Slashdot Mirror


HHGTG Screenwriter Interviews Himself

Overly Critical Guy writes "The screenwriter for the upcoming Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy film has interviewed himself. A snippet: 'Who am I? "Not Douglas Adams" is the answer that concerns most people.'"

96 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. Douglas Adams by Ianoo · · Score: 5, Funny
    Who am I? "Not Douglas Adams" is the answer that concerns most people.'"
    Actually I'd be more concerned if the guy claimed he was Douglas Adams, what with him having passed away and all.
    1. Re:Douglas Adams by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, the screenwriter is quite alive and well, much in the same way that Douglas Adams isn't.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    2. Re:Douglas Adams by mog007 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the only way it's possible for someone to interview oneself is if you're Zaphod. If you only have one head, it's very hard to hold a conversation.

    3. Re:Douglas Adams by daniil · · Score: 2, Funny

      I protest! Douglas Adams is immortal!

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    4. Re:Douglas Adams by mek2600 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      LOL. Awesome post. I wonder how many people actually caught the reference.

      That could be the best line DNA ever wrote.

    5. Re:Douglas Adams by cmeans · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You're not sane if you don't question yourself every-once-in-a-while.

    6. Re:Douglas Adams by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you only have one head, it's very hard to hold a conversation.

      Tell that to Gollum.
    7. Re:Douglas Adams by NTmatter · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm still in hope that he's just spending a few years dead for tax reasons.

  2. Who is interested in the questions... by tmk · · Score: 5, Funny

    when the answer is not "42"?

    1. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by __aambat2633 · · Score: 3, Funny

      when the answer is not "42"?
      The answer is always 42... :)
      It is the answer to "life, universe and everthing".

    2. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by rasteri · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, the question that Arthur comes out with at the end is "What is six times nine?"

    3. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by sbennett · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which, as we all know, is 42, when written in base 13. Douglas Adams always claimed that this was a complete coincidence, saying that as weird as he was, at least he didn't make jokes in base 13.

    4. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, it is never claimed that this is the actual question. To quote Prak (teller of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth): "the Question and the Answer are mutually exclusive. Knowledge of one logically precludes knowledge of the other. It is impossible that both can ever be known about the same universe.?

    5. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by sbennett · · Score: 2, Informative

      Six times 9 is 54. Write 54 in base 13, and you have 42. (4 x 13 = 52; 52 + 2 = 54)

    6. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by Henrik+S.+Hansen · · Score: 3, Informative
      doesn't 42 equal 54 in base 13? Would not 42, written in base 13, be 33?

      Yes, that's the whole point! Douglas Adams put the question to be "What is six times 9?", since the answer should be 42. Of course, this was a joke, since 6 * 9 is really 54.

      So someone made a new joke of that, pointing out that 42 is correct, as long as we use base 13 instead of the usual base 10. So to make this painfully clear:

      6 * 9 = 54 (in base 10). And 54 = 42 in base 13.

    7. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, and that's probably the real one.

      Since Douglas Adams has said he just did this. Picked a number. Source

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    8. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by dspeyer · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Prak may not be telling the truth anymore -- after all, the drug has worn off and he may feel free to mess with peoples' heads.

      In the radio series, it is revealed that the question/answer annihilation theory may have been concucted by "a wily editor of the Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy to increase the general level of nervousness in the galaxy and, thereby, sales of the book."

    9. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by sentientbeing · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google has its own little gag

      Here

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    10. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by figge · · Score: 4, Informative

      And since then, Douglas Adams has been quoted saying "Nobody writes jokes in base 13." Another quote here.

    11. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by Nintendork · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I don't think he was lying. The very next line in the original radio broadcast is Arthur saying, "I always knew there was something fundamentally wrong about the universe."

      -Lucas

    12. Re:Who is interested in the questions... by jx100 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hah.. first time I clicked that, the search time was .42 seconds.

  3. I believe Adams himself once wrote... by fpga_guy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    "The only problem with talking to yourself, is that you are rarely surprised by the answers..."

    1. Re:I believe Adams himself once wrote... by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      He certainly stole Adams idea of combining humour with SciFi (or Fantasy), Well, no. As much as I've enjoyed their writings the idea that either of them invented that idea is silly. (And where did Tom Holt or Robert Aspirin get it, from P2P illegal idea sharing? The SFWIA will be busting them soon, no doubt. :)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  4. Wonderful.. by Fullmetal+Edward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope this doesn't become a fad, most film actors don't have the IQ of an average person let alone enough to figure out that they are talking to themselvs....

