Slashdot Mirror
Hitchhiker's Guide Movie Greenlighted
Overly Critical Guy writes "According to Chud, the Hitchhiker's Guide movie is a go." It's too bad DNA won't be around to see it, but good news for his fans. I hope they can borrow Weta Digital's render farm to perfect some of the characters, though anything will be an improvement on the BBC series' special effects.
Forty-Second Post!
So.. The Guide will be really shaky, oddly cut, using all the current 'trendy' angles.. In other words.. Really really annoying ?
I'd probably have preferred Jay Roach on the project.. alas..
So who do y'all see as possible casts ?
Venlig Hilsen / Regards
John Hinge - shayera /
"Buffy I love you... Please God No!" S
Yes, it is sad DNA passed away a premature death, but I'm sure he'd be happy to know that people still enjoy, and will for a long time, his excellent and humorous style of writing. I saw a few stills from the BBC Version of the film and I can say . . ."Woah" I really do hope the new people in charge redo a few characters. I've always invisioned Marvin as something like a Bender from futureama.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
If this isn't yet another false hope...
WAHOOOOOOO
And of course the special effects will be better than the BBC version's were. That was made in 1981, after all, and on about the same budget that Doctor Who had at the time, so it's not exactly unexpected is it?
The DVD release of it is, of course, wonderful, because the TV series' animated sequences still stand out as some of the best I've ever seen. Hand-drawn too. I hope they preserve that look for the film, although no doubt these days it'd be done on a computer.
Music will be critical for the atmosphere too. Fingers crossed...
Miri it is whil Linux ilast...
Neil Gaiman was here in Stockholm the other day, holding a q&a with his fans. One of the questions was "How come you aren't involved with the Hitchhiker's movie, writing the script and directing it?"
His answer?
"If Douglas [Adams] couldn't do it, I can't either."
He also said that the best Hitchhiker's movie is and will always be the book, or the radio show. "Hollywood can never render Ford turning in to an infinite number of penguins better than you can in your head," as he put it.
but good news for his fans.
I'm not so sure about that. For me, almost all the 'goodness' and 'funniness' of HHGTTG in is Adam's writing style and narration. I imagine watching the events on screen would be rather flat. HHGTTG is very well tailored to the book medium.
bring a towel to the opening premiere.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
...or i shall be very very upset.
Hopefully if it's not at the end they will apologize for our inconvience.
*downs a pan galactic gargle blaster for DNA
This movie should have some spectacular CGI. A whale plummeting to its death, Ford Prefect turning into a penguin, and a humongous cavern where entire planets are manufactured. Now that I want to see.
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
As they say..."The BBC Special Effects department. Neither special nor effective".
Blake's 7 fans know all about this. And anyone who managed to watch the Doctor Who story "The Green Death" without being a gibbering wreck after seeing the giant fly effect has my undying respect.
As someone noted earlier though, I liked the graphics for the Guide entries - lovely style.
from the article:
;) Besides, the BBC DVD version has some great interesting subtitles of where the stuff was recorded etc. for those of us who remember watching it the first time round on TV
;)
The novel was previously adapted into a cheap-looking BBC series, which you can see on DVD and anticipate slightly better special effects for the new version.
This sounds cool as long as it doesn't turn into some Hollywood style space jaunt full of effects and no character. The BBC effects were straight from Dr. Who's reject cupboard but I thought it suited the underlying sarcasm of the book
Actually, thinking about it, I could stand Zaphod's heads being slightly better
ermmm... don't take any notice of me... I'm too old...
Would have been the Monty Python gang. Terry Gilliams as Zaphold (and as a director, of course!), Eric Idle as Ford, and John Cleese as Arthur.
Alas, it is too late for that... A pity. We take comfort in that, at the time, there was a finite (im)probability for this movie to exist, so we you need to do to obtain a copy it is a time machine and hot cup of tea.
I'm placing high hopes on this, but I'll hold off any rejoicing until I've seen it.
At least he beat the inifinite improbability of ever getting the movie through Hollywood :-)
What a surprise now the suits .
a) Dont have to pay the author anything.
b) He's not around to maintain quality.
Conclusion. It will probably suck.
siggy played guitar
I've always thought Hugh Grant played a hapless English gent well. Of course I'll probably be flamed to death for saying that...
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
Funniest today. :-)
You have to remember that the BBC series was the original. The book(s) was(were) written after the BBC series. Having read all of them, you could tell that DNA had run out of puff half way though book-4, where it became a cash-cow and a real hard read.
:)
Some things are best left at their natural ending.
