Yoz Grahame's Cheerleader: Hitchhiker's movie reviews: Some balance needed, perhaps

April 11, 2005

Hitchhiker's movie reviews: Some balance needed, perhaps

Despite there having been several positive reviews of the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy movie before his, MJ Simpson's vitriolic slamming has been getting more linkage than all the rest combined. This is mainly because, as someone who wrote a book about Douglas Adams, it's generally considered that he should know what he's talking about. (Oh, and also because it fulfils all the "I knew they'd screw it up!" paranoia which so many fans seem to treasure.)

To redress the balance somewhat from the only negative review that's appeared, here are some slightly-more-positive ones:

From Kevin Davies, probably the best-known Hitchhiker's fan after MJ Simpson (whose long Hitchhiker's-related career is listed here):

I loved it. (I clearly saw a different film to Mike Simpson!) Douglas's family were there and everyone was delighted with the outcome. Imagine you've never heard / read / seen any other version of HHGG. You're all in for a treat - so long as you keep an open mind.

From Moriarty of Ain't It Cool News:

[...] I can tell you that I thought the film was a glorious shambling tribute to the work of Adams, a beautifully realized vision filled to the brim with quirky performances and hilarious details. It’s almost shockingly eccentric and manages to stay very faithful to the spirit of all the previous incarnations of the story while also contributing some fascinating new ideas to the overall mythos.

From Nicholas Botti, webmaster of h2g2movie.com:

I would have difficulties to understand someone who says that he's a Hitchhiker's fan and hates the movie. This is certainly the best movie we could hope for. From now on, I'm a great fan of Garth Jennings and Nick Goldsmith. They really deserve all our respect.

From Jenz Kjellberg, webmaster of douglasadams.se:

Bearing in mind all the way that this was a rough cut of the movie, with not all the FX finished and the music score not all there, I have never seen anything quite like it, and nothing springs to mind to compare it with. Did I like it? Yes I did, very much. Did I laugh? Oh, yes indeed I did. Very much so.

From Jim Lynn, the technical lead on h2g2.com:

What some people might be expecting is a version of the radio or TV series with better effects, and those people will be disappointed if that's all they want. What we do get is a film which still contains a large amount of Douglas' words but which, more importantly, recognises that film is a visual medium and not radio with pictures. It somehow manages to do the kinds of things with pictures that Douglas did with words in the Radio series and books.

From Tim Browse, lead developer on Starship Titanic and producer of h2g2.com:

Today I saw the movie for the second time, and once again I find myself coming to the conclusion that I must have been shown a different movie to the one that MJ Simpson saw. Having twice been in a cinema full of people who were laughing all the way through at the movie (and these are British people, for crying out loud!), and then reading that the movie is "staggeringly unfunny" leaves me somewhat confused. Partly because I heard all those people laughing myself with my own ears, but mainly because I loved the film.

From Sean Sollé, who also worked on Starship Titanic and h2g2.com, as well as the new mobile adventure game of the film:

If you want a damn fine Hitchhiker's movie, something that you as a fan (and hence contributor to the original success of Hitchhiker) can be bloody proud of, and something that your non-fan friends will enjoy and finally understand what you've been going on about for the last twenty-something years, then this is it.

(Disclaimer: Sean, Tim, Jim and I have been tangentially involved in various stages of the movie's production and publicity. We've also been massive Hitchhiker's fans since we were young, and have worshipped practically everything Douglas ever wrote. So our perceptions are somewhat coloured.)

And me? Take a wild guess. But in order to redress the balance somewhat the other way, I'm going to make an effort to be as critical as I can:

A couple of the gags are corny.
While the four main stars are great, a couple of the other performances don't work quite as well.
A couple of bits are rather rushed.
A couple of my favourite lines are missing.
Er...
That's it.

(And until I get the chance to think things through and write a proper review, that's about all you're getting from me.)

If you're the kind of Hitchhiker's fan who's going to turn up with a checklist and base your opinion on a final total at the bottom then you might not enjoy it. On the other hand, if you're a fan who realises how different each version of the story has been and who wants to see Hitchhiker's performed with the kind of visuals (and more importantly, the kind of utterly stunning production design) it deserves, and who, most importantly, wants to see a good new movie, I think you'll love it too.

To finish, a favourite old quote:

I loved the film of 2001, saw it six times and read the book twice. And then I read a book called The Lost Worlds of 2001 in which Clarke chronicles the disagreements between himself and Kubrick - he goes through all the ideas left by the wayside, "Look at this idea he left out, and this idea!", and at the end of the book one has an intense admiration for Kubrick.