    --
    --- [Insert intresting Sig here]
  5. The first question he asks himself.. by nadavspi · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "WHO THE H*#&! ARE YOU AND WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO MUCK AROUND WITH THIS TREASURED PIECE OF LITERATURE, YOU AMERICAN HOLLYWOOD HACK?"
    I like this guy already.

    Seriously though, the attitude he has in this self interview gives me (some) hope for this movie. He seems concerned with keeping the movie parallel to Douglas Adams' intentions and style.
    He also noted how his initial reaction after reading Douglas's script was "I can't write this, this guy's a genius and I'm no genius."
    "I was never trying to put my stamp on this material or bring my 'voice' to it (whatever the h*#&! that elusive thing is)."
    Who knows, it may even turn out decent. Eh, who am I kidding.
    1. Re:The first question he asks himself.. by madpoet_one · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hear Hear... and this line was also very funny: this was England, after all, and whenever two or more people assemble in England, it is national law that tea must be served. I'm from Louisiana and we have a similar law that involves Dr. Pepper and Cheetos It was almost like he was channeling Douglas Adams when he wrote that...

      --
      Remain lost in hidden worlds where I reign. Head engine and caboose in my toy train...
  6. Actually.. by MooCows · · Score: 5, Insightful

    .. this guy strikes me as a good person for this task.

    And when I told him of my "I'm not worthy" moment, he said "I think you're perfect for it and that attitude will probably help you."

    And he seems to really grasp the bizarre HHGTtG humor :)
    (Let's just hope the rest of the movie will be made by equally promising folks)

    --
    The path I walk alone is endlessly long.
    30 minutes by bike, 15 by bus.
    1. Re:Actually.. by MilenCent · · Score: 4, Funny

      Here's one thing I'm worried about:

      That someone along the line, someone important to the process, will mess it up terribly. The whole movie can get made perfectly and it can still get messed up -- we're talking about Disney here, they can always decide the editors did a horrible job and re-edit it, which could be murder to a Hitchhiker's movie.

      And here's another thing I'm worried about:

      Consider, for a moment, that everyone involved with this could be perfect and the movie could still disappoint. This is not a situation where they can take any old crap out of the script pile, raise its attributes by equipping it with a director and actors, and plop it out onto the screen.

      This movie is going to require real directoral skill to work, but he can't get too fancy with the material or he'll incur the wrath of geeks everywhere.

      And the last thing I'm worried about:

      A Hitchhiker's movie has been bouncing around Hollywood for a long time. Adams has been dead for what, two or three years now? When did the project get uncorked and start moving towards production? It wasn't long after the critical fatality.

      The thing that may have held up the movie for so long is Adams himself, refusing to accept the various flavors of Hollywood taint that infect so many productions. Of course, the success of the Lord Of The Rings movies has changed things a little bit....

      My god, that's the new thing that really worries me:

      A Hitchhiker's Movie is in production because Hollywood has concluded there's money to be made in movie adaptations of books beloved by geeks.

      O'Reilly is sitting on a gold mine.

    2. Re:Actually.. by Scarblac · · Score: 2, Funny

      O'Reilly is sitting on a gold mine.

      What a great idea, and why restrict it to O'Reilly! We can have George Lucas do K&R with all the C++ special effects added in later, have Peter Jackson direct a definitive version of Knuth that will most of the geeks can live with, and the guy who did Trainspotting can do the Camel book...

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
  7. A film ? .. by Gopal.V · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Being the imaginative , day dreaming type , I've always seen stories rather than read them ...

    Like seeing a sandworm while reading dune or seeing the patronus (made of glittering points of light) from a low angle (only hooves visible) making ripples on the lake as it runs ... Or see Arthur Dent flying around trying to grab his bag with the bottle of retsina ...

    The Harry Potter movie literally destroyed that picture I had in mind, because a movie still cannot give me the "real" feeling the book gave me ..

    But I guess , illusions provided by a book cannot be enjoyed by everyone... some just need a little "CG" help.

    1. Re:A film ? .. by __aatgod8309 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is when instead of 'a little CG help' they instead rely on 'the huge CG crutch'. Lets hope they focus on the original material, and don't end up with $$$ of flashy sfx trying hide the failings of the finished product...

