offered by Douglas, but it was nonetheless far better than I had hoped.


----------



## dwndrgn

Princess Ivy said:
			
		

> i'm re-reading the book, and just to note, 1. zaphod had two heads, with two brains, not one brain split into two faces. 2. zaphod wasn't voted in by mass vote, the imperial council is not a democracy. he was voted in by the council only!
> 
> i think though, raven, that they may very well have confused fen with trillian. she does seem more a composite character in the film.
> 
> i wish hollywood could just leave well enough alone!


 
I read a great deal about this movie as they were making it.  It seems that Adams had already written the script and made many changes to the story himself.  He wanted it to be different.  The movie wasn't supposed to be an exact copy of the books.  I can't say how faithfully they went by his original script but I do know that it wasn't faithfull to the books per Adams' desire.


----------



## The Master™

For all those that liked the Dolphin song... Go here: http://hitchhikers.movies.go.com/games/dolphin.html


----------



## Princess Ivy

dwndrgn said:
			
		

> I read a great deal about this movie as they were making it. It seems that Adams had already written the script and made many changes to the story himself. He wanted it to be different. The movie wasn't supposed to be an exact copy of the books. I can't say how faithfully they went by his original script but I do know that it wasn't faithfull to the books per Adams' desire.


oh i do know that babe, its just agravating. when you're expecting a certain something, and its not delivered. One thing that forever prejudiced me against the project, was a comment that i read, in which the new director said he'd stay faithful to the 'spirit' of the original. Adams himself was infamous for not meeting deadlines and then having to be shut in a hotel room for a few days to complete a work. is why 'the salmon of doubt' was never finished.  i'm a fan of the books. unless the film was faithful to the original book (not its spirit), i would have been prejudiced against it. which is precisely what has happened. and its no good telling me that DMA had made changes himself. that doesn't bother me. its those fundamental changes to the characters and basic storyline which are bothering me.


----------



## Raven

Ivy: yes, but...

The spirit of the books was precisely that kind of spirit that has no problem with the changes. We're not dealing with Tolkien here, but an anarchic, free-spirited entity. That's the whole ethos of the books.

The point about DNA making the changes is that he had no problem with 'being faithful' to the books, he didn't view it as important or necessary, any more than he felt he had to stay faithful to the radio series when writing the books! 

I went into the movie without expectations, because I knew that those expectations were a trap. At no point were we going to get a 'faithful' rendition of the books, and I'd have been rather disappointed if we had. And so, I suspect, would DNA. He wouldn't have seen the point.


----------



## Darken Rahl

Saw the film with the missus, who has never read the books and won't watch the old TV version either.  She gives it a four out of ten.  However, I loved both the books and the TV show, as I would assume most here did.  Pushed to rate the movie, somewhere around a six. (See Dolphin song notes above) Go see it for the visual effects, but don't plan to laugh too much.  Whoever told that actor to play Zaphod as a George W wannabe needs to be shot, it was PAINFUL to watch. The Arthur / Trillian romance really ticked me off, it just wasn't right. Ford definitely not cool enough. The visuals were GREAT, but couldn't overcome some rather weak Hollywood ideas about the storyline and did I mention how BAD Zaphod was to watch?


----------



## dwndrgn

I finally saw the movie yesterday.  I must admit that the dolphin song was rather uninspired.

Zaphod wasn't cool enough.  Ford wasn't smug/smart/cool enough.  The new plotline regarding the kidnapping of Zaphod was really dim...didn't seem to have the heft that a normal plotline should.

I have to say though, the biggest disappointment of all?  The doors in the Heart of Gold.  They sighed.  Huh?  How does that show they are happy in their jobs?  It made me feel like they hated their jobs.

It was entertaining but not nearly as funny as it could have been.


----------



## nemogbr

Read the book
Enjoyed the series
Saw the film

I was disappointed, but then I knew it was from hollywood.

Became bored and went to sleep halfway through the film.


----------



## Hestia

I generally don't enjoy the movie version of books i have read, as i am constantly picking out the errors, or whole parts that have been missed out.

For this reason i have so far avoided watching this.
However after reading the feedback here, i think i will check it out for myself after all. Actually i loved the character Marvin and would really like to see how he was portrayed in the movie.


----------



## HoopyFrood

I love the books, and I really enjoyed the film! A scene in wool!!! Oh that made me laugh so much!
Ok, I agree Mos wasn't the best choice for Ford...but I loved Martin freeman as Arthur (but then I love Martin Freeman full stop and was overjoyed to hear that he was playing arthur). 
I love Zaphod though! Authur will always be my favourite character, but Zaphod came a close second in the film!
Ah...loved it... 
Oh, one thing to have a moan about...the supercomputer was a bit strange...I do imagine it as a computer rather than that strangely shaped creation. And I didn't like how the mice tried to steal Arthur's brain back in his house, with everyone drugged around him...and I really hate that soppy moment...but other than that...brilliant! And Bill Nighy as Slartibartfast! Excellent!


----------



## lordoftime

Of course the series of books this film is based on were concieved and written by Douglas Adams, who was a Script Editor for Doctor Who during the late 1970s.


----------



## Simon Haynes

I waited for the DVD and knew I was in trouble the minute I saw that damned dolphin song.

I loved the TV series, enjoyed the first book but not the rest, and never heard the radio series.

Aside from the singing dolphins, I felt they tried to cram too much into a short space of time, missing or skimming all the best bits.

Never mind, I still have the TV series on DVD and I still have the books. The movie can just gather dust.


