The good news: Zooey Deschanel gives a swell performance.

The bad news: Zooey Deschenel is the best thing about the movie.

I'll see it tonight. Reviews have been mixed, which often means a movie might work for you, or it might not.

Qapla'

SSB

I liked it. It isn't perfect, but still enjoyable. I actually thought all the cast were fine, and the actor playing Arthur reminded me strongly of the guy in the BBC TV production -- as did the scenes at his house and at the pub, which were visually quite similar as well. Even the cheesy theme from the TV version gets reprised, and the "original" Marvin shows up (non-speaking, of course) pretty prominently in one scene. And the fact that Mos Def's Ford Prefect has an American accent is addressed in dialogue.

It garnered applause from the audience, for what it's worth.

Stay after the end credits begin for a little more from the Guide ...

Qapla'

SSB

A positive vote from me, too.

Two things you need to remember going into the movie:

1) It is officially based on the first book. Which means you can't have a literal adaption since the book HAS NO PLOT!

2) The things that make Douglas Adams so popular, the humorous asides, the clever wordplay, are things that bring a movie to a dead stop.

All in all, I think they struck a nice balance between being faithful to the source material and making something that actually works as a movie. More successfully than the TV series which I think was too faithful to the radio series. There were a lot of things that work fine on the radio or in print that just don't play credibly when acted out.

The only major problem I had with the movie was the music. One of my pet peeves is "funny music" in a comedy. Show me what the characters are feeling, not what I'm supposed to feel.

Could someone help me? The movie makes visual references to the jeweled crabs the Vogons like to smash and the gazelle-like creatures they like to sit on. Which version of the story is this from? I seem to remember reading/hearing it recently, but I haven't read the books in years and I can't figure out where it would fit into the radio or TV series.

Could someone help me? The movie makes visual references to the jeweled crabs the Vogons like to smash and the gazelle-like creatures they like to sit on. Which version of the story is this from? I seem to remember reading/hearing it recently, but I haven't read the books in years and I can't figure out where it would fit into the radio or TV series.

That's definately straight from the book, I don't believe it was in the TV version. It's been a decade or two since I heard the radio version so I'm not sure about that......

Saw it this morning, and I was pretty underwhelmed. Maybe I was expecting too much, but what I'd hoped would be a light romp through the cosmos felt instead like a tedious march to nowhere. It's not that the film doesn't have its moments, but I found them to be few and far between.

Sketch comedy is hard to pull off in a feature-film format. The Pythons made it look easy, but the movie version of "Hitchhikers" strains under the labor of trying to be funnier (not to mention more fun) than it actually is.

Like flat coke, the flavor's there but none of the fiz. Go see Kung Fu Hustle instead.

Well, mmy daughter and I both loved it!

Probably because we haven't read the books yet.
Always meant to when I was younger, but never ran across a copy at the used book store I used to feed my reading.
Haven't had time for a lot of reading the past decade either.
Most of that has been catching up on all the books I have accumulated but never even opened.

As a BIG fan of the Radio series, and the TV series, I was not expecting much. But, I liked it. It has a lot of my favorite scenes, and some of the changes were good. I was happy to see the original Marvin, and Simon Jones. The movie was not as good as it could have been, but American movie goers just want to get to the good parts. I would have liked to seen more of the book on screen. Of course with a bigger budget than the BBC had, the creatures, and effects were great.

:thumbsup:

I saw it Friday. Enjoyed it. Could have been better.
But it could also have been a lot worse!

I got big kick out of seeing the original Marvin and the original Arthur Dent.
It also slowly dawned on me that the music and the voice of the Guide are also the originals!
:lol: That is a very nice touch!

The animations of the Guide reminded me slightly of Monty Python. Sort of what they might have done if they had the technology back then.

Apparently Douglas Addams himself was involved with writing the screenplay. And the differences are deliberate.
He seemed to think that the book, the radio play, the TV mini-series and the movie should be different from each other. So that's the way they are.