    2. Re:A film ? .. by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry, it just really annoys me when you get that stereotypical person in a movie thread complaining about a movie being made, usually in reference to a 'sacred work of fiction'. DON'T WATCH IT AND SHUT UP ABOUT IT. Allow me to elaborate...

      But I guess , illusions provided by a book cannot be enjoyed by everyone... some just need a little "CG" help.

      Some of us like to enjoy the creative visions of others as well.

      Many people get a thrill from watching a well-constructed 2-minute trailer for a good movie, just as some of us like to watch a well-constructed 2-hour "trailer" of a good book.

      It's not the same as reading the book, they are two separate types of enjoyment.

      And sometimes the movie is actually better. E.g., IMO, The Shawshank Redemption. In my book-reading, I don't have the benefit of great actors, the voice over of Morgan Freeman, or the music of Thomas Newman to enhance the story.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    3. Re:A film ? .. by ctr2sprt · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But I guess , illusions provided by a book cannot be enjoyed by everyone... some just need a little "CG" help.
      Don't be such a snobbish elitist. Just because I like the Harry Potter movies doesn't mean I lack an imagination, which is what you're claiming. All it means that I have the ability to enjoy watching someone else's imagination without sacrificing my own. After all, no interpretation is really perfectly correct, even if your name is J.K. Rowling - you make the books your own when you read them.

      The diversity of interpretation is one of the really positive aspects of art, including movies and literature. Shakespeare's works are still hotly debated (among academics in the field, anyway) hundreds of years after his death. So it's good that you can read the books and get a vivid impression of the world. But if you refuse to consider other interpretations, even those which directly contradict your own, you're missing out on half the experience.

      Seriously, try it. You may not like those other viewpoints, but you'll probably find them interesting - and if you get together with a few other Harry Potter (or whatever) fans, you'll probably have a great time talking about them.

    4. Re:A film ? .. by MilenCent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some of us like to enjoy the creative visions of others as well.

      I can understand that. But in our culture, movies carry ten times the cultural weight that books carry. If a book and a movie made from that book are both equivilently popular, relative to the size of their audiences, then the culture will tend to remember the movie to the exclusion of the book.

      This is why, when a movie is made from a book, the book suddenly gets back into print, almost always with cover graphics that match the movie. They even did this with The Lord of the Rings.

      Many people get a thrill from watching a well-constructed 2-minute trailer for a good movie, just as some of us like to watch a well-constructed 2-hour "trailer" of a good book.

      I'm not one of the people who particularly enjoys movie trailers. Many times they give away story secrets, they often miss the whole point of the movie they're promoting, and I get tired of seeing giant CGI letters get set aflame, become lit with the sound of a knife sharpening, have a sun rise behind them, or vibrate towards the viewer in lewd fashion.

      In any case, trailer is not to movie as movie is to book. Not that it's wrong that a movie should inspire anyone to read the work upon which it is based, but that I can't help but think reading a book after the movie must be a different experience than reading the book first.

      But then again, I can imagine there being some books that are so confusing that I imagine that seeing the visual Cliff Notes version could be helpful.

  8. DVD regions by MavEtJu · · Score: 4, Funny

    And I didn't get a chance to watch their commercial and music video reel before the call (because my DVD player wouldn't play UK Region 2, but I digress)

    The snake bites itself in the tail...

    --
    bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
  9. The Radio Shows by TaxSlave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm glad to read that he followed up his script-reading and hiring by going straight to the radio shows. Both the TV shows and the first two books showed amazing genius, primarily because they sprung forth directly from those radio shows.

    In radio, you must build your images in the spoken word with minimal sound effects. You must do it clearly and succinctly. This translated very well to the TV screen, because they didn't throw away the descriptions altogether and replace them with images. They just added TO the descriptions.

    The first two books were very dialogue driven, and dialogue is where Adams' genius really showed through. The other books in the "trilogy" never felt quite the same, and I stronly believe that feeling came from the lack of basis in well-formed radio drama/comedy.

    I can't wait.

  10. Nice attempt at a pre-emptive strike by Tuvai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But I doubt this stunt will be enough to silence the most rabid of followers of Douglas Adams' work, that particular camp will only be content if this movie is never released at all. After all, not even Peter Jackson, with his vision, scope, funding and love of the books could silence the complaints following the rings trilogy.
    He has to realise that with book-to-film adaptations, whether it be Harry Potter or Battle Royale, you can never satisfy the lunatic fringe. In fact, in the end, you can never win, all you can do is please as many people as you can.

