Hitchhikers guide & the Chocolate factory

[TerranRich]

Just keep in mind that it's a movie, the formula for which the book doesn't fit. They had to re-shape the book for the movie. Don't expect the book... instead, expect a damn good movie that won't disappoint.

[Kweepa]

I have NEVER bought that "can't make book into movie" line. That's always the first excuse trotted out when some perfectly good plot and dialog is replaced with rubbish. Not that I'm saying that happened here...

[TerranRich]

But think about it. As far as I could remember, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" didn't really have an orthodox plot the same way other novels do. It just kinda went along at its own pace, unraveling a huge thread of initerweaving stories and anecdotes. The movie was awesome. Let's just keep it at that.

[Las Naranjas]

It didn't have a plot.

[Haddas]

AS a film, it was enjoyable. As staying tru to the book it was mediocre. I liked the TV series better too. Sure, the Vogons were better here, but there were many new things not mentioned in the book. As I can recall, Arthur wanted nothing more than everything being back to normal. I might recall wrong thoug. It's been 6 months since I read it. I wanted to see the movie version of the restaurant at the end of the universe. Though Martin was terrible in my opinion.

[TheYak]

I finally watched HHGTTG.  I dug it.  I thought the mood of the movie fit well with the book.  There were some minor additions/changes but I'm not entirely convinced DA wouldn't have made some of them himself had he still been around.  The beginning song was brilliant and put me in a very Monty Python mood. 

Since there's a critical air about this place, I'll go ahead and throw in my criticisms:
>Thought the latter half of the movie fell a bit flat.  They seemed to want to take the "plot" to a finish and wrap it all up nicely. 
>I didn't care for Ford much.  He seemed a lot more smart/sarcastic in the book.  Any action he took seemed to be random or silly in the books but ended up showing a lot of know-how.  In the movie, he was a bit more of a bumbler. He also didn't factor in as a real driving force or unique personality - more of a kick-off in the beginning than pencilling him in for the rest of it. 
>Zaphod came off in the movie as an utter imbecile who acts like one.  In the book, I felt he was more of a fairly stupid person that at least conveyed the idea that he knew what he was doing. In the books, he always struck me as a bit of a two-headed Leisure Suit Larry kind of chap.  I didn't care for the compromise they made with his physical attributes but prefer it to them leaving that out all together.
>  I think the voice of Marvin was a great choice, just didn't like the body style much. Somehow, in my head, he resembled something more like a boxier version of the Lost in Space robot.

Other than it flustering about and falling down a bit during the latter half, I enjoyed it.  I'd expected to loathe it but, on the whole, it felt worthwhile. Certainly not a waste of cash (unlike many movies I've seen recently).  Slartibartfast (sp?) kicked much ass. Also, they even kept a lot of the narrative/Guide parts, even when they interrupted an action sequence.  A lot more true to the book than I expected.  I'd give it about an 8/10. 

[Al_Ninio]

I enjoyed the film.
Granted, it wasn't the book, and it wasn't at all similiar to how I imagined the book.
It may have been a bit too slapstick-y... But it worked.

One thing I didn't really like was Marvin.
The voice acting was perfect, as I knew it would be when I learned that Alan Rickman would be doing it.
The robot's design, however...
So... Cute... In an unsettling way.
Although they sort of made up for it when:

Spoiler

The original Marvin (from the TV series) made a little cameo. Sweet.

[close]

Slartibartfast was also quite awesome, and the whole Magrathea bit... Just... Wow.

[Ashen]

For the most part, I really enjoyed it. It was odd to see little things they threw in that would make perfect sense to fans, but confuse or completely bypass anyone else (the crabs on the Vogon ship and planet, "This is my cousin Ix, sorry Ford"), while at the same time altering 'classic' lines for no readily apparent reason (although the only one that come to mind right now is "On display? I had to go down to a cellar.")

As staying tru to the book it was mediocre.

But, there's a long and pround tradition of each successive version of the Guide (radio to book, to TV, the sequels) ignoring or flat out contradicting stuff that's gone before. That's the reason, I think, that I wasn't as upset about most of the changes as I was expecting to be - it doesn't have to be the exact story, provided it's in the same spirit. (Which is why I'm not happy about them getting Arthur & Trillian together - it's more or less antithical to the characters, as I think of them.)

As to the design of Marvin, I didn't like it either, for most of the reasons mentioned, although I can sort of see why - we know he's an electric sulking machine, but he wasn't necessarily designed to be, he's a personality prototype, that went a bit wrong, so he shouldn't look like a paranoid android, more like 'your plastic pal who's fun to be with'. I wasn't too happy with the voice, either - good as Alan Rickman is, he didn't sound like Marvin to me. He sounded like Alan Rickman - more sarcastic than depressed, and maybe a little drunk.

I'm also going to have to disagree with most people about Slartibartfast. He was funny, yes, but it just seemed like Bill Nighy doing the aging-rockstar-thing he usually does (as far as I can tell), and totally lacked the gravitas he had in the book. Still, as comic relief, I suppose he was perfect.

