The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

Re: Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy... Trailer

Cool, it's been a while since I've read the books, so I'm really looking forward to this. And if it's bad I can still go and read the real stuff! :D
 
Re: Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy... Trailer

i love the hitchhiker's series but i'm not going to get too excited over the movies...that always leads to disapointment with how much the movie will be different from the books...but yeah the movie itself looks pretty good...:rolleyes: hopefully it is
 
Re: Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy... Trailer

Hmmm.

I am worried by the Beeblebrox. Although he does seem to be maintaining his title as worst-dressed sentient being in the universe quiet well.

That is the bit that worries me most.
 
Re: New Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy Trailer

My perception of Hitchhikers is entirely from the BBC series, which even as a kid I thought had terrible effects and was far too dry and flat. It entirely killed my enthusiasm to read the books.

That trailer looks bloody smart, though - it suddenly looks like a really good concept. I'll watch it. :D
 
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

Synopsis
Everyone has bad mornings. You wake up late, you stub your toe, you burn the toast...but for a man named Arthur Dent, this goes far beyond a bad day. When he learns that a friend of his is actually an alien with advanced knowledge of Earth's impending destruction, he is transported off the Earth seconds before it is exploded to make way for a new hyperspace motorway. And as if that's not enough, throw in being wanted by the police, Earth II, an insane electronic encyclopedia, no tea whatsoever, a chronically depressed robot and the search for the meaning of life, and you've got the greatest adventure off Earth.
I'll say this for it- I came out with the same vague notions as I used to after listening to the H2G2 radio serial... :)
A desire to slit my wrists.
Just the reasons are different.
One for good sympathetic and very humanitarian reasons, the other is the film. :(

The object of sympathetic humanitarian reasons is obviously Marvin, who for some reason now looks like an over grown toy robot from Tomi. Gone is the voice so depressed it carry's the weight of the universe on its shoulder, to be replaced with something that in the trailers sounds like Wil Smith in a sound proof box.. Unfortunately, it is not that good.
The real Marvin makes a cameo appearance in the Vogon waiting room though.

Zaphod, too, has had a personality labotomy. In the older versions he made a whole lot of sense, in a zany sort of way. Here they tried to give him some sort of purpose in life and it didn't really manage it. He has a second face instead of a second head and although slicker than the TV series, it manages to look far more fake.

Trillian is at least a saving grace- She isn't Sandra Dickinson.

With the exception of Zaphod's second head, the effects are far more impressive than the BBC series, just not as inventive.

The original radio series rather meandered its way through the story, often appearing not to have any form of goal at all, but making cynical side swipes at humanity as it went. So I expected the film to make a few changes, cutting out the worst of the distractions, perhaps even linking a few together to get a story. But ultimately the film looses much of the originals originality in trying to become too much of a standard film, yet manages to miss any form of story as well.

I don't know how much of the script Adams actually produced before his untimely death, or how far they corrupted it for the film.
But if it is largely his, he should have learned to leave well alone. His original story was bright, funny and original. Then it started to lose a lot of that as successive variations came out. I think the film slips safely into last place below even the ghastly independant audio versions.

I might be seen as being a bit harsh. Undoubtedly anybody who has only ever read the poor book versions will think the film quite good and jolly. But I would highly recommend, should the opportunity arise, they spend a little time with the excellent BBC radio version.
 
Re: Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

I thought it was a pretty good adaptation actually.
Originally posted by ray gower
Trillian is at least a saving grace- She isn't Sandra Dickinson.
That was the best change, she was much more like the original Trillian. Martin Freeman was excellent as Arthur Dent. The Vogons were good. Marvin, I didn't think was as good, just not depressed enough!

As for Zaphod's heads, I think that that was the best way to do it. How else can you keep the surprise about the two heads that you have on the radio? For someone who has never heard of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the head below the first head is the only way.

There was some good new stuff too. I liked the Humma Kavula character which Adams wrote in.

Visually, it is infinitely better than the TV series.
 