----------



## Starbeast

I've haven't read the book or seen the tv series, nor have I heard the radio play before I watched the movie, but when I saw the film, I became an instant fan. Today, I have seen the tv series and heard the radio play, now I have to read the book.


----------



## The Ace

The guy playing Zaphod should be shot.


----------



## Vladd67

My main view of the film was that all the good lines seem to have been lifted straight from the original radio series.


----------



## Rodders

Starbeast said:


> I've haven't read the book or seen the tv series, nor have I heard the radio play before I watched the movie, but when I saw the film, I became an instant fan. Today, I have seen the tv series and heard the radio play, now I have to read the book.


 
And now that you've seen and read all the versions, how do you rate each one? 

Personally, i love the book and the radio drama. I didn't care much for the film, but that's not to say that it was a bad movie. I saw it expecting it to be bad because i love the original. I should try and dig it out and try and watch it more objectively.


----------



## Connavar

Starbeast said:


> I've haven't read the book or seen the tv series, nor have I heard the radio play before I watched the movie, but when I saw the film, I became an instant fan. Today, I have seen the tv series and heard the radio play, now I have to read the book.



Its a shame you didnt start with the novel series, thats what Adams is most loved for.  Not film,tv series.

Radio i know was earliest.    

The books are enough for me and maybe the radio.  Film,tv are not Douglas Adams so no interest for me.


----------



## Starbeast

Rodders said:


> Personally, i love the book and the radio drama. I didn't care much for the film, but that's not to say that it was a bad movie.


 
I knew they would all be a little different from each other, so I didn't want to compare any of the versions. It wouldn't be fair, because the novel is always better. Like the _Lord of the Rings_ novels, I knew the cartoon, the radio drama and live-action would all be slightly different from one another, but I still like all the versions. 



Connavar said:


> Its a shame you didnt start with the novel series, thats what Adams is most loved for. The books are enough for me and maybe the radio. Film,tv are not Douglas Adams so no interest for me.


 
It's ok, currently I have been avoiding the all other versions, so I can have a fresh look at the novel. Sometimes it's good to save the best for last.


----------



## paranoid marvin

For once , the novel isn't the best version , it's definately the tv series for me. Brilliant and utterly British - in much the same way that the film _wasn't._

I've owned the radio series on CD for several years , but still havent got round to listening to it yet.

Tv series best 

Novel great

Film awful

Radio TBC


----------



## natalienoo

The Hitchhiker's film did what Spielberg's War of the Worlds did to me.
I'm sad, angry & depressed with Hollywood's constant need to churn out terrible remakes and adaptations.
Please stop it now.


----------



## Rodders

paranoid marvin said:


> For once , the novel isn't the best version , it's definately the tv series for me. Brilliant and utterly British - in much the same way that the film _wasn't._
> 
> I've owned the radio series on CD for several years , but still havent got round to listening to it yet.
> 
> Tv series best
> 
> Novel great
> 
> Film awful
> 
> Radio TBC


 
Make the time, it's well worth it.


----------



## blacknorth

I never liked Hitchhikers, probably because I'd read much of Robert Sheckley's output before discovering it; consequently it all seemed like old hat. I even seem to remember a Sheckley story that featured a suicidally depressed robot...

Having said that, I sat down to watch the film with as much of an open mind as possible. But I didn't even last 20 minutes. It was just horrible, deeply unfunny, poorly acted, loud as hell.


----------



## Ursa major

The radio series will all be the definitive version for me, if only because the special effects are better than those on the TV version.


Having said that, I quite enjoyed the film. I'm usually tolerant about changes between media (although remakes, being directly comparable, have to work hard to gain my approval). That Adams produced different versions for radio, TV and books (and weren't the records not quite the same as the radio version?), makes it all easier to swallow.


----------



## MartinJH

This is a real feel good film for me; it always makes me grin and leaves me in a good mood. It seems to have been made with affection and respect for Douglas and the subject matter. The cast are on the whole great, although while I don’t think Mos Def as Ford Prefect is actually bad, the way he plays Ford there just doesn’t seem to be much there. The makers decided that they couldn’t do Zaphod’s two heads side by side and make it look good, so opted for the double-decker approach instead – which I think works well.

I even enjoy the song! Neil Hannon’s version over the end credits anyway.

I have no problem with it not sticking to a previous version of H2G2. I had to get over that expectation when the books started coming out in the late 1970s and I realised as I read them that they were diverging from the radio series. Since then I have enjoyed all the different versions, and from what I understand the new elements introduced in the film were mostly Douglas’s ideas anyway.

I would still have loved to know what happened next after the end of the second radio series though… It finished with Arthur and Lintilla stealing the Heart of Gold and leaving Ford and Zaphod stranded with the man in the shack. Arthur was finally taking control of his life – and got the girl – then that version of the story just stopped dead. The more recent follow-on series managed to wrestle that plot into something closer to the books by way of a Bobbie-Ewing-shower-scene type plot device for Zaphod, and some talk of parallel universes. But that’s H2G2 for you; you just have to Don’t Panic, go with the flow, and enjoy the ride wherever it takes you.

But if I was to rank the different versions then first is the radio (all 5 series), then books, film, and way way behind the rest is the TV series. I was always disappointed with this, mostly due to the creaky low budget feel. As they say the effects are always better on the radio and I really couldn’t see the point of transferring it to TV unless you could make it look as good as the radio sounded (which was groundbreaking for its time).

Martin


----------

