The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005) (1 Viewer)

[TheLongshot]

My wife would be all over that. Her favorite author ever.

Course, we still don't have a Good Omens film, and it looks like the deal he made with Dreamworks to do a 3D animated version of the Bromeliad series seems to have gone nowhere.

Jason

 

[Patrick H.]

More than any other film in recent memory, it seems as though 'Hitchhiker's' is a really "audience-dependent" film. I saw this on opening night with a theater full to the gills with both long-time fans (who all seemed to like to finish their favorite lines) and teens just out at the movies on a Friday night. Right from the opening musical number, everybody was laughing up a storm, and with only a few lulls, they kept it up for the whole film.

One bit which got a great reaction was the flash-cut pullback up the whole height of a Vogon ship that just...kept...going, with appropriately over-the-top music hits. With every cut, more and more of the audience started laughing, until the whole theater was in hysterics. It was infectious. When the Guide made its entrance immediately afterward, people applauded.

A couple days later, I talked with a friend who'd seen it and didn't like it. Neither of us were religious followers of the franchise, so our experience going in was roughly equal. I asked him specifically about that scene, and he said he didn't find it funny at all. Our senses of humor are slightly different, but I suspect more that the audience he saw it with just didn't have that same reaction. I think I just lucked into a great crowd which was diverse enough to get big laughs for everything, from the sly British humor to the in-jokes to the all-out slapstick.

So, that said, I got a big kick out of it! In spite of some freneticism which cropped up in the second half, I enjoyed the cast and the wild twists and turns in the plotline. And I REALLY enjoyed the visuals...the old-school effects (particularly the Jim Henson creatures) were nicely whimsical, and the "factory floor" sequence was worth the price of admission alone. Truly awe-inspiring moment there...

 

[Chris]

Dear God, if I could just get a film version of "Small Gods" one of (IMHO) the funniest books ever written..

Anyway, my wife & I went back through the BBC Miniseries tonight of "HitchHikers" and while the graphics are bad, etc. it manages to "sell" the goofiness in a way that is very hard for the big screen version to do.. in part because of the polish.

 

[Will_B]

I'd originally thought the tv mini series sets were bad, but someone must have though we "fans" liked it that way becayse the new film spent such attention recreating the general look of the Heart of Gold and the general look of Arthur's home and pub. I don't mean they recreated them inch by inch nail by nail, but they created the same sort of look & feel, and used the same pedestrian kind of cinematography of them as well.

Except in the film they actually knock down the house instead of just the garden gate. Which shows you what an extra 50 mil can do.

I'd rather they'd just abandoned the old BBC feel entirely rather than try so hard to recreate it.


All in all, tv mini series versus the film: I like the tv mini series better.

 

[TheLongshot]

See, and I thought that whole sequence was a waste of time that could have been better used developing characters. I mean, I saw the earth being blown up in the trailers. I don't need to see them take about 2-3 minutes to do it here.

I thought it was a decent enough movie, and plotwise it works, but most of the comedy gets killed either by lack of chemistry, or lack of comic timing. It was disappointing to see Zaphod basically disappear for the second half of the film. I liked the way they handled him up to that point. Ford is basically a blank slate throught the film.

I'll take the tone of most of the reviews: it wasn't bad, but it wasn't all that great either.

Jason

 

[Robert Crawford]

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.


Crawdaddy

 

[Jim Barg]

Saw the film last night, bought the score CD this afternoon.

I've only read the first two books and that was about six years ago, so I guess you could call me a casual Hitchhiker's fan.

I wasn't sure what to expect since my memory was hazy on the particulars, but I enjoyed the movie quite a bit. The actors (Rockwell and Rickman in particular) were great fun and Joby Talbot's score fit the film perfectly. (The combination of score and source music makes for a pretty satisfying CD experience. The Zaphod election song is very, very funny.)

I was under the impression that the budget was about $100 million, perhaps that was going to be the cost when Jay Roach was in the director's chair five years ago. At a $50 million price tag, I'd bet that Restaurant at the End of the Universe isn't too far out of the realm of improbability after worldwide box office and DVD totals come in.