But I agree with Al about:

Spoiler

the original Marvin cameo being kind of cool

[close]

As was:

Spoiler

Simon Jones, the original Arthur (and the model for the character, I believe), as the Magrathean answer phone message.

[close]

[Ubel]

I haven't yet seen the film but I read the book a few days ago when my dad recommended it for me. It was really the funniest book I've read this far.

[dgunpluggered]

Haven't seen the movie yet. Want to. But in regards to the whole "book into the movie" discussion, you can adapt most books into great movies. In fact, some of the best movies I've seen have been adapted from really crappy books.

In HHGTTG, adapting it was harder, mainly cause the story was inconsequential. What made the book great were Adams' digressions where he'd just ramble on about very funny stuff that had no relevance to the plot. He was just a funny guy who did a great job of weaving jokes around his narrative. Meanwhile, most conventional films rely on straight line narative. The digression weaving doesn't work so well.

Also, his digressions were very textual. It's hard to make them into something visual and still keep the flow of the story.

Keep in mind, though, I haven't see the film yet.

[PaulSC]

^^ good points.

Personally I wasn't bothered about 'accuracy', things being changed or shortened in principal, I was bothered by the fact that most of the big changes and additions didn't really make the story any more 'cinema-ready' or coherent, but also didn't add much in the way of good comedy. It just seemed to have a couple of new subplots thrown in there for no clear reason at all.

There was still enough good stuff in there to make it a basically enjoyable film, but I wish I could look back on it and go "yeah they really nailed it with that Hitchhiker film they did", instead of "Hm, not too sure about that one".

[TerranRich]

Now, where was the TV-Series Marvin cameo? I must've missed it.

[Ashen]

In the queue on Vogsphere. You can see his back when they enter the room, and as Arthur passes him, he (Arthur) does a double take. I think his eyes where the wrong colour, though.

[DragonRose]

The movie was okay. Not as good as the TV show or the books, but it was okay. They left out some of my favourite bits (Majikthise and Vroomfondel were nowhere to be seen, and Mr. Prosser didn't lie down in front of the bull dozer :'() and some of the stuff they replaced it with was just sort of bland. And the ending was baaaaaaaaad.

But I must admit, I surruptitiously rocked out to the opening theme.

[PaulSC]

The moment when the main theme tune kicks in was definitely a chills-down-the-spine moment. The So Long And Thanks For All The Fish song was pretty catchy as well. And excellently reprised in Divine Comedy form at the end!

[FrogMarch]

I agree that the film was basically OK, but what was with the whole section to do with Zaphod getting his head stolen? Although the coming of the big white handkerchief and the planet (I forget its name) that the guys land on are both mentioned in the book, I just don't see the sense in putting this stuff into the film in the way they did. The time used in these scenes could have been more wisely used by includig parts of the book that were left out.

Also,

Spoiler

Why did the dolphins return at the end? Did the makers of the film simply not read pas the second book? They're gone forever! Even on the new Earth! Arg...

[close]

It was a funny film, but, as mentioned by others, the characters and events seem to have been misinterrperated in the film.

[Mr Flibble]

The thing that annoyed me most (apart from the rubbish casting. Martin Freeman isn't nearly English enough!) was that all the ends were left off jokes.
Arthur says that the plans were in a basement, but he doesn't say they were in the a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard" in a basement with no lights and no stairs.

I mean, they leave in the entire wale monologue, but they cut "Very deep. You should send that into the readers digest, they've got a page for people like you."

The section on Vogsphere felt tacked on, though I did enjoy seeing old Marvin in the queue, and the Bug Blatter Beast of Traal.

Apart from that, the film was alright. Not a touch on the book and not quite as good as the TV series, but my hopes weren't high. At least they kept the theme music, and the lemon hat was a good replacement for the Peril Sensitive Shades.

Actually I would have overlooked ALL of these points, had Prefect been more childlike and subtle, and crazy, and if the plot had some vague coherence along the lines that Arthur is a bumbling idiot who can't grasp even the simplest of premises.

As for Wonky Willie, I prophesise nastiness.

[lo_res_man]

Does anyone besides me know about the hithhikers guide to the galixy game ? crazyiest text adventure of all time
(for those who dont know, text adventures were what adventure games were before Kings quest)

[FrogMarch]

I played that game once (actually, about 50 times, as I kept getting blown up right at the start).

It is indeed insane, and amazingly hard. Some of the puzzles, especially those inside the Heart Of Gold, are a bit too random for my liking, and it's because of this that I never finished it.

If anyone's interested, though, you can play it online, for free, here.

You can save your games, too.

[PaulSC]

I used to totally love the text adventure when I was a kid. It might even've been my first intro to Hitchhikers. I keep meaning to set some time aside to go through it again.

It is practically impossible to finish on your own, but my version had all the hints built directly into the game, so it didn't matter. The thing is filled with just a ridiculous amount of detail and tiny jokes and things. The hint thing I had gave you a big list of all the guide entries and fun things to try in the game, but they don't seem to have put those online, the churls.