All i can say is… Michael… don’t kill me…
Read the extended version… i want to show you something that will probably depress the shit out of you… of course we can stick our fingers in our ears and hum really loudly as though we don’t read/hear anything bad… hear no evil.. see no evil… etc.
A review of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.
right… so… Hitchiker’s guide to the Galaxy review is up there… it has no spoilers, except for ruining your hope and prayers that the movie would be worth a darn…
It should be noted that the person who reviewed the movie is MJ Simpson. Who is the self acclaimed:
Welcome to Planet Magrathea, the only site on the web which provides daily news updates about the world(s) of the late Douglas Adams and his creation The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. I’m MJ Simpson: writer, journalist, occasional broadcaster and – so I’m told – the world’s leading authority on the life and career of Douglas Noel Adams.
Hoping this might be a hoax (which it still might), i searched wikipedia for an entry on MJ Simpson and it confirms the identity of the person.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Adams
ok… weep… weep like the mother of your child as she learns her child is a troll… or stand back and realize that this person has devoted his/her life to covering Douglas Adam’s work and sees this movie as not being able to match up to what the books were.
April 11th, 2005 at 5:47 pm
Actually I was expecting this. It couldn’t possibly be that all or even most fans would be pleased with this film. This guy seems to be the ultimate fan, so it’s not surprising that he would see divergences as a kind of faithlessness to Douglas Adams. I mean, since Adams is (very sadly) gone, this guy seems to have become a self-procalimed spokesman for his works, and a protector of sorts. As for the storyline being very different from the books and the radio series, Adams wanted it that way. The real question is not whether the story is faithful to Adams’s actual writings, but whether they were faithful to his style. I think that any kind of style assessment is bound to be very subjective. While the review does not bode well, it could still be a good film. There’s still a chance, even though it may be slighter.
April 12th, 2005 at 3:38 pm
check your PMs please.
April 13th, 2005 at 2:18 am
[quote:ef5cc247f3]except for ruining your hope and prayers that the movie would be worth a darn…[/quote:ef5cc247f3] This was pretty much my first reaction when I found out that there was even going to be a movie based on HGTG. I mean most of the humor is transmitted in asides, how could you possibly convy any of that without heavy narration? But I’ve never heard the radio series (was there a TV version as well?), so I dunno. If the radio version differred from the book, then I guess the movie could just as well not follow the book faithfully. As long as the underlying style and humor remains intact. All in all, I question the whole idea of “This is a great book, so it must be turned into a movie”. I mean, is that suppose to lend some kind of validity to the book? More people will see it? I think turning a book into a movie can be hit or miss, mostly miss. It works for some books on different levels. It worked for “Sin City”; did not work for “From Hell”. Take Lord of the Rings, for example. I think the movies were…not so great from a storytelling perspective. But what they did well was create beautiful scenery that I can associate with the story told in the books. Another example: 2001. A great book and a great movie, but for different reasons. Both stand on thier own as works of art. Anyone seen the “Naked Lunch” movie? Or “American Splendor”? Both interesting ways to go about making a movie based on the spirit of their source material. I dunno…just some random thought. Ron. (Still dreading the idea of a “Watchmen” movie)
April 13th, 2005 at 6:33 am
it was an interesting story… still have no clue what the comic is about, other then what the movie told me. I think the overall theme of the story tells us a lot about humanity though. The simple fact that this guy got popular off of translating his life into comic book art, and the fact that he wasn’t very interesting or likable. Of course the cancer part was touching, but other then that his life was very uncharacteristic. hmm… so watchmen movie would be bad? *ponder* uhm i’m not sure it has to be bad, could be good.