    1. Re:Nice attempt at a pre-emptive strike by aheath · · Score: 4, Insightful
      When I was a kid, there were many movies I avoided because I loved the book so much. As an adult, I've come to realize that it's the story that's most important. A movie is just a different way of telling a story than a book is. Book's encourage active imagination. Movies do all the imagining for you. Now I always make it a point to read the book before I see the movie.

      My 11 year old son just discovered HHGG and Douglas Adams. He's read the radio script, read the books, and seen the BBC TV show. Each version is slightly different from the others. I fully expect that he and I will both enjoy the HHGG movie because we will accept it for what it is instead of comparing it to the source material.

    2. Re:Nice attempt at a pre-emptive strike by Tuvai · · Score: 2, Informative

      Battle Royale was based off a book?

      Indeed it was.

    3. Re:Nice attempt at a pre-emptive strike by mongbot · · Score: 2, Interesting
      He has to realise that with book-to-film adaptations, whether it be Harry Potter or Battle Royale, you can never satisfy the lunatic fringe. In fact, in the end, you can never win, all you can do is please as many people as you can.
      But this assumes that the film moguls are actually trying to please people in the first place, rather than just exploiting well known brands to get more butts on seats.

      My major grip with book-to-film adaptations is how much liberty the studios take with the plot. I'm no diehard. I fully understand if characters and scenes have to be deleted or altered, _as long as the basic plot is kept the same_. The problem is they rarely do have the disclipine to keep the integrity of the book, and make annoying, unnecessary changes to make the story fit boring Hollywood formulas.

      Peter Jackson's LOTR was unusual in that the adaptation kept relatively (stress relatively) close to the book. And it was a massive success. I don't think this was a coincidence. If more adaptations kept true to the original vision of the writer then there would be more successes like LOTR. But this is rare.

      For example, just look at how Hollywood screwed up the Illiad with Troy. It makes me sick - tacking on a happy ending to a classic story. I didn't even think Hollywood could stoop that low. It's like having Hamlet live. It's just unacceptable and it led to a boring, overemotional film.
    4. Re:Nice attempt at a pre-emptive strike by IdleTime · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who cares about the fringe people anyway?

      If they don't like the movie, I'll read them some Vogon poetry and that'll take care of even the strongest opponent!

      The point is to get DA's incredible stories out to people who have never heard of him or his work and at the same time be as true as possible to the original work.

      Fringe lunatics running around with dual papier mache heads are not the target of the movie.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    5. Re:Nice attempt at a pre-emptive strike by guidemaker · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's like having Hamlet live.

      Hey! Watch the spoilers!

  11. Re:its gonna suck by BenjyD · · Score: 2, Funny

    From reading the interview, this guy seems to 'get' Adams humour, so this could be an exception.

    As for US remakes, I really never know why they bother most of the time. The Ladykillers? For the love of good, why are they remaking the Ladykillers? Personally, I reckon the Orange adverts at the cinema are far too close to the truth of how movies get made.

  12. American to be the screenwriter for h2g2 .. hmmm by themadcaplaughs · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Well, with Doughlas Adams not around, someone of course had to do the screen-writing. I wished all along that the chosen someone be British.

    I am not any of the "ists" .. but then as a neutral observer, I would say let the duck float and and let the fish swim. J D Sallinger is funny no doubt, but then comparing him with G B Shaw would be injustice to both. For the more literally challenged of my friends here, check out the difference in the humour of Blackadder or Monty Phython and Friends or Will and Grace. I don't think Brit and American humour can be mixed. None of them is inferior ( ok that is being neutral to the point of getting irritating, so the confession : I do admire the Brit humour more ). Hoping this guy proves my doubts to be plain paranoia.

  13. execs have the infinte power to $@~$ things up by Random_Goblin · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If you've read through "the salmon of doubt" you get a sense of just how difficult it's been to get this film made. Adam's was repeatedly told "there's no market for a funny sci-fi film". I don't recall his exact words on the success of "Men In Black", but you can feel the head bashing against a brick wall.

    there is more film goodness here including what I think is a picture of marvin.

    You know what? It just might work, after all Pete Jackson did a damn good job, and everyone thought he would suck.

