Hitch Hiker's Guide [Archive] - Diablo: IncGamers Forums

Lostprophet

30-04-2005, 03:20

Hated it. Not the worst movie I've ever seen, but certainly among the most dissapointing. Actually, it shouldn't have been, since I knew there was no way they could do the book justice, even if Adams did have a pen on the script, like he did. But I let my hopes get all up after laughing at the credits.

Ah well. Just another Poland pose, I spose.

Glad you enjoyed it, sir.

cotton

30-04-2005, 03:37

I have been hanging around in the air waiting for this movie, in exactly the same way as bricks don't.

And I'm not exactly sure how Adams had a pen in the script, as he's dead (1952-2001.)

EDIT: Maybe he has Tupak skills, or, more likely, it was his son, who finished Salmon of Doubt for him.

Lostprophet

30-04-2005, 03:51

I'm pretty sure he was given partial credit for the screenplay... maybe? :confused:

(Yeah, I know he's dead. Calm down).

Stevinator

30-04-2005, 05:06

If I'm not mistaken, Adams "translated" his book into several different media, and had to rewrite the story a bit each time to fit the media. No doubt much was changed again when it finally moved to the big screen. I haven't seen it. but I intend to see it eventually.

Jigga-Scrooge

30-04-2005, 06:22

my local paper gave it 2 and a half stars.

corax

30-04-2005, 10:49

say it on friday. but gf wouldnt stop talking so missed most of it

Necrolestes

30-04-2005, 12:29

my local paper gave it 2 and a half stars.

My paper was less generous: 1 and a half. The main issue was that all of the cool dialogue was replaced with mundane tripe (when Arthur's house is about to be bulldozed, and he asks to see the plans that were on the wall, the response in the movie is "they were in the basement"...that's just plain wrong!) They also downplay the towels! That's even more wrong than the dialogue. Everyone KNOWS that the towel is the most useful thing a hitchhiker can take with him when he galavants about the galaxy.

bigD72

30-04-2005, 17:16

From what I've noticed, critics don't like it and people who go see it do.

As to Napoleon Dynamite, I'd rather stab myself with a fork 12 times in each eye while swimming in a tank of shark's than watch that again.

If you don't enjoy just random funny stuff happening or don't catch onto subtle humour easily. Don't go see it.

Ash Housewares

30-04-2005, 17:29

keeping score on various forums where I wouldn't instantly spit on peoples opinions I've seen about a 4:3 good:bad ratio

SuggestiveName

30-04-2005, 17:44

It seems like people think it is trendy to not like it. It makes them feel cooler to hate on a movie for whatever reason. Myself, I hope to see it this afternoon and I will pass judgement.

Stoutwood

30-04-2005, 18:03

As to Napoleon Dynamite, I'd rather stab myself with a fork 12 times in each eye while swimming in a tank of shark's than watch that again.

This definitely gives your movie credibility a boost in my eyes.

Cloud_Walker

30-04-2005, 19:38

It was OK, but I was disappointed because I as well knew they couldn't do the book justice.

Adams did help write the screenplay, but the film got delayed for some reason. I have the Ultimate Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (all 5 books in one), and Adams mentions it in the introduction.

Beowulf

30-04-2005, 20:29

I liked it very much. My local paper gave it a 3.5/5. It mainly focused on the first book but parts of so long and thanks for all the fish and others to appear. Some stuff was removed or shortened like how Ford gets the forman to replace arthur in front of the buldozer etc. Still liked it though.

Matt

01-05-2005, 00:19

I liked it, its a very random story though.

Ev_

01-05-2005, 02:14

I liked it, its a very random story though.
Hah! Have you read the books?

I think I'll be seeing it on Monday.

piff

01-05-2005, 04:30

It's a story that I like to imagine. I don't really want someone else dictating how the sceneries and characters are.

Christor

01-05-2005, 04:42

I just went and saw it, and I have to say that I thought the whole thing was just a big display of how good they could make the special effects. The movie just lacked substance, I couldn't find much of a coherent plot through the whole thing. There were some entertaining bits, but overall I'd only give it 2/5.