Personally, I like the original BBC series and I think they will have a hard time capturing the overall theme. In the same sort of way that they lost the plot with "Lot in Space". Besides, I think they're going to have a hard time finding a naturaly large girl to play the part of Trillian
and then DNA will be around to see it
Here are some torrents of the TV series:
Episode 1 & 2 VCD
Episode 3 & 4 VCD
just like the new starwars films did, because all you jerks can't hack it not being just as you pictured in your head. Stop being so anal.
I don't think that they can improve on the original. For exactly the same reason we still watch ST TOS - we love the style of the original stuff - I'd say you couldn't remake it if you tried.
Having said that I am all for the project - and I will be taking my towel (just in case).
Jon - TheSpork
While this movie could go any direction, wasn't there supposed to be another book released at some point? Back when Adams died, I remember seeing in a news article that a sixth book in the series was left incomplete, but was to be published anyways.
Anyone have information on this?
"Come on, let's go drink till we can't feel feelings anymore."
I'm of the opinion that the reason HHGTTHG: The Movie was snarled up for 20 years was Douglas himself. He had a vision, he wanted to translate it to the screen. But I'm of the opinon that he didn't really know what it was he wanted.
Given enough time he'd have given us something I'm sure. It would have been totally different to anything he'd already given us. Would it have been any good? I'm not sure. But I'd have rushed out to the cinema to watch it.
Okay. So now Douglas is no more. And somebody is going to translate his works into a movie. If they and take what they need from the various HHGTTG source material, adding just a dash here and there to get the pieces to mesh - great. But if they start rewriting vast tracts of Douglas's work... hideous.
So for now I'll be cautions. I'll hope for the best. But I'm not going to celebrate just yet. After all, the movie business has a past record of raping decent stories...
Do you mind, your karma has just run over my dogma.
Uruguay... hee hee hee hee.
Peter Jones, the voice of the book. In fact, so key was he to the success that he was billed as the star (each radio episode always begins with "Starring Peter Jones, as the book"). He was utterly superb, and again gave one of those performances that fixes a thing in my mind.
It's going to be hard for anyone to match him. Best of luck to the person that eventually gets the job, but they have some work to do.
Cheers,
Ian
I think, provided Hollywood dont mess it up.
A chance to get some decent actors in - I was never that impressed with some of the cast used in the BBC TV series..
The animations used for the guide itself were pretty neat though.
"You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
It'll probably just end up being Macintalk Pro English Bruce.
I can just see it now:
Disney's Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
I'd sooner watch the BBC version than have a Disney funded film. Who cares about the FX anyway? the strong points of the novel and TV series are the story and all it's humour.
I'm sure they'll improve Zaphod's head, but Zaphod is not Zaphod without Mark Wing-Davey! He made that character in the original radio drama (remember, the books came later and aren't quite as good) and then later the BBC series. I can't imagine anyone else in many of the roles, but especially that of the being with an ego bigger than a universe, a guy so hip he can't see over his own pelvis...
Cheap or not has nothing to do with it, the casting was spot on, the acting just great - the effects were the perfect level of low-tech.. if they over do the CGI they'll ruin the movie - it's Adams' ideas and narration that makes that story, and Ill bet you they screw up the movie, by getting the emphasis wrong.
So whos it to be? Brits or Yanks making it?
Not sure who to cast as arthur dent, but i think zaphod could be played by btruce campbell. michael dorn as a vorgon.
john leguizamo as the fly
im sure others will think of better
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
... if it only had a budget of 10 million. Imagine if they had to focus on the telling of the story instead of the big money maker effect.
Call me pessimistic, but I'm of the belief that movies are better when there are limititations are overcome.
"Derp de derp."
God help us all.
anything will be an improvement on the BBC series' special effects
I dunno. They tried to improve Red Dwarfs special effects and ended up making it worse. Sometimes, flashy new special effects are not what you need. A decent and funny story is much much more important.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0371724/
i l/-/1400 045088/ref=ase_pelmanism-20/104-4026186-4413552?v= glance&s=books
Very light on details, so far the only cast member they show is the guy who did Marvin's voice in the BBC TV show.
By the way, just finished "The Salmon of Doubt" (phostumous book put together from pending writings found in Douglas Adams's Macs),
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/deta
Of course it felt uneven, unfinished and patched together. But I enjoyed it more than I expected. It was bittersweet to go "hitchhiking the galaxy one last time" with DNA.
A friend of mine was in a cafe last Sunday (here in Prague) and at the next table a person was reading the script. I've heard it will be shot in Prague.
Gilliam would be a great director for it, but he's still busy doing "The Brother's Grimm" with Matt Damon and Heath Ledger (also shooting here in Prague).