... from Neil Gaiman's Don't Panic, as spoken by Douglas Adams.

Posted by Yoz at April 11, 2005 05:23 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Frank Herbert wrote (in "Eye") about the making of the Dune movie, that "film is another language" into which the director "translates" a book. I would guess Douglas would have understood that perfectly well, and it seems, from the reviews I've read, that's what's been done to HHG. I suspect Arthur Clarke didn't quite get that (at the time).

Posted by: Ben Last on April 12, 2005 10:08 AM

At last somebody got my name right! Thanks Yoz!

Posted by: The Duke of Dunstable on April 14, 2005 07:00 AM

You can thank Jim Lynn for that, Jenz - I got it wrong first time!

Posted by: Yoz on April 15, 2005 02:04 AM

Hahaha, that's ok Yoz.

Posted by: The on April 17, 2005 03:17 PM

Oh, where to start...

First of all, Arthur C. Clarke wrote 2001 alongside Kubrick at the same time the film was being made. They worked together, even though there were minor differences between the film and book, so Clarke can not be critisized for any part he had in the film or the novel.

As for the Guide...

Posting "reviews" by people involved with the production of the film itself is a good way to discredit all the content on this page. Way to go.

I have not seen the film, and I fear seeing it. It's obvious that the timing of this film's production coincides with Adams' death; it took his death to allow this heap of a film to be made.

The fluidity of the telling of this story over the years can be used as an excuse to rewite huge chunks of the story and the jokes, but it seems, by most accounts, that this film went too far.

That said, I like the prospect of Mod Def as Ford, and Alan Rickman as the voice of Marvin. But no amount of acting (or over-production) can salvage a film that has the audacity to remove Adams' jokes and insert new ones.

Posted by: C Barter on April 18, 2005 03:28 AM

That Simpson guy needs to get out more,,, seriously,, I'm worried about him. I'll be there, towel in hand.

Posted by: Juck on April 18, 2005 06:50 AM

"First of all, Arthur C. Clarke wrote 2001 alongside Kubrick at the same time the film was being made. They worked together, even though there were minor differences between the film and book, so Clarke can not be critisized for any part he had in the film or the novel."

I think you've completely misunderstood the point of the quote, which is not to criticise Clarke for problems with the film, but rather to point out that Clarke's own criticisms of omission are faulty. Leaving something out does not necessarily make the movie worse.

"Posting "reviews" by people involved with the production of the film itself is a good way to discredit all the content on this page. Way to go."

All those who were involved with the movie have been listed as such, and only make up half the review excerpts on this page. Perhaps you missed that.

"It's obvious that the timing of this film's production coincides with Adams' death"

Nice theory, but completely wrong. Douglas was actively working on the movie when he died. The movie that's being released is the culmination of the same project that started in the late '90s.

"The fluidity of the telling of this story over the years can be used as an excuse to rewite huge chunks of the story and the jokes, but it seems, by most accounts, that this film went too far."

Where do you get this "most" from? By now I've seen other negative reviews than Simpson's, but they're still hugely outweighed by the positive ones, including those from print publications.

"But no amount of acting (or over-production) can salvage a film that has the audacity to remove Adams' jokes and insert new ones."

You appear unaware of the role of a script editor, of the obvious constraints of a 100-minute movie, and the fact that much of the new material was written by Douglas before he died.

Posted by: Yoz on April 19, 2005 12:57 AM

I think I was 22 years old when I played Zaphod, strapped to my twin brother, in a play of Hitchhikers that I helped adapt for a University production. Totally illegal, yes, and an absolute dogs breakfast of a show. But by God we were enthusiastic! Anhoo, I just finished reading the reviews on this site and I'm really excited. The film opened here in Sydney yesterday, and I've been avoiding reviews as I'm seeing it tomorrow. Well, I was avoiding them, until I got in after a long days work, followed by a few post work ales, and started surfing the net. Yes! I knew Sam Rockwell would kick arse as Zaphod; you could keep a side of beef cold in that guy for weeks. My partner wants to be the mother of Martin freemans children. I know this because I've read her emails to him. I've been a fan since The Office, and I'm really glad he nailed Dent. Great casting. I'll be back!

Posted by: scott ferguson on April 29, 2005 03:25 PM

Thanks for the response to Simpson's article. I'm in the USA and I just saw the film. I am delighted with it!

