I saw the movie last night, and here's what I thought of it...

Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog

[Suche] [Administrator] [Hinweise zum Reader] [Startseite]

Science Fiction » alt.fan.douglas-adams » I saw the movie last night, and here's what I thought of it...

I saw the movie last night, and here's what I thought of it... [message #23715]

So, 01 Mai 2005 16:14

Dirty Steve

First of all, the casting was pretty much as good as it could be. I
really enjoyed Mos Def as Ford Prefect, and I was expecting this to
be the one aspect of the film that would piss me off. I had my
misgivings about a black New Yorker being cast in a role that I've
always thought of as the quintessential upper middle class English,
but I was happily proven wrong, Mos Def nailed it.

Sam Rockwell was also inspired as Zaphod Beeblebrox, the president
with half a brain, a Southern American drawl and a tendency for
innapproriate outburts... heh... Wonder who the inspiration for this
character to be played that way could be? I wasn't too sure about the
way they got around the two heads plot device, but it didn't detract
at all.

Martin Freeman was good, as he he pretty much always is. My only
complaint here is the love scenario between Dent and trillian, the
novel's Dent is just too awkward to be that forward with a woman, and
that's part of the charm of Arthur Dent. Also, I think that the
movie's Dent altogether too readily seemed to accept his predicament
and didn't spend nearly enough time asking for cups of tea. I know
things change in an adaption, but our hero Arthur's downright refusal
to accept the universe as anything other than 'silly' and generally
his whole 'there's the Earth and then there's everything else'
outlook to everything, well, this was the cornerstone of the whole
series, IMHO.

Marvin the paranoid android was perfect. I loved the costume the
first time I saw it, and combined with Alan Rickman's voice,
fantastic, just fantastic. It was a shame they didn't have the
time/inclination to get Marvin moaning about the diodes down his left
side... That always made me laugh through my nose in the book.

What else did I like? Ah, the Guide itself. Wonderfully voiced by the
marvellous Stephen Fry, I think the Guide entries were awesome, funny
and faithful to the point, and animated in a nice and retro way, they
would have been awful if they were the height of CGI technology. The
Guide is all about being a little cobbled together and rough and
ready. Possibly the Guide was under-used though, but to use more
Guide entries would have meant cutting into the rest of the story,
which they had obviously already been forced to be incredibly brutal
with...

Which I'll come onto now. This movie goes at a frantic pace, and if I
wasn't a massive fan of the series and very familiar with it, I think
I would have struggled to keep up. I don't even want to think about
how hard it must have been to decide what to keep in, what to cut
down and what to discard, but there were some scenes where I felt too
much had been sacrificed and it detracted from it overall. Example;
the opening scene, when Arthur is arguing with the man from the
council, the whole interchange about where the demolition plans were
on display was carved down to just two lines. As I said, I can
understand the need to do that, but it's one of the first laugh out
loud moments for me when I get to that part of the book and I was a
little unhappy.

Anyway, to sum up. They didn't kill it, not by a long way. But they
didn't nail it either. I enjoyed it, and think that it is a good
addition to the series, but my love remains firmly with the beautiful
wordplay and sheer absurdity of Douglas Adams' novels, which truly
are a gift to humankind.

Re: I saw the movie last night, and here's what I thought of it... [message #23739 ]

So, 01 Mai 2005 18:53

Full Name

"Dirty Steve" <dirtysteve [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0v5de.22855$G8.19941 [at] text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

>
snip snip snip

> Anyway, to sum up. They didn't kill it, not by a long way. But they
> didn't nail it either. I enjoyed it, and think that it is a good
> addition to the series, but my love remains firmly with the beautiful
> wordplay and sheer absurdity of Douglas Adams' novels, which truly
> are a gift to humankind.
>

Beautifully put, sirruh; and thus do I concurrah.

A movie is only a movie, but a book is an entire universe.