Beowulf

01-05-2005, 13:01

Echod16

01-05-2005, 16:13

Dude the books do not have a very coherent plot and that is the whole idea.

so...for a movie he was rating for it's plot, drama, and oscar perfomances...he gave it a 2/5

they should have a seperate star system for comedy movies...since they're not meant to carry much story

SuggestiveName

01-05-2005, 18:19

I did end up seeing it yesterday and I will say it met most of my expectations. It would have been better if they could have kept all the lines and scenes from the radio series, but that would have been a 6 hour movie. I'm generally pleased with what they left in. My only big complaints were that Trillian needed a british accent and acting lessons and they overused the theme of nature montages.

Also, did anyone else notice that Zaphod has be redone as a not-at-all subtle George W. Bush impersonation? It was funny, but I like the traditional Zaphod much better.

Tor

01-05-2005, 18:26

i only thought it was so-so

not the funniest movie. I really liked the special effects though

bigD72

02-05-2005, 02:57

I've seen it twice now.

It's the only movie I've seen more than once and laughed at all the same jokes. The ones that were especially funny the second time, was at the 2nd Earth when the Vulgons were firing, and the group tried to come around the back and Ford attacked them with a towel they screamed "Run he has a towel!!" then Ford locks the gate and one says "He locked the gate from the other side, go around!!" while the gate is roughly knee high.

Ah, what's the point?

th5418

02-05-2005, 03:15

I say it pretty sucked flat out. It was pretty cheesy and what the hell was with the two heads thing?

Module88

02-05-2005, 05:29

I say it pretty sucked flat out. It was pretty cheesy and what the hell was with the two heads thing?

That's obvious. Two heads are better than one. :thanks:

Hatsepsut

02-05-2005, 14:22

I love the books but I fail to see how there is any way a film could do them justice. Judging by the comments here, it can't. Oh well I suppose I'll go see it anyway, just out of curiosity.

jmervyn

02-05-2005, 15:47

I have been hanging around in the air waiting for this movie, in exactly the same way as bricks don't.

Kudos for the most Douglas-esque post in this thread to date...

Arokthis

02-05-2005, 16:25

My biggest gripe is the way they did Zaphod's heads. They're supposed to be side by side, not one on top of the other. At the party where he picked up Trillian, he was supposed to be dressed as a pirate, with a covered cage over one head that was squaking like a parrot.

memememe173

03-05-2005, 05:12

mostly harmless fun. I only liked it because I went in with low expectations towards turning my vision of the book into a movie. (odly enough, I was right) so because of my mindset, I had a great time :D

Ev_

05-05-2005, 08:46

Alright, so I went and saw it tonight. I went in expecting that there was no way they could possibly recreate the books in movie form. They didn't, obviously, but I left the theater incredibly amused.

Adam's did write this screenplay, to clear things up. Like he says in the foreward to The Ultimate Hitchhiker's Guide book, it's all been rewritten so many times that things contradict each other and change all over the place. So this movie was an extremely condensed version of the story with a slightly different take on it.

The problem with putting HHGTTG into movie form is that so much of the humor isn't in the dialogue. It's in Adams' descriptions and phrasings, which can't translate onto screen unless it's in the form of narration. Which is why the best parts of the movie were the narrator's lines. I was doubled over in laughter at the sperm whale part...my favorite part of all the series, and it was put in word for word.

Not an award winning movie (except possibly for visuals), but well worth the ticket money.

KnightFall

05-05-2005, 09:53

I was really looking forward to seeing this film.

Now I'm wondering if I'm going to be filled with dissapointment when I see it...

The books are fantastic, I couldn't stay in the cinema if it's too far from them.

KnightFall

bigD72

07-05-2005, 16:05

So apparently it turns out that it's a love it or hate it kind of movie.

Christor

07-05-2005, 20:28

so...for a movie he was rating for it's plot, drama, and oscar perfomances...he gave it a 2/5

they should have a seperate star system for comedy movies...since they're not meant to carry much story

I never said that I was rating it on "plot, drama, and oscar performances," merely that I didn't enjoy it for it's lack of cohesion. I know that comedies don't tend to carry serious plots, but I like them to at least have a plot, rather than just randomly bounce around all over the place.

