From Fark: http://www.planetmagrathea.com/shortreview.html
Rats. I’d like to dismiss this as just some internet nut who doesn’t know what he’s talking about, but he goes into a great deal of detail, and I’m having a hard time seeing how he could be wrong.
Check out the links on the bottom of the page for said details - I’m linking to the non-spoiler version.
Oh, dear. My worst fears are confirmed. It sounds as if the filmmakers really don’t get it at all.
Damn!
Oh well.
Gin and tonics all around, hey?
I’d prefer a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster. Which is, incidentally, apparently not mentioned once in the movie. :mad:
From the few brief clips I have seen of the TV commercial it does look terrible. So back to the original source for me ( the radio tapes) and a stiff Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster. O hum.
Bah, I’m not worried at all.
First of all, some people just get so attached to books or other source material that they won’t accept any criticism. Remember the scathing net reviews for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and I, Robot? Both of those turned out to be decent movies, notwithstanding all the carping about how much they diverged from the respective books. This guy starts out by saying the acknowledges that every version must have differences, that what works in radio format doesn’t necessarily work in book format, and so on, by the review that he proceeds to write acknowledges no such thing. Hell, at one point he whines for a whole (long) paragraph about the removal of a single word from a particular patch of dialogue.
Second, he’s off the mark on what made the book funny in the first place. He insists that all the comic high points are in the dialogue, which is why he objects strenuously to any changes in the dialogue. But at least as much of the good stuff, if not more, is in the narration. That includes the bit about the bable fish and God, the jump in the narrative at the missile attack scene, the whale’s interior ruminations, and so forth. Those things won’t go over to film, they have to be changed. There’s no way out of it. For instance,
He’s upset that Helen Mirren isn’t deep and majestic enough as Deep Thought. Well in the book, it says, " ‘Forty-two’ it said, with infinite depth and majesty." So in a movie, how do you say ‘forty-two’ with infinite depth and majesty? You don’t! The filmmakers had to find something different to do in tht scene. Sheesh.
cries I’ve been looking forward to this for so long. Criminy.
Consider me unconvinced. I didn’t read the whole 4 pages, as it got, well, boring and irritating. It seems to me that the writer is indulging in a lot of nitpicking about where the film differs from previous versions, and never actually tells us if the film in itself is any good. That’s the bottom line. Not how pain-stakingly true it is to the particular bits of one particular prior version that were this one particular fan’s favourite.
Then there’s a litany of complaints about the plot not making sense, to which all I can say is; “Have you read HHGTTG??” And then there’s complaints about the Improbability Drive not being improbable enough, followed by complaints that the following plot is inexplicable… or improbable, as you might say.
That’s not to say that the film won’t turn out to be just as bad as described. But this guys complants sound too much like a precious fanboy’s who was never going to be happy.
What ITR said. Heck, forget Harry Potter and I, Robot: remember all of the purist whinging about Lord of the Rings? I think the same thing is going down here. Film and text are different media. Internet reviewers/purists are nigh-impossible to please.
Also, the reviewer seems to be unaware that Adams wrote the screenplay and by all accounts was pretty heavily involved in production until his death. I’ve still got high hopes for this movie.
Sounds like fanboy whineing to me by a kid that has no understanding of the film medium. Any review that includes a list of things left out can be easily dismissed as fanboy whineing. I’d like to see if his ten hour word-by-word remake is any better.
Let’s face it, the only reason to make HHGTTG in to a movie is to try to make a buck off the pre-existant fan base. It’s horribly fragmented, the plot is held together by innumeralable shreds, and it relies on narration and backstory that just can’t be conveyed well in film. Nobody would make this movie out of pure love. It, like nearly all movies, is a purely commercial enterprise, not some sort of public service.
And lets face it, there are very few bucks to be made off this thing. Your not going to sell Americans on either sci-fi or British comedy any time soon. To most people, HHGTTG is that thing the dorky kids would quote in wierd accents right before you pants them in gym. Of course they could have CG’d Zaphod’s extra head, and sure they *could] have had fabulous special effects, but that would ruin the whole point of the movie- which is to make a buck.
Meanwhile, they’ve got to find a plot, figure out what to do with the narration, deal with the fact that most of the things that happen in the book are the result of long somewhat pointless connections that simply can’t all make it in to the movie, add appropriate plot climaxes and resolutions (after all, it’s got to be somewhat appealing to a mainstream audience to make any money at all- do your parents really want to go out to see a movie they think is “wierd”) and appease the fanboys at the same time.
Not a task I would have taken on, but I didn’t pay for the thing so I’ve got no right to complain. I can always just pick the book off my shelf and enjoy it in it’s pure entirety all I want.
How disappointing. I love the books - and thoroughly enjoyed the cheesy low budget TV series.
The puerile whinings of this Comic Book Guy wannabe are not enough to convince me that Hitchhikers’s won’t be a fun movie. He was looking for things to bitch about.
Of course, I still have hope for Episode III…
And I thought Troy and King Arthur had a chance to be good…
Aw hell, I’m just turning into a rosy-viewed movie optimist in my old age.
Yeah, really. I’m not really a fan of HHGTTG because of the inconsistent nature of the plot. I don’t care if the individual jokes are funny if the plot doesn’t make sense, so I didn’t like the book. I actually think I’ll like the movie way more–because it has to appeal to a wide audience, it’s going to have a plot that makes some kind of sense. Come on, some of the stuff in the book was totally unfilmable. Though I don’t know how they could have done away with the entry on Earth. That was actually an important part of the book, I thought.
Oh man, a geek on the 'net didn’t like the movie. My day is rui… wait, what’s the word I want. Unaffected, that’s it.
In other words, what Futile Gesture and ITR said.
Going off on a tangent here, I have a whole week of vacation stretching out ahead of me. Is there actually a recipe, or a simulation thereof, of the Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster?
Yes, but you’ll need a gold brick, a lemon and a neurosurgery appointment to follow.
No. They. Did. NOT.
Okay, I know of a neurosurgeon, and I can get a lemon. It’s the gold brick that will be the problem. Gold paint over a regular brick, maybe?
I figured there was no “real” recipe on this world but thought that Dopers, being what they are, had mixed up their own versions.
I sure thought they did. Sorry sir. 