    Lets just all pray George Lucas doesn't walk near the studio. [shuddering at the thought of Ja-Ja Marvin]

    1. Re:execs have the infinte power to $@~$ things up by TomV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Looks to me like just the sort of design the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation would come up with for "your plastic pal who's fun to be with". Any Sirius product that doesn't look infinitely tacky in the film will represent a missed opportunity, IMO.

  14. Whoa.. look at the cast by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 4, Informative
    So I went and did the IMdB like everyone else and after checking Mr. Kirkpatrick's credentials, I looked at the slated cast for the H2G2 movie... some interesting choices...

    Arthur Dent = Martin Freeman ("Tim" from The Office)
    Ford Prefect = Mos Def (weird, but I could see it)
    Warwick Davis = Marvin (?!? uh, Willow?? is Marvin short, I can't remember)
    Humma Kavula = John Malkovich (say no more)
    Zaphod Beeblebrox = Sam Rockwell (right on!)

    I have hope.

    --
    If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    1. Re:Whoa.. look at the cast by FrostedWheat · · Score: 3, Informative
  15. eddy by Random_Goblin · · Score: 3, Interesting
    doesn't eddy the ship board computer ask exactly the same question?

    I know purists might argue that "think of a number" isn't really a question. However if they think that would have stopped Adam's they are quite mistaken.

    I think actually it's like the question "Why is a raven like a writting desk?". Lewis Carroll didn't intend there to be an actual answer... but he found the readers' solution "...because Poe wrote on both." to be be true and funny.

    BTW has anyone else noticed the similarity between "genuine people personalities" and everyones favourite windows application clippy the paperclip?

    Adam's was a genius...

    1. Re:eddy by gcalvin · · Score: 2, Funny

      I like this combination of two proposed answers:

      Q. Why is a raven like a writing desk?

      A. Because there's an O in both, an R in neither, and each begins with an E.

      (Think about it.)

  16. The Radio Shows (listen to them at KCRW) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I could not agree more. All the versions of HHGTG are classics, but the radio show has the primary vision from which the rest sprang. You've not had the full experience until you've heard them.

    Luckily, KCRW has them on-line at: http://kcrw.org/show/hg

    1. Re:The Radio Shows (listen to them at KCRW) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Luckily, KCRW has them on-line at: http://kcrw.org/show/hg

      For those preferring MP3 formats, another on-line source for the H2G2 Radio Show is New Mexico State University

      (Sorry for posting AC, but I already did some moderating for this article...)

  17. Problem isnt the sci-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the problem is the HHGG is based on an undercurrent of very British humour, particularly jokes about class, beaurocracy and the like (do Americans really get the references to British Rail etc.?). E.g., Vogons aren't funny because they are grotesque green aliens, they are funny because they are the local council town planning department in space. It is a well known fact that cricket makes no sense to Americans whatsoever. But theres a reason that he didn't write about the "baseball wars". Etc. The zany sci-fi stuff floats along top this. I'm a little concerned its going to end up all the latter and none of the former.

    1. Re:Problem isnt the sci-fi by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 3, Insightful
      the problem is the HHGG is based on an undercurrent of very British humour

      Yeah that's probably why the book did so poorly over here in North America.

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    2. Re:Problem isnt the sci-fi by HeghmoH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Incompetent monopolies, stupid governments, and incomprehensible sports are pretty much universal human experiences.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    3. Re:Problem isnt the sci-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
      See, I thought you wouldn't understand.

      Yanks. You do realise Ford Prefect was a joke at your expense with regard to "getting" British culture don't you? Anyway, moving on...

      The humour in Hitch Hiker's Guide to The Galaxy is at multiple levels. One of those levels is British vernacular so to speak. Like I say, theres lots you don't need to get the references to find funny, but for British viewers of the film if they drop this material as inconsequential (as does tend to happen) or worse still, it buzzes directly over the script writer's head, then it will be a shame.


      Remember, Hitchhiker's was originally written for a radio 4 audience. This is isn't even typical of Britain, far less the English speaking world. I understand it has to be adapted and changed, but theres lots that could be missed or clumsily removed.

    4. Re:Problem isnt the sci-fi by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 2, Insightful
      See, I thought you wouldn't understand....Yanks. You do realise Ford Prefect was a joke at your expense with regard to "getting" British culture don't you? Anyway, moving on...

      I find it amusing that you would assume that I am American, but not nearly as funny as the idea of you explaining a joke to me that we weren't even talking about.