Sometimes more sometimes less, depends on many things including the country and the year in which the work was done.
Who will be cast as Trillian? Mmmm....Trillian....
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Yeah, right. Camp where suicide bombers are being trained.
Well after the mess the yanks made of Red Dwarf and thankfully canned a remake of Ab Fab, I for one hope hollywood have nothing to do with it.
I had a pet once
I certianly don't discount the value of books' entertainment, I have shelves full of fiction novels that I enjoy thourghly. However, that doesn't mean that movies are without value or that books have some kind of inherant superiority. There are advantages to both formats. It is often nice to see another person's vision of something, how they would realise it. Also there are thing you can communicate with a visual medium that you cannot with text, or can only with dificulty.
I think that well done movies of good books are great. They present a different way of telling the story, often even a better one. For example I really like Dave Barry's Big Trouble, but I thought the movie did an even better job, though omitting some of the book. I also though Fight Club was just excellent, and a mucst watch even, no especially, if you read the book.
I think some people need to quit being so stick-in-the-mud about rendering text into a visual format. Just because it is different doesn't make it bad.
The whole point of "The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" was that it was on the wireless, and therefore there were no pictures outside of your own head. This meant you had to work harder to suspend your disbelief.
Adapting it to TV was always going to be difficult because some of the people who had heard it on the radio would have developed their own ideas of how the characters looked and acted, which would not tally with the TV producer's ideas. Now, I know the BBC's special effects were a little on the cheesey side, but a TV licence was cheaper in those days - especially as there were still many people watching in mono and paying an even cheaper licence. {Stating the obvious, the BBC is funded from TV licence fees and does not carry advertising. This means, in theory at least, that the programmes it shows are ones that people have paid to watch, rather than ones that advertisers have paid to show in order to interrupt}. Again, you had to suspend your disbelief: make a conscious effort to believe that that lampshade dangling on a length of fishing line was really a spaceship.
Maybe I'm just being pessimistic, but I can't imagine Hollywood making anything but a massive pig's ear of the story. Today, a mass of special effects are generally used to cover up a thin plot {invariably with some kind of sex angle added} and/or one-dimensional characters {and ac(tors|tresses) who were chosen more for their unrealistic conformance to the ideal of Conventional Beauty than anything else}. In mediaeval paintings, before anyone had worked out that light travels in straight lines and so distant objects appear smaller than close ones, the most important character in the scene was painted the biggest. In Hollywood movies, the most important character is either the "prettiest" or "ugliest" depending on whether they are a "goodie" or a "baddie". Plots, too, are reduced to a simple battle of "good" versus "evil". This doesn't work for complex characters, so sometimes characters are distorted so as better to fit the stereotype. {Can you imagine Hollywood's take on something like "Trainspotting"? All the characters are basically on the same side. Disney probably would make them all the Baddies, and introduce a young orphan boy for the Goodie. Or it might be more politically correct to have a girl this time. Uh, yeah, maybe we could use that baby instead of making her a cot death victim. [Never mind that the whole point of that scene was that you were hoping all along that she wasn't dead, but at the same time you knew she was anyway - and the confirmation knocked the wind out of you]. Said child meets a Special Friend - an improbable character, who {after a little playfighting and banter} helps them break into an underground laboratory and poison a batch of junk. Renton and Sick Boy are seen cooking up in the Mother Superior's flat. Child looks out of window. Dead bodies lie still. Solitary church bell rings. Tommy [not dead of AIDS] and Spud solemnly promise never to touch junk again. Tearful scene in which Special Friend departs forever, while outside the sun is shining. The end}. And, while my imagination is generally capable of making up for poor SFX, I find plots and characters harder.
For an example of what I mean, look at Star Wars Episode I. There are just too many things out of that film that don't gel when you come to think about them afterward. Explosions, obviously. Pod racers? Someone's having a giraffe. What keeps the outside part of those engines from rotating? Battle droids? Come on, if you're going to make an entire army of foldy-uppy robots, you should at least give them proper weapons. The original Star Wars {now re-named Episode four - A New Hope} stood up far better to post-movie analysis.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I think the BBC has shown us the true value of special effects. Here's a simple test. Take the latest movie or sci-fi show and replace the flashy special effects with cheap cardboard props. Is the movie still worth watching? Too often, the answer is no. The special effects are the movie.