Surely, the interest of Zaphod is not so much the two heads, but what it says about him, his character and the size of his ego i.e. 'I'm wonderful, I think so too and we are NOT interested in your third choice'

Due to any combination of: poor casting, script, story, or even just trying to give him a motive, he fell flat. All that happened was he swaped from screaming idiot, to screaming gah-gah.

And having given him some sort of motive, why didn't they give the vice-president and Vogon's a motive for chasing him around the Galaxy with such perverse pleasure?
Certainly the approval appeared rather quickly, so they forgot to 'bury them in soft peat for 3 months and recycle as fire lighters'.
 
I agree with your points about the personality lobotomy. Zaphod is meant to be so cool you could keep a side of meat in him for a month and the proud owner of the biggest ego in the known universe. This version of Zaphod was a complete idiot and buffoon.

I agree that trying to give him a motive did fall flat, as did playing out the romance between Arthur and Trillian more. But I think it's a little harsh to criticise a screenplay that managed to reduce all the material into a two hour film that still made sense, even to a potentially new audience. Everyone who has previous expectations is going to find something wrong with it. It could have been much better, but I enjoyed it on the whole, so I'm being more positive, though I won't argue with you over Zaphod or Marvin.
 
I haven't seen the movie yet, but when I read the books I never got the impression that Zaphod was really cool even though the books sort of say he was.
 
Hmm, Zaphod. He was pretty much acting like a stoned rock star, which was quite funny in itself, but was nothing like his character in the books.

I think, overall, it would have made a lot more sense if they had kept the film the same as the book. The sub-plot about Humma Kuvala and Zaphod's head being kept as insurance just didn't seem to fit with the rest of the film, and it wasn't wrapped up at all by the end. There was no explanation for why the Vogons were chasing them, or for that weird woman's obsession with Zaphod. And there didn't seem to be a reason for the point-of-view gun, except to have a nice sappy ending to the film, which really wasn't needed.

But I have to disagree about Marvin. I wasn't expecting to like him (mostly because of the gigantic head), but he really did grow on me. And you have to admit, he was very cute. Didn't you just want to give him a cuddle? :p

But I did enjoy the film. The FX were great, especially the scene when Arthur and Slartibartfast are travelling through the planet factory. And the mice were very sweet. :D
 
Now that I've seen the movie . .
The book is better.

But, I don't think the book would ever work well as a movie. The humor doesn't always translate well.

A lot of the books humor came from funny Encyclopedia-like guide entries. I think they did a good job trying to make video to go with these entries, but it doesn't work.

Because of that issue I think the movie should have actually tried have a different story line using the basic premise and only a few scenes from the book.

I think the movie should have been called "The Guide" instead of the full name.

I understand the Movie's need to compress the story line and re-use expensive costumes like Vogons, but it felt funny.

I felt like the movie needed close captioning, especially for the dolphin's song.

When I seen the movie the audio seemed . . hard to hear at some points. I'm not sure why.

Still, I want to see the movie again. I want to give it another chance. I want to watch it on my own with out someone that likes to talk during the movie.

By the way the Vogons chased them because there was a reward for capturing the kidnapers of the Galactic President (even though the flashback makes it clear that Zaphod kidnapped himself . . er ran away.)
 
I think I would tend to dispute whether the book would translate well to screen, the BBC TV series followed the first two books very neatly.

Watching the film and TV series back to back, I'm inclined to say that the TV is better (Dickinson not withstanding). But it left Arthur on a prehistoric Earth, which I suppose would not do for the average film goer?
 
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Glaxey

Has anyone seen this? I thought this was a really awesome movie. I was not expecting it to stay completely 100% true to book. However I do love the inside jokes if you have read the book and the newly added stuff fits in wonderfully.

Very funny. It made me pick up the book and reread it again.
 
Re: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Glaxey

hehe might of helped if used the search button sorry, you can close this.
 
I know this is far from a perfect adaptation , but its still a a terrific and hilariously funny movie ! :LOL:
 

Similar threads


Back
Top