Re: I saw the movie last night, and here's what I thought of it... [message #23784 ]

Mo, 02 Mai 2005 01:17

Fuzzy Wuzzy

"Dirty Steve" <dirtysteve [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0v5de.22855$G8.19941 [at] text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> First of all, the casting was pretty much as good as it could be. I
> really enjoyed Mos Def as Ford Prefect, and I was expecting this to
> be the one aspect of the film that would piss me off. I had my
> misgivings about a black New Yorker being cast in a role that I've
> always thought of as the quintessential upper middle class English,
> but I was happily proven wrong, Mos Def nailed it.
>
> Sam Rockwell was also inspired as Zaphod Beeblebrox, the president
> with half a brain, a Southern American drawl and a tendency for
> innapproriate outburts... heh... Wonder who the inspiration for this
> character to be played that way could be?

George W Fucking Bush. No shit.

I wasn't too sure about the
> way they got around the two heads plot device, but it didn't detract
> at all.
>
> Martin Freeman was good, as he he pretty much always is. My only
> complaint here is the love scenario between Dent and trillian, the
> novel's Dent is just too awkward to be that forward with a woman, and
> that's part of the charm of Arthur Dent. Also, I think that the
> movie's Dent altogether too readily seemed to accept his predicament
> and didn't spend nearly enough time asking for cups of tea. I know
> things change in an adaption, but our hero Arthur's downright refusal
> to accept the universe as anything other than 'silly' and generally
> his whole 'there's the Earth and then there's everything else'
> outlook to everything, well, this was the cornerstone of the whole
> series, IMHO.
>
> Marvin the paranoid android was perfect. I loved the costume the
> first time I saw it, and combined with Alan Rickman's voice,
> fantastic, just fantastic. It was a shame they didn't have the
> time/inclination to get Marvin moaning about the diodes down his left
> side... That always made me laugh through my nose in the book.
>
> What else did I like? Ah, the Guide itself. Wonderfully voiced by the
> marvellous Stephen Fry, I think the Guide entries were awesome, funny
> and faithful to the point, and animated in a nice and retro way, they
> would have been awful if they were the height of CGI technology. The
> Guide is all about being a little cobbled together and rough and
> ready. Possibly the Guide was under-used though, but to use more
> Guide entries would have meant cutting into the rest of the story,
> which they had obviously already been forced to be incredibly brutal
> with...
>
> Which I'll come onto now. This movie goes at a frantic pace, and if I
> wasn't a massive fan of the series and very familiar with it, I think
> I would have struggled to keep up. I don't even want to think about
> how hard it must have been to decide what to keep in, what to cut
> down and what to discard, but there were some scenes where I felt too
> much had been sacrificed and it detracted from it overall. Example;
> the opening scene, when Arthur is arguing with the man from the
> council, the whole interchange about where the demolition plans were
> on display was carved down to just two lines. As I said, I can
> understand the need to do that, but it's one of the first laugh out
> loud moments for me when I get to that part of the book and I was a
> little unhappy.
>
> Anyway, to sum up. They didn't kill it, not by a long way. But they
> didn't nail it either. I enjoyed it, and think that it is a good
> addition to the series, but my love remains firmly with the beautiful
> wordplay and sheer absurdity of Douglas Adams' novels, which truly
> are a gift to humankind.
>
>

I saw it yesterday as well. I thought it was just terrible. Great effects,
but a terrible version of the story. All the funny lines, you know, the
way Douglas made us laugh when we first heard those lines - the way
he puts things - have been utterly changed or removed. Anyone not
familiar with the story from any of the versions would have been
saying...what the fuck ??? For Douglas indeed...

Re: I saw the movie last night, and here's what I thought of it... [message #23828 ]

Mo, 02 Mai 2005 07:38

Neil Gerace

Vorheriges Thema:	Something completely not movie-related (or even Bop-Ad-related)
Nächstes Thema:	Old and New Marvin

Gehe zu:

-=] Zurück zum Anfang [=-

aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 26 10:40:16 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,02257 Sekunden

.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.