If you like that sorta thing, that's great, I'm glad you enjoyed it, however I didn't.

myleftfoot

08-05-2005, 15:53

It seems like people think it is trendy to not like it. It makes them feel cooler to hate on a movie for whatever reason. Myself, I hope to see it this afternoon and I will pass judgement.

maybe you're the one passing judgement.

The way to watch these movies is to forget about the book, and don't do dialogue comparisions or look for scenes left out. If you expect the book you'll always be dissapointed.

SuggestiveName

08-05-2005, 18:17

maybe you're the one passing judgement.

The way to watch these movies is to forget about the book, and don't do dialogue comparisions or look for scenes left out. If you expect the book you'll always be dissapointed.Um, if you read my post *after* I watched the movie you will see that I did in fact like the movie and that I made the exact same point about not going in with expectations that the movie will be exactly as the book was.

(And it's pretty clear I wasn't making any judgement on the people who hated the movie, just making a guess as to a possible motivation for their dislike. Equally plausible hypothesis: they didn't like the movie. No judgement there, so why accuse me of such nonsense?)

asdf

08-05-2005, 19:52

my only major disappointment was that they left out the guide's explanation on towels.

i would say it's alright as a movie... though much of the humour in the books was from the way adams phrased things, especially his extremely long and strange metaphors. the movie just couldn't capture that, except when the guide was speaking.

TheUnchosen

09-05-2005, 03:13

I thought it was funny.
It is, however, british humor which some may not find amusing.

Gibby

09-05-2005, 03:20

bigD72

09-05-2005, 03:47

Since you took a hit at the beloved Napoleon Dynamite then I refuse to go see Hitchhiker's Guide. Thanks for informing me.
Not a problem, I'll gladly burn trash away any day.

RebirthOfMak

09-05-2005, 13:19

Your no fun! Lol i have not seen but I want to...

Mak~

myleftfoot

09-05-2005, 13:50

Um, if you read my post *after* I watched the movie you will see that I did in fact like the movie and that I made the exact same point about not going in with expectations that the movie will be exactly as the book was.

(And it's pretty clear I wasn't making any judgement on the people who hated the movie, just making a guess as to a possible motivation for their dislike. Equally plausible hypothesis: they didn't like the movie. No judgement there, so why accuse me of such nonsense?)

What does your post about the film have to with anything. You were passing judgement on people who didn't like it. Doesn't matter if you phrase it as "just making a guess as to a possible motivation for their dislike". But it's not a big deal. :thumbsup:

It seems like people think it is trendy to not like it. It makes them feel cooler to hate on a movie for whatever reason. Myself, I hope to see it this afternoon and I will pass judgement.

garublador

09-05-2005, 14:50

I never said that I was rating it on "plot, drama, and oscar performances," merely that I didn't enjoy it for it's lack of cohesion. I know that comedies don't tend to carry serious plots, but I like them to at least have a plot, rather than just randomly bounce around all over the place.

If you like that sorta thing, that's great, I'm glad you enjoyed it, however I didn't.

I've had trouble getting through all of the books because of that lack of cohesion, too. I get through "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe" and then start to lose interest. I'm going to try again, though.

Also, not that it will help you enjoy it the movie more, but the movie is more coherent than the books. You can tell they added stuff to try and tie everything together a bit better. Unfortunately, like other serials that have been turned into movies (mostly comic books) there aren't really specific villans to conquer, so it's more difficult to make into discrete movies. In other words, it's not like Spiderman where they can just pick a bad guy for each movie and focus in on that. They tried to do it with the Vogons in "The Hitchhiker's Guide," but were only marginally successful. I still liked it, though.

Johnny6

09-05-2005, 15:02

It was cool, I liked it. But then maybe I was just in a euphoric buzz from the fact that the Vogon dudes weren't entirely CGI. No joke, some actual "old-school" techniques were used. Can you believe it?

SuggestiveName

09-05-2005, 15:53

What does your post about the film have to with anything. You were passing judgement on people who didn't like it. Doesn't matter if you phrase it as "just making a guess as to a possible motivation for their dislike". But it's not a big deal. :thumbsup:No, passing judgement would mean that I said it was good or bad that people were motivated as I was guessing. I did no such thing. So any judgement you felt I made you read into my words, because I certainly wasn't passing judgement on people.