"If you're the kind of Hitchhiker's fan who's going to turn up with a checklist and base your opinion on a final total at the bottom then you might not enjoy it." This goes along with any good movie adaptation where viewers criticize its faithfulness to the original book. Any good moviemaker knows that books must be changed in order to make a good movie. (see FIGHT CLUB)

I am surprised that no one has commented on the Arthur/Trillian love story. Was that a Douglas addition, or a marketing tool for audiences? I read one review that criticized the addition, saying that Doug Adams would never include ventures into romantic fluffyness. I guess that person never made it to book four of the trilogy. Fenny?

Posted by: dan d. on April 30, 2005 08:04 PM

Unlike some of the people commenting I've actually seen the movie - I hadn't read any reviews, I'd even forgotten Disney had a part so no Disney-bashing - but as a life-long H2G2 fan - since seeing the series at 8 in 1981 and reading them all, writing reviews and then listening to all the radio plays, this film was the biggest pile of crap I've ever seen, I've never wanted to walk out of a film, this was the first.

It's Keystone Kops in Space - MJ Simpson is right, all the jokes have been taken out. I wasn't expecting the TV series or the radio show (I was aware of all the carping about the TV show, but it bore more of a relationship to Douglas's humour, vision and ideas than the film!).

I didn't want a blow for blow reanactment, but for a film I've been waiting for for 25 years I wanted it to be a good legacy of Douglas Adams's work even if they rewrote it all, made them all adverts for teeth whitening and set it in States, if it was funny, worked and had that same great dry wit and Adam's surealistic humour I'd not care.

But the changes to the plot, dialogue, and acting don't actually ADD anything and actually detract from it. Sorry. Big stinker - worse than Star Wars II - that at least had BIG stoopid battles and FX.

I mean I'm a big fan but not a rabid one - listening to the Tertiary Phase and loving that, even though some of the people *gasp* are not the same some actually sound better - Franklin's better than Peter Jones actually. It's not about slavish devotion, it's that Adams is part of my youth and makeup and it pains me to see some Disney-wash out and meeja-obssesed knowing advertising director's wet dream labeled 'HitchHiker's' when they may as well done a Star Wars on it.

Then at least the non-fans might have enjoyed it, yes?

Posted by: tim baker on May 1, 2005 07:14 PM

I was really looking forward to the film, having come to the "World of Adams" with the radio show, and enjoying its development through books and TV. But I was really disappointed. Ford was poorly cast and badly characterised, as were most of the rest of the cast. No-one stands out as good, the closest being Bill Nighy as Slartibartfast. But still not a patch on Richard Vernon (TV) for sheer "other worldliness".

Younger members of the audience did seem to find it funny in places, but they were places that the older fan could see coming, and relish being re-aquainted with.

I realise the limitations placed on a cinema offering, and that it is impossible to accurately reproduce H2G2 in the time constraints imposed by the modern cinema. But it was very disappointing.

It was good to see the original Marvin the Paranoid Android again, if only in cameo.

It was a shame that the 'Guide' scenes were so poor, my PDA has a better presentation.

Sadly, I wish I'd stayed at home and re listened to the radio series.

Posted by: JohnT on May 2, 2005 02:56 PM

It bothers me when people say things like "Sadly, I wish I'd stayed at home and re listened to the radio series". Such platitudes are simply not true at all. If, before the movie, you had been told that it was so mind-buggeringly boring that it would be better to stay at home and re listen to the radio series, you would have prompty headed to the multi-plex, hand over a small sum of greenies, and delighted in the next two hours. And guess what - you would have walked away saying "I'm glad I didn't stay at home and re listen to the radio series".

Please, don't overeggagerate here. The film, much like the radio series, is merely an entry into the H2G2 Universe. Don't take it as being any more or less important than previous entries simply because it's the newest! After all, the radio series, the TV series, the books, the video game... it's all there to comfort you.

You close-minded twat. ;)

Posted by: Tim on May 2, 2005 10:30 PM

Even on its own terms, it wasn't a very good movie. The acting and direction seemed clunky and disorganized. Nope, I wasn't expecting the radio or TV show to be duplicated on the big screen, but I didn't expect it to be a something where the set-ups and the dialogue seemed so sterile, that three people at the screening I went to said it confused them, and three others and their kids fell asleep.

It wasn't an awful movie, just unimportant and underwhelming.

Posted by: Ccook on May 4, 2005 12:08 AM

just saw the film. nuh.
scott ferguson, sydney.

Posted by: scott ferguson on May 9, 2005 04:55 AM

just saw the film. nuh.
scott ferguson, sydney.

Posted by: scott ferguson on May 9, 2005 04:56 AM

Saw the movie for the second time in London last Friday. It was even better the second time, because I could relax more and take in all the detail. I assume it's going to take a week to get through the DVD set when it comes out.