Let's hope Adam fares better than Asimov. I can just see it now:
Will Smith as Arthur Dent
Jackie Chan as Ford Prefect
Vin Diesel as Marvin
On set interview with Will Smith: "Well, we just finished filming the big scene for the beginning of the movie, where my character uses all his skills to destroy an incoming Vogon fleet. Then Jackie, Vin and I all get together to hunt down and kill the mastermind of the attack. This is going to be a great action movie that really sticks to what the author's themes were."
Vincent J. Murphy
Spandex Justice
Looks like Disney is back into thier favourite trick: Taking something in the public domain, making a movie out of it, then copywriting it for themselves for the next eleventy billion years. Honestly, after seeing what they did to Notre Dame and the like, I'm hesitant to trust them on anything at all.
DNA on voters.
Not found :(
"anything will be an improvement on the BBC series' special effects."
Oh come on, that's not very fair. It was made with the best effects available at the time, including some groundbreaking work. (Watch the extras on the DVD set for more info.)
LOTR was made with the best effects available, including new stuff. If the effects don't look primitive in 20 years time I'd be very surprised. That doesn't mean they're crap. If LOTR is remade in 20 years, it's highly likely that anything will be better than WETA's current abilities.
At the time nothing was better than the BBC special effects. Of course it could all be done now with a PC in half the time and looking 10 times better, but that's the nature of technology.
The obvious choice would be Parminder Nagra, the star of Bend it Like Beckham
If I recall correctly, the book Trillian described as having dark skin, being either from the Middle East or India. She also had advanced degrees in mathematics and astrophysics.
The TV series portrayed her as a ditzy blonde, probably because some marketroid thought it was good idea.
When you're the size of an atom, just about anything is the size of a planet. Matter of scale, really...
We have had to suffer the indignity of naff remakes of "Get Carter" and "The Italian Job" but this is too much. I fail to see how Yanks can understand and appreciate the very British blend of irony and self depreciating humour. Don't knock the BBC TV series. The low budget effects fit the subject and humour style very well. Why does everything have to be totally dumbed down to cater for Yank taste. How about trying to introduce them to a bit of subtlety. An "Old European"
Tone
George W. Bush. Vogon.
My HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE is on DRUGS.
You know, I always got the feeling that "Mostly Harmless" was deliberately written by a bitter man to piss his fanbase off so that they'd stop bugging him to write sequels to the first four books.
This is the same author, after all, who wrote the whole middle of "So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish" in response to the publisher's demands, but then prefaced the section with a note that the middle of the book was crap, please skip to the end which has a nice bit about Marvin in it.
I shudder to think how he was planning to sabatoge the movie, which he must have regarded as a worse sellout than books four and five.
Itll be turned into a shit Austin Powers parody with lame fart jokes.
No wonder the world hates you fuckers.
yup, que the marischino cherry;-) the pix in your head r always the best, but the music is a big factor in how vivid they r:-)8-O;-)
hope paddy kingsland(sp?) of the radiophonic workshop does the music & sound effects again...
This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
unless your Disney, in which case the copyright duration magically extends every time the question comes up
What's the big deal? They made this movie about 15 or so years ago. It's an absolute clasic.
Hugo Horton from the Vicar of Dibley.
CLEARLY the best candidate to play Arthur.DNA?? Who the hell calls Douglas Adams "DNA"? Laaaaaaaaaaame
evil adrian
I think Disney will skimp on the special effects!
I think Disney will go cheap on this movie (think League of extraordinary gentlemen).
I bet they'll do it half ass. Ruining any chance of a halfway decent LOTR style movie ever being made!!
Fuck you disney.
...so has Disney sued Cerulean Studios over a nebulous "trademark infringement"claim yet?
+5 INSIGHTFUL, +5 THE TRUTH, +5 JESUS IS A HOMO
Besides, everyone knows the REAL Jesus was BLACK.
Established religions are the real enemy of today's society. I think we should declare war on Christianity.
Can't comment on the old movie, but the radio series, that which I heard of it, was good. Heh. Should be intresting. The books don't make any bones about stretching the readers credulity to the limit, which will make the movie version both harder and easier. Harder to match, and easier since the producers don't have to be quite as attentive to realism, per se. Of course, that still won't excuse bad movie making, which is always a distinct possibility.
Z
...They can get Trilian right this time. The TV bimbo-fied character was terrible.
Davo -- Free speech, free software, AND free beer.
Actually, DNA desperately wanted the movie to happen. For once, it was everyone around him dropping the ball, over and over again, that kept it from happening. Read "A Salmon of Doubt".
End of lesson. You may press the button.