 

[ThomasC]

I got the soundtrack yesterday. I don't think the Zaphod election song is funny, but it is fun to listen and sing along to, and that goes for "So Long, And Thanks For All The Fish" as well.

 

[Jim Barg]

Yep. (I could just see them doing that number on the Oscars next year... maybe not.) I get a kick out of the (almost) hair-metal ballad vibe that "Vote Zaphod" gives off. Hell, even the Stephen Fry rap about Marvin doesn't assault my eardrums as bad as some reviews made it seem like it was going to.

 

[Joe Schwartz]

I'd have to say the film easily surpassed my lowered expectations. Love triangle aside, I thought it was a decent homage to the BBC TV miniseries.

I played the original Infocom game on my Apple II. You can play that version online here:

http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/infocomjava.html

You can play an illustrated version here, which includes the all-important ability to save and restore your game:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/hitchhikers/game.shtml

 

[Zen Butler]

First time, in years, that I've walked out on a film. 1hr. and 15minutes in. Just horrid and I was on a first date. Luckily, she was smooth about it.

 

[Rich Malloy]

I never expected this film to be as good as the radio program or the novel... but is it even as good as the BBC miniseries?

(I happen to like the BBC series fairly well, and it at least gets the rhythm of the humor and the beats of the punchlines right... and the cheesy sets, costumes and extraneous craniums work fairly well in this context.)

 

[JoSAN]

Short entry: "Mostly crap."

Somewhat longer entry...

Okay, the best thing about it was that I had gift certificates so it didn't cost me anything and it only felt like I wasted about an hour watching a mindless TV show.

With all the flaws throughout - and that awful Disney-fied ending - I find it hard to believe that the producers of this bland endeavor have read the first book. Furthermore, I severely doubt they have even opened books 2, 3 and 4.

If they had read them they would know that Arthur's soulmate is Fenchurch. Trillian is just someone he barely knew and had failed to pick up in a bar.

They would know that the Restaurant at the End of the Universe is at the end of time and not at the "other end of the universe".

They would also know that Earth Mark II was not remade up to the time that it was destroyed. And that Arthur is not the kind of person who would say "Let's have fun and adventure roaming around the galaxy." He roams because he thinks he has no home. The Earth Mark II is still being made and he doesn't know that the dolphins saved the Earth
- as revealed in book 4 - and the planet the Vogons blew up was a fake.
If Slartibartfast plucks a ready-made Earth in its spot, how can the real Earth be put back by the dolphins
?

They don't even know how to make a movie that is engaging and funny. This movie had zero laughs and one chuckle.

(Aside: My chuckle was for the scene in which the camera keeps pulling back, ad nauseum, from the Earth just before it is blown up in a parody of Star Wars/Aliens, etc with the "dum-dum dum dum dum" music that always precedes the destruction of something big. The rest of the audience's chuckle was for the whale hitting the ground. Go figure.)

The producers looked like they were trying to imitate the BBC series more than the book. What with the music from the original show and the cameos of the original Marvin and Arthur. But the movie does such a piss-poor job of it that I intend to go out and buy the series on DVD. It was done infinitely better. The actors could act for one thing. Act and make you laugh. They were so in character. Mos Def didn't capture Ford AT ALL and you'd need a Babel fish in your ear to translate his mumbled lines. And the Humma Kavula character is COMPLETELY POINTLESS and that plot diversion GOES NOWHERE.

The visuals for the guide in the TV show were perfect and hilarious. The FX of the guide in this movie were pathetic -- they looked like some kid playing around with a colorforms set and a time-lapse camera. Again, the guide entries from the eighties - done nearly a quarter of a century ago - look supremely better.

The theatre I saw this at advertised: "Don't forget to bring your towel!" I wish I had. Then I could have wrapped it around my head and shielded my senses from this mind-numbingly bad movie.