Posted by: The Duke of Dunstable on May 13, 2005 01:05 PM

By the way, Yoz. I met up with Dirk Maggs near BBC on Friday, along with a mate of yours named Paul, I think. It was a good day.

Cheers

Posted by: The Duke of Dunstable on May 13, 2005 01:07 PM

wine
beer wine liquor
wine rack
wine gift basket
wine club
wine gift
wine basket
wine cooler
food and wine
wine country gift basket
wine store
wine glasses
red wine
wine cellar
iron and wine
wine spectator
wine storage
wine online
wine making
wine of the month club
strawberry wine
wine enthusiast
book en in investing primeur wine
wine refrigerator
wine bar
wine accessory
wine country
wine tasting
wine of the month
red red wine
wine tour
wine cabinet
california wine
wine and spirits
french wine
buy wine online
wine opener
total wine
wine country basket
wine rating
napa wine
ice wine
wine shop
buy wine
wine chiller
port wine
italian wine
white wine
wine of the world
mulled wine
wine label
wine making kit
wine bottle
wine making supply
wine glass
california wine tour
wine review
wine note
german wine
fine wine
april wine
wine decanter
wine country gift
wine prices
type of wine
food world wine
oregon wine
australian wine
food and wine magazine
riedel wine glasses
wine stopper
mulled wine recipe
wine glass rack
iron and wine lyric
wine charm
wine and cheese
wine bottle opener
food and wine pairing
wrought iron wine rack
dessert wine
wine carrier
southern wine and spirits
sparkling wine
wine guide
sams wine
wine decanters
sweet wine
merlot wine
wine bottle holder
metal wine rack
monthly wine club
stemless wine glasses
how to make wine
napa wine tour
best wine
wine library
wine glass charm
wine merchant
www.azwinebottles.com
www.azwinebottles.com
http://www.azwinebottles.com

Posted by: beer wine liquor on January 24, 2006 02:39 PM

Posted by: KopaBJqsYW on January 27, 2006 06:26 PM

Posted by: bwFdMjmLci on January 27, 2006 10:42 PM

watches
watch
replica watch
citizen watch
jewelry watch
man watch
seiko watch
fossil watch
watch music video
omega watch
heisman watch
watch tv
pocket watch
watch free movie online
swiss army watch
football ticket
watch winder
nba ticket
cartier watch
price watch
tag heuer watch
tag watch
casio watch
wrist watch
gucci watch
breitling watch
watch free movie
invicta watch
kenneth cole watch
bulova watch
nixon watch
guess watch
timex watch
womens watch
automatic pilot productpage watch
hockey ticket
swiss watch
swatch watch
tissot watch
watch repair
watch music video online
watch tv on the internet
designer watch
celtic productpage watch
watch band
anne klein watch
world of watch
michele watch
nike watch
basketball ticket
atomic watch
lady watch
third watch
skagen watch
watch tv online
watch free tv online
woman watch
hamilton watch
rado watch
luxury watch
fake watch
esq watch
geneva watch
pulsar watch
discount watch
watch movie online
diesel watch
relic watch
diamond watch
night watch
elgin watch
raymond weil watch
dive watch
watch free music video
whale watch
croton watch
dkny watch
concord watch
vintage watch
watch battery
watch box
wholesale watch
iwc watch
jacob watch
santa watch
oris watch
watch cases
luminox watch
mickey mouse watch
market watch
watch movie
freestyle watch
watch strap
coach watch
longines watch
citizen eco drive watch
army watch
used rolex watch
gold watch
antique watch
military watch
http://www.azbrandwatches.com
www.azbrandwatches.com

Posted by: military watch on January 28, 2006 12:39 AM

Posted by: JqthmSQCAg on January 29, 2006 09:50 AM

penis enlargement
penis enlargement pills
penis enlargement products
penis extender
http://www.online-manufacturer.com
www.online-manufacturer.com

Posted by: penis enlargement on January 31, 2006 11:01 AM

Posted by: dRPBfMJShc on February 1, 2006 10:51 AM

Posted by: FTAlHNbLXY on February 11, 2006 04:25 AM

Posted by: UpJxOLYVar on February 12, 2006 12:07 AM

Posted by: mlBcXajIgM on February 12, 2006 12:44 AM

poker casino poker 817

Posted by: poker casino360 on February 13, 2006 09:34 AM

Pornographic character information...

Posted by: Febe on February 13, 2006 10:04 PM

Posted by: yInzSjFgup on February 13, 2006 11:36 PM

Posted by: Meduza on February 14, 2006 01:02 PM