- Dawkins' Lament for Adams
- Adams's interview with American Atheists
- Adams' s excellent speech at Digital Biota
The essays cover everything from a hilarious step by step guide to making the perfect cup of tea to a story about what it is like to climb mt. kilamanjaro(sp?) while wearing a rhino suit (He was very passionate about environmental causes, and was one of the people doing this to raise money for rhino conservation.)BTW, Adams said that of all the book he had written, his favorite was Last Chance To See. I'd even recommend this book to people who don't care about environmental causes, because Adams talking about biologists is just as funny as him talking about sci-fi. Some of the descriptions in LCTC (e.g. traveling on a boat with chickens who eye you warily because they suspect you will be eating them later) are priceless.
"Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
I think that goes for OS's too
Disney made the Bono Act and bribed the U.S. Congress into rubber-stamping it. Disney helped in lobbying for the DMCA. I don't want to support Michael Eisner any more than I have to.
In other words: I'll wait for the video and rent it, just as I am doing with Finding Nemo , and I encourage anybody who respects the public domain to do the same.
Will I retire or break 10K?
If you like the guide entries you may be interested to know that you can buy prints of the original artwork here from Rod Lord.
My favourite is this one (which I have framed on my wall). The babel fish is cool too.
LOTR was made with the best effects available, including new stuff. If the effects don't look primitive in 20 years time I'd be very surprised
I'm not sure of that. There is a point were it stops making a difference, and it's indistinguishable from real. IMHO LotR a milestone- is at that point (mostly - don't mention the ents). It is the end of special-effects-as-special-effects, you know, stuff that you look at and go "hey, that's pretty special". After a while the brain adjusts and you just accept that Gandalf is twice as tall as Frodo and it seems normal not special.
From here on, it gets cheaper. In 20 years time, I expect to see a couple of guys in a garage doing effects that good. Of course, as the making-of features on the LotR:FotR DVD brings home is that enormous detail requires enormous effort. Literally hundreds of man-years of work went into the costumes, sets and so on.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
I hope they can borrow Weta Digital's render farm to perfect some of the characters
I've thought about an internet distributed render farm, something like SETI@home, where regular people would add processing power to it.
A while ago I've talked to blender people about that but they didn't look interested, so that's an idea i spread around.
What else did you expect them to say?
If that's so, where is the proof?
How is that project coming along.. anyone know?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Funny. I always thought it was the other way round: He was poking fun at fans who insisted THHGTTG be all about robots and spacecraft.
...precisely because it is a little calmer and, dare I say it, romantic in its quirky, wistful fashion.
Then again, "So Long..." _is_ my favourite in the series
What I'm dreading is a movie that focuses on the "jokes" alone. Then again, if they at least get them _right_, that'd be something too. But there's always been more to it than breakneck pace "gags". In the comparatively mediocre and not-quite-so-funny "Life...", I liked the thoughtful moments best -- Trillian and how she relates to the Krikkit warlords (or Haktar), for example.
And "Mostly Harmless" was sort of bitter, weary and brooding throughout. That, too, was a sellout? Hm.
Ideal Director: Terry Gilliam
Ideal Narrrarator: John Cleese
Ideal Arthur Dent: Cary Elwes
Ideal Ford Prefect: Tony Slattery (watch old Whose Line Is It Anyway? episodes on Comedy Central to see what I mean)
Ideal Slartibartfast: Sean Connery (imagine "It was made from the rib cage of a stegosaurus!" in a Scottish accent)
Everyone else is negotiable.
Schnapple
Nice to see Timothy is dissing the BBC's (then) groundbreaking 1980s special effects. Presumably US TV was all fully CGI back in those days? Sorry to prick your bubble Tim, but there's more to a good film than just special effects... although Hollywood seems to think otherwise.
Unless the yanks are very careful with the material, I can't see it being an improvement on either the original radio series, or the subsequent TV series.
I was looking for these the other day, someone once put up for sale "Don't Panic Towels" that I though were entirly appropiate for HHGTTG....but I can't locate them anymore. Anyone happen to know where they'd be?
... Walk in with a goldfish stuck in your ear.
Have fun, and look forward to the reactions you'll no doubt receive.
Checklist:
- Towel.
- Atari Portfolio with "Don't panic" printed on the front.
- Goldfish in ear.
- Pajamas (optional).
...you also have:
- Junk mail
- Pocket fluff
- A thing your aunt gave you which you don't know what it is
- A buffered analgesic
~Philly
I hope they can borrow Weta Digital's render farm to perfect some of the characters,...
Weird, I read the sentence this way (for obvious reasons): I hope they can borrow Weta Digital's render farm to prefect some of the characters,...
Here's a little suggestion for the movie makers. Forget Zaphod's second head and third arm. Write them out of the story.