Could have done without the singing dolphins though. :freak:
-Leelan

All together now! " SO LONG AND THANKS FOR ALL THE FISH". I love that song! :drunk:

:thumbsup:

It also slowly dawned on me that the music and the voice of the Guide are also the originals!


Actually the voice of the Guide in the movie is Stephen Fry. Peter Jones (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0429012/) voiced The Guide in the original radio and TV series. Unfortunately, he passed away five years ago.

:( Sorry BEBruns. I didn't know.

But Fry sounds so much like what I remember that I was fired up anyway.

Were any others of the old cast in the movie besides Marvin and Simon Jones (Arthur Dent)?

-Leelan

^^ Not that I noticed, on screen or credits.

I just watched the DVD, all in all I liked it. It had a very "Douglas Adamsy" feel to it, which probably contributed to both the good and bad reviews.

I like Martin Freeman and Mos Def in other movies, but didn't feel they had much to do here, I prefer the Arthur and Ford from the old TV series. Loved the new Trillian, definately better than the gal on the BBC series. I liked Helen Mirren's part, even if it was a glorified cameo and she did seem to be imitating Jennifer Saunders. Sam Rockwell was an inspired Zaphod. I liked Marvin's "70's cool" design. And I thought the dolphins were pretty cool. And the Startibartfast stuff felt VERY faithful to the book.

A mini-series ala Galactica probably would have been a better idea. My one main complaint is the films timing, either a shorter or longer version might have worked better.

Were any others of the old cast in the movie besides Marvin and Simon Jones (Arthur Dent)?

The Trillian from the radio show and stage play is the older lady sitting next to Arthur in the pub.

Never really saw the TV show, but as a long time fan of Monty Python and the like, I enjoyed the movie. It seems many of us are so jaded and hard to entertain these days (myself included sometimes). Occassionally you gotta let your hair down. On that note, it is most definitely British humor and you'll either like it or you just 'won't get it'.

the movie missed the boat. badly. someone here compared it to flat coke.. perfect analogy... the sparkle was gone.
the biggest screwup is fundamental. the radio and tv shows are the story of the fictional book "the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy", the movie is the story of arthur and company. the book is the star of the earlier formats, its an aside in the film. let me back that up: in the earlier formats every time something odd happens, we go to the book for an explaination, in the tv show always accompanied by their incredibly clever animation (which sometimes gave you so much info...all of it funny... you couldnt take it all in). the occasional voice overs from the narrator in the film, and the even more occasional bits of animation push the book into the margins. its especially galling that the book is sacrificed in order to make room for a useless new subplot and a couple of love stories.
what made the hitchikers guide popular and fun isnt the story of some guy in a robe, a hippie with 2 heads, a flim flam man, and a babe, its the unbeivably clever and ironic writing style of douglas adams, which is the "voice" of the book. i mean the absurdity of the plotlines are fun but they are nothing compared to the writing. (just thought of a great comparison: poe's the raven. i mean theres a plotline there, and it is scary, but without those words being read to you, its nothing.)
adams himself wrote most of the screenplay before his death. perhaps he had spent too long as a novelist in the intervening years, perhaps it was modesty, but he forgot that he himself (or rather his writing style) was what needed to make it to the screen, as opposed to big budget fx versions of arthurs story.

i knew we were in trouble when the movie stops dead in its tracks about 20 minites in so that they can play the original theme song to us. its like they were saying: "see this really is the hitchhikers guide. honest it is."

Still it deserves viewing in the privacy of one's own home with the proper mood enhancements and company.

I agree with you Razor, the whole emphasis of the movie is Arthur, Ford, Trillian and those they run into, rather than the book.

I was so shocked and appauled by the Thanks for all the Fish song even though it was very "Monty Python-ish", to me it like they filmed the opening of that book and stuck into this movie as the first chapter.

Yet, my wife totally loved it and has heard and seen everything but actually read the books.

I bought the DVD for her but it might be several weeks before we'll watch it.

If it weren't for seeing the original Marvin (hate the new one) and Simon Jones, I would have tried to ask for my money back.

Michael