And people mention that the opening scene with the dolphins is the best part? That may be so, but you can thank the dolphins for that. Their grace and beauty would help anything, but for a movie the scene it was overly long. (And what are they going to do for the fourth movie, which is called "So Long and Thanks for All the Fish"? What am I saying?? There will never be a fourth movie or any sequels after this!) And Monty Pyhton-like? This movie has been Americanized. All the British wit has been leached out of it. It's like watching the failed pilot "Red Dwarf: USA". Dreadful.

Rent the BBC show if you want to see the Hitchhiker's Guide. At least that Zaphod has two heads and three arms!(Question: How can Sam Rockwell be brilliant in Galaxy Quest and revoltingly bad in this? Answer: 42. Doesn't work? Well how about -- blame the director and the writers!)

If you haven't done so already, I recommend you read the books. Except the 5th one, which is crap and non-canonical so you can skip that one. Adams himself admitted to being in a bad mood when he wrote it. He didn't like being known only for Hitchhikers and so killed off all the characters in a ludicrous rage. (Funny, Arthur Conan Doyle tried to do the same to Sherlock Holmes).

But books 1 to 4 are very good. The first Dirk Gently, too.

 

[JoSAN]

.

 

[Will_B]

I'm glad you said that. I thought I was going deaf. It was odd casting, getting someone who couldn't enunciate. Plus I kept trying to figure out if he was the guy from Red Dwarf, which pulled me out of the film.

 

[Jeffrey Nelson]

I love the original BBC TV series. Never got to hear the radio version, unfortunately. I saw the trailer for the film, and my immediate thought was, "Oh great, they Americanized it. Fabulous. One Brit in the whole cast. Super." And the rest of my thoughts to follow were even less favorable. JoSAN's review just confirmed my suspicions. I don't think I'll bother...

I can just imagine Monty Python's Flying Circus being remade with all American comedians. Yeah, that would be a GREAT idea...

 

[TheLongshot]

I think those critisizing the movie because it doesn't follow the books is missing the point. Considering that Adams didn't particularly care about plot, it shouldn't matter that the plot changes here as well. The general plot of the movie, I thought, was well thought out. (Except for the Humma Kavula thing, which was pointless.) It is the least of this movie's problems.

The main problem is that the director forgot that you need to develop actual characters in the film. I mean, you have a problem when Ford and Zaphod disappear after the halfway point. I don't have a problem with the "romance" plot, if they actually spent some time developing it.

It is too bad they give these jobs to rather amateurish directors. If they actually gave this to someone with talent, this could have been something special. Unfortunatly, it was a missed opportunity.

I still think it is worth seeing, just don't be in a hurry.

Jason

 

[ThomasC]

After they go through the portal? Trillian went along with them too. A similar thing happened in the book, didn't it? They went inside Magrathea and not much was mentioned of them until Arthur saw them again at the dining table.

 

[Paul_Stachniak]

Hahaha. Brilliant - that should be a quote on the Special Edition DVD where the directors apologies to the fans for the whole run time of the movie.

Let's not kid ourselves, if you've read the book, heard the radio series or seen the TV series you will know this is a terrible adaptation. I'm all for playing around with the story, but pointless subplots which go nowhere is not very Adams-ish.

Nor where some of the interpretations of the characters.

The worst bit was the dialogue that was left out. Dialogue is what made the other version as popular and special as they where. Here we have some flat slap-stick moments followed by childish jokes. Terrible.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I've only caught bits of the BBC series and excerpts from the books, but enough to sort of know what type of humor to expect. I agree that they added the touch of George Bush to the Prez of Universe, but that I chalked up to the film being extended to comment on its own times as well.

Generally speaking I thought it was in exactly the DA vein of humor. Certainly it could never be as dense as the written word, but the general attitude still comes across I think.

It makes me want to spend time with the books properly, but will remain an enjoyable viewing as a stand-alone film for me.

I'd rate it 7.5 or 8 of 10. Pretty solid "top 30 things to see" type of rating. Much better humor than typically comes out of big productions like this, far more sly and whimsical as pointed out by others.