Part of the charm of the original radio play was the dialog between these "guys". In radio, it's easy to toss out the fact that a character has a second head, but then move on. In TV or in the movies, you're saddled with it. It's a terrible distraction, it's awkward, and it ruins all of the interpersonal dynamics.
Lose the head. You'll be glad you did.
Corollary to Moore's Law: The IQ of new computer owners is declining.
Actually, the note was to skip the chapter where Arthur and Fenny screwed in the sky if you didn't want to read about that sort of thing. It was a joke, not a warning that his book was crap.
(no, not James Earl Jones...)
A not-so-secret cameo is Hotblack Desiato's bodyguard, the guy who threatens Ford at the Restaurant. It's David Prowse!
"Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
What is the average time of processing with just these textures (without needing to download new ones)?
Because if the transference time is bigger than the processing time it won't worth.
Yeah, it's a really, really expensive PDA. But it's definitely an impressive one. God, I hate Sony. They belong to both the MPAA and RIAA, yet they still crank out uber-l33t electronic products.
However, you might not feel comfortable about writing "DON'T PANIC" on the cover. After spending $700 on something like this, you might get really paranoid about anything that would deface it.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
The ultimate irony then is Spyglsss/Disney releasing this film. Adams need only sit back and watch it be ruined.
I still think that a proper HHG2G movie should have been an animated one. Imagine a Pixar HHG2G? That would seriously rock. Then again they seem to have a pretty busy schedue right now.
I still think that 2D drawn animation is pretty cool too...I wonder how a prestigious Japanese studio like Gainax would handle a HHG2G movie? They'd certainly make Trillian nice and bouncy for all the fanboys...^_^
Seriously, there is so much in the book and in the radio show that really would lend itself well to animation. With animation, you would be able to make everything and everyone as outrageous as you want to without bumping the budget up too high. CGI+Live Action is often more expensive than animation.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
There are lots of good reasons to dislike the BBC's TV series (mangling of the storyline would be tops on my list) but I honestly doubt the movie will have a better Ford, Arthur, or Narrator (the Guide). Douglas Adams felt that the casting for them was perfect (and clearly nobody will ever be a better "guide" than Peter Jones). If I were to cast it, I'd put Jack Davenport (of BBC's Coupling) as Arthur, and hope Peter Jones is still alive to do the Guide.
Also, the "Computer Graphics" of the guide will never, ever be topped. To quote from Don't Panic - The Official Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galazy Companion written by none other than the great Neil Gaiman:
"The graphics...were incredibly detailed, apparently computer-created animated graphics, full of sight gags and in-jokes, and presumably designed for people with freeze-frame and slow-motion videos, since there was no way one could pick up on the complexities of the graphics sequences in a single watching at normal speed. Would one have noticed, for example, the cartoons of Douglas Adams himself, posing as a Sirius Cybernatics Corporation Advertising Executive, writing hard in the dolphin sequence, and in drag as Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings? Could one have picked up on all the names and phone numbers of some of the best places in the universe to purchase, or dry out from, a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster? One of the phone numbers in the graphics of Episode Six was that of a leading computer magazine who phoned Pearce Studios, responsible for the graphics, to ask which computer it was done on, and whether a flat-screen television was built into the book prop used on the show. The comment beside the phone number was not flattering."
The reason the TV series was, in many ways, very good, is because Adams realized with the medium of television, he had a whole new outlet for his humor that was simply impossible to do on Radio. Also, there's simply no way you can condense the book into an 1.5 hour movie. THGTTG isn't an anecdote to be shortly told with expensive special effects... it's a Decameron, a Canterbury Tales collection of stories that gives the reader (or listener, or viewer) a rolicking feeling of traveling from place to place.
The first LOTR Movie was coming out and everyone said how the pictures of the characters in their heads would be better in every way than the movie production. But personally, other than the characters in my head I would have chosen the ones from the movie.
Give it time, if it sucks, we will all bash it later together as a big family.
But there is always hope that you might enjoy the movie, reserve your judgement for after when you are either looking for the directors house to set ablaze or speed dialing your 4 friends and 6 different emergency functions to tell everyone you know about the movie. (A PARAGRAPHICAL SENTENCE)
I LOVE YOU
[cx]
Douglas Adams spoke to this himself in a 1998 interview
-Dave
Just get Sean Connery to play any part. LXG, anyone? -_-''
Circumcision is child abuse.
The radio series is still the definitive Hitch Hiker, with of course the books a close second.
The BBC TV series was VERY cheesy but let's be honest here, so was the Radio show - that's the whole point!