      I'll just leave it with this thought: comedy, even clever comedy, does not have a nationality.

      Now, you just carry on with the classist British curmudgeon bit, and I'll go on not caring. Deal?

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
  18. Hammer and Tongs? by Dolentron+3030 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'd never heard of these guys before reading that interview, but i found their website, Tongsville. You can check out some of their music video and shorts here to get an idea of their style. I'm encouraged.

    1. Re:Hammer and Tongs? by Random_Goblin · · Score: 3, Informative
      Their little animated milk carton video for "Coffee and TV" by blur, was really good. I hadn't realised that was them. I knew I'd heard of them, but couldn't think of what they'd done.

      Good link

  19. fools by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    for those saying that a brit should've been picked for the screen writer: bullshit.

    genius is indiscriminate, and british cultural humour is not only "gotten" by brits, as the last 20-some years of Monty Pyton fandom in the US has demonstrated. Nor are brits the only ones that can create such humour.

    Furthermore, kirkpatrick said he didn't even make all that many changes, just organized it so it would fit the film format (ie, so that the action wouldn't be crouded at one end of the film, with the other 3/4ths of it boring as fuck).

    I don't know about anyone else thought about Chicken Run, but I thought it was very similar in style to Wallace and Grommit. Are not the writers/makers of W&G british? (I personally thought Chicken Run was more fun and humorous overall, but what do I know. I'm a stupid American, right? bigots.)

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  20. Re:its gonna suck by admbws · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the problem is not with the script writers and producers, but the funders, the film company. You see, script writers tend to have a great sense of humour. However, when a film company sees this, they see this. This means that film companies only feel particularly jolly when it's pushing hundreds of thousands through the turnstiles. They don't care how many people laugh, just how many people cough up.

  21. Re:its gonna suck by Mononoke · · Score: 4, Insightful
    just like every single British film that Americans touch
    Terry Gilliam is an American, and he did ok with the Python movies.
    --
    NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
  22. More behind the scenes stuff by guidemaker · · Score: 3, Informative

    On h2g2 there's more movie stuff, including an interview with the director and producer, and a short clip of behind the scenes as the first scene is filmed.

  23. Re:Chicken Run / Wallace and Gromit by lxt · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, they are British. In fact, I'm typing this around 100 metres away from the animation studio (Aardman) at which they were made.

    However, I do believe that Chicken Run was touched up somewhat by DreamWorks, to slightly Americanise it - after all, Chicken Run was bankrolled by a US film studio, whereas the Wallace and Grommit films were bankrolled either by Aardman themselves or the BBC

  24. Lunatic Fringe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He has to realise that with book-to-film adaptations, whether it be Harry Potter or Battle Royale, you can never satisfy the lunatic fringe.

    The problem is, with something as bizarre as this "trilogy", the lunatic fringe is a rather large percentage of the whole readership...not meant as a troll but you have to admit, these books are strange.

  25. Re:American to be the screenwriter for h2g2 .. hmm by hey! · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, with Doughlas Adams not around, someone of course had to do the screen-writing. I wished all along that the chosen someone be British.

    Well, it's probably unimportant that the writer inherit concretely from the British class so long as he implements the Satirist interface.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  26. Worrying extracts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful



    he was watching CHICKEN RUN (with his sons? I don't know. In my head, he watches it weekly) he thought "hey that writer seemed to create a feature film that worked as a big studio movie while still keeping an existing and uniquely British sensibility.

    Speaking as a Brit, I found Chicken Run hugely disappointing. It was a good idea with poor execution, like it was dumbed down. It felt like a sell out from beginning to end, with much of the quirky and inventive humour of the three Wallace and Gromits completely missing. I thought Nick Park had just struck a bum note in scaling up to feature length, but I guess it was partly this guys fault too. It was laugh free.

    one of those guys who quoted Holy Grail

    There is nothing more nauseating than someone who quotes MP at length, trying to be funny. It's basically the sure sign of someone who just isn't funny at all. Al Gore probably does it at parties.

    (brilliant ideas, too -- truly humbling),

    This whole Adams worshipping strikes the wrong note with me. I mean, the guy was great, but like the rest of us, he had his occassional shit ideas. I've read the early draft of the "Salmon of Doubt". He worked over and over on scripts to bring them up to par. If you're blinded by adoration, and don't have the talent to rewrite, maybe you're just not the right guy. He seems to go from

    "I'm not good enough"->"I'm really excited about the project, but I'm not good enough"->"This is my project, but I'm not good enough"->"I'm just like Adam's in many ways."->"I can rewrite his stuff better."