I hope they do Douglas Adams justice with the movie. Who knows, they just might, but I have a feeling I'll leave the movie theatre disappointed.
On the Hitchhiker's DVD, the "making of HHGTTG" feature has interviews with DNA, and the cast and crew.
:)
David Learner, who played the body of Marvin, tells of his conversation with David Prowse, and how ironic it was that they both played masked characters whose voice was dubbed by another actor.
Learner asked Prowse, "Why do you think it is that they didn't use your voice for Darth Vader?"
Prowse shook his head and said, "oi've no idear!"
Im really looking forward to a proper moview of h2g2 . Does anyone have links to somewere to download the old BBC version? www.baldy.za.net
Magically? Do you have any idea how much each extension costs to the company?
People are bitching that it's "tailored to a book medium" (even though the radio series came first). People are bitching that it will suck as a movie. That it should have been a CG animated movie (huh?).
I, for one, am really excited to hear that this project that Douglas Adams tried to get off the ground for so many years is now one step closer. If this movie pulls it off, imagine how much of a classic it will be.
Freaking naysayers.
"Sufferin' succotash."
That's exactly why it was greenlighted. He isn't around to not see it go into horrible commercial production via Michael Eisners greedy pet cat.
Many Thanks,
Luke
It's never been "renamed". It was always titled "Episode IV - A New Hope". Don't you remember seeing it in the theather all those years ago? Or perhaps you are too young for that?
In fact, it was renamed. It was originally released in 1977 as just "Star Wars." According to IMDB's alternate versions page for Star Wars, you could still have seen it in the theater with the revised title.
I think if hhg2g makes it the big screen it might encourage people to have an imagination of their own again. Sadly its maybe too late, but i would have recommended richard briers take the lead. I would say eric idle could be cool too, maybe even monty python team get involved, john clees is a genius and would be great.
Don't we have the technology eg stem cells to grow his eye balls so he can watch it?
the hard part will be the special effects.
-pyrrho
I really hope they can finish this movie and do it well without DNA around to babysit the project. I was just reading Salmon of Doubt last night at the section about the Hitchhiker movie and wondered if it was still in progress or a dead project. If they can pull it off I'd then really like to see a Dirk Gently movie. It's about time these classic books (and radio shows.. and pretty much everything else) made it to the movies.
If you haven't read Salmon of Doubt and are a DNA fan I suggest picking it up. It's really a shame DNA died so young. I blame Thor the Thunder God. Clumsy brute.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
She's lump, she's lump, she's lump
She's in my bed...
Ceci n'est pas une
Now, I could be wrong, and they could intend to follow his script and vision closely. But then, they could have done that 10 years ago.
Go to planet Lavronx in the Plural Z sector of the galaxy.
They hold a large stock of both new and second hand babelfish.
Make sure to bring your towel as all
qualified hitchhikers recieve discounts.
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
I'm very excited about this; leave it to mainstream Hollywood to destroy ideas and generally make things worse. With this in mind, I am very happy to see the beginnings of the destruction of these books, as I hate them and Douglas Adams (who, thankfully, is quite dead and unable to publish anything else). My fondest hope is that this movie will go down as the one of the worst adaption failures on screen, right next to Lynch's "Dune" and Howard's "The Grinch", so as to forever tarnish the books themselves. :~D
To those who enjoy the books, my condolences for seeing something you cherish about to be shat upon by Hollywood corporate executives (and I hope you forgive my joyous dancing). Douglas Adams, if you can hear me, you're a hack! I'm glad you're dead! Watch as your magnum opus is reduced to the steaming heap of shit that it really is!
<dance>
I've been waiting for a post like this to rub everyones noses in that fact that I have the best Slashdot username... EVER!
Not to mention this looks like it could be the greatest movie... EVER!
I think a large part of this "whineing" is because that, with few exceptions, most movies based on books have turned out to be terribly, terribly, bad.
Okay, so you already posted a couple of exceptions. I can think of a few too.
But for every "Fight Club", there is a "Starship Troopers", or a "Congo", or a "Sphere", or a "The Sum of All Fears", or a "Pet Semitary", and so on.
cya,
john
Imagine all the people...
I'm appalled at those people who denigrate the BBC TV series. Yes it was made on a budget. So? It was brilliant. Those computer-animated sequences (which were actually hand-done by Kevin Davies), the performances, the whimsy of the "extra bits" ... it's really quite good. The reason some Americans don't cotton to it is the horrible butchering job that cobbled it all together into one LOOOONG movie.
... script editor for Doctor Who, another show whose great stories and superb performances overcame lack of money. A little imagination scores bigger in my book than million-dollar CGI.
And yes, the radio series is the original. Written, incidentally, at night while DNA's day job was
Why stop now, just when I'm hating it?
In this interview he said:
Question: When will we here in the US be able to see [one of] your books put to movie?
DNA: The Dirk Gently books are currently in development as a television series. The "Hitchhiker's Guide" is currently under development. I'm very confident that it will actually go into production any decade now. When... I want to know when too.
So this is what he wanted, and I hope it's done well.
Read the biography to understand why a movie was a bad idea even when Douglas was working on it. The short version is, if they've been rewriting the script for 20 years (and subsequently rewritten Douglas' many versions), what kind of script do you think is going to result?
This is just an exercise in rights mining: it won't please anyone, and will probably bury comedy SF as a genre.
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
This is a test to see how a completely random quote from the HHG gets modded. I'm actually optimistic.
The power of Christ compiles you!
Forget this crap... get on over to yahoo
shopping and get yourself a copy of
Abenobashi Mahou Shotengai instead!
Well what you've shown (aside from the fact that your argument is weak enough to require picking on someone's spelling) is that it needs to be well done, as I noted. Yes, if the book is poorly redone into a movie, it will suck. However if a script for a movie is poorly written from scratch, it will suck. This is not news. However, when it is well done, you get something like Fight Club, which is excellent. Yes, for every good movie of ANY kind you can find probably 100 crappy ones. Doesn't mean we should stop liking and making good movies.
Need someone hotter. Even my (Pakistani) girlfriend's objectively hotter than her, and that's not supposed to happen.
late post.. but anyway..
he talked about the movie when he was in Stockholm
(when Starship Titanic was released)
and said that he had bought back the rights to the film since he wanted it done and that in a properly manner.
I think that there was mentioned that someone from SNL could be playing Zaphod
- I choked on the red pill and now I'm stuck in limbo
That's because you only hear Pet Shop boys and other gay music.
but the reason they have been getting closer is a direct responce to cross influences over the past 30 years. if you look at the period when the Monty Python gang were active the differance between american humor was huge - I can't even think of any good examples then of american humor of that time..
then influence startd to trikle - with skit shows like saturday night live, and guys like robin williams (who was influenced by the goon show) and so the british understated intelligent humor started to infiltrate the US culture. this trends continued, and still is continueing, the simpson is a great example of the type of humor that, while being american, is extreemly inteligent with cross referances to various cultural elements, pop, clasical, art, and so on.
I'm actually german. ;-)
Interesting explanation about towels! Personally I would have said a sarong is more useful - at least in warm climates. The moisture holding power of a sarong is lower than a towel, but it tends to lose that moisture to the atmosphere more quickly. However, by the time it's dry enough to dry you any more, you're already dry yourself. Someone forgot the most important use for a towel / sarong / arbitrary piece of cloth: no-bathroom bathroom privacy! Also, a sarong with fringes and tastles on the ends is more interesting to dry your genitals :-) On a cold planet you probably would be better off with an actual towel, though.
And I have hitch-hiked for real with and without an actual towel. Didn't really make a lot of difference. Either way, you still get lifts off loonies. Only with the towel, they're more likely to be Adams fans.
> Adams need only sit back and watch it be ruined.
Or, more properly lie back... although he hasn't got much say in it at this point.
> Do you have any idea how much each extension costs to the company?
Do you have any idea how much cash Disney grosses per year? Enough to consider the cost of legislation purchased very low.
The ultimate irony then is Spyglsss/Disney releasing this film. Adams need only sit back and watch it be ruined.
Mr. Praline: Look, I took the liberty of examining that author when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it had been sitting on its perch in the first place was that it had been NAILED there.
(pause)
Owner: Well, o'course it was nailed there! If I hadn't nailed that author down, it would have nuzzled up to those bars, bent 'em apart with its beak, and VOOM! Feeweeweewee!
Mr. Praline: "VOOM"?!? Mate, this author wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it! 'E's bleedin' demised!
Owner: No no! 'E's pining for the fjords!
Mr. Praline: 'PINING FOR THE FJORDS???? E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This author is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-AUTHOR!!
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Yes, I was comparing Fort Wayne, Indiana, an A-ball city of 200,000 residents, to major-league cities. I was guessing that public libraries in New York, L.A., and Chicago are much more likely to have larger holdings in general than libraries in cities of 200K.
I still won't be able to answer anything but speculation until tomorrow when I browse the stacks.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I just checked the local library, and it in fact has a bigger collection than I had imagined. Thanks for the tip. Now I'll tell my friends to screw Disney by borrowing DVDs from the library.
Will I retire or break 10K?