    Putting "I felt a certain amount of freedom to continue carrying that torch, mostly with the new concepts, characters and plot devices that Douglas had already created" together with "More has been made of the Arthur/Trillian relationship and the Arthur/Trillian/Zaphod triangle. Douglas knew, as I know, that in order to make a feature film bankrolled by an American studio that is to play on the global stage there needs to be a certain amount of attention paid to character, character relationships and emotion." suffuses me with dread. Let's say Douglas experimented with a number of lame ideas to make the film more appealling, such as more love triangles and jealousy. Shouldn't be in the final film, but will be in the process outlined here.

    Hammer and Tongs: the music video specialists. A 3 minute music video direction to a feature film direction? That's a hell of a leap. I'd worry with this project in experienced hands. Jackson analogy doesn't hold here, he cut his teeth on a number of low budget horror flicks like "Bad Taste", and one more mainstream "Heavenly Bodies"(?) before moving onto LotR. Anyone think of even one music video director who has gone on to make a successful full length feature? I can't.

    The tide has receded and left his admission he wrote the script for "Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves!" indelibly impressed on my mind like a hulk of a wrecked ship. Prepare yourselves: HHGTG will be a wreck of a film.

    1. Re:Worrying extracts by macthulhu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mmmmm.... Spike Jonze?

      --

      Someday a real rain is gonna come...

    2. Re:Worrying extracts by guidemaker · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Anyone think of even one music video director who has gone on to make a successful full length feature? I can't.

      David Fincher? Michel Gondry?

    3. Re:Worrying extracts by dozer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Anyone think of even one music video director who has gone on to make a successful full length feature? I can't.

      (guidemaker): David Fincher? Michel Gondry?
      (macthulu): Spike Jonze?
      (me): Joseph 'McG' Nichol?

      So, yes, there have been quite a few.

      "...indelibly impressed on my mind like a hulk of a wrecked ship"?? Good lord, man, it's quite clear that you don't know much about good writing yourself.

    4. Re:Worrying extracts by smugfunt · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Anyone think of even one music video director who has gone on to make a successful full length feature?
      Ridley Scott had only made commercials before Alien.
  27. One thing not to loose: subtlety by sela · · Score: 3, Interesting


    I think the biggest problem with american works vs. British is the lack of subtely.

    In Hollywoodic movies everything needs to be explicit. We need to know who are the good guys and bad guys right ahead. If there is a moral to the story, they make an effort _nobody_ will miss it. If there is a commical situation, they make every effort to make us understand that we just experianced a funny moment - or otherwise Joe sixpacks might miss the fact that someone said something funny, which is not good for their wallet.

    And this is exactle what I hope _will not_ happen to HHGTTG. If it will remain a truely British film, they will be able to present the most commical, rediculous and improbable situation with a sence of casuality, as if it were an absolutely normal situation. If it will become a typical an hollywoodic film, every scene will be accompanied with a "Look - what a cool concept this is!", and "wasn't this just hillarious?". Every element in the story will be explained to death.

    I sure hope this won't happen to this movie.

    1. Re:One thing not to loose: subtlety by mikedaisey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I think the biggest problem with american works vs. British is the lack of subtely."

      This is a shopworn bias. On the American side it only considers Hollywood films--and it convienently forgets all the awful British TV and film that gets made every year.

      There are differences between the British and American film canons, but it's nothing as simple as "subtlety".

    2. Re:One thing not to loose: subtlety by Scarblac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think he gets that, actually. Read the part where the directors ask him to "clarify" the infinite improbability drive concept:

      Each time we tried to clarify the I.I.D, we'd look through the script and say, "It's in there, isn't it?" By lunch, we moved from coffee to wine and the I.I.D. concept was gaining clarity. By late afternoon when we moved from wine to more wine, we had deduced that we were, in fact, brilliant and that the script was flawless. So we decided to go with the "less is more" theory and left the script alone. And then we had more wine.

      Less is more. He gets it.

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
    3. Re:One thing not to loose: subtlety by MilenCent · · Score: 3, Funny

      Less is more. He gets it.

      Unless you're talking about wine....

    4. Re:One thing not to loose: subtlety by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would like to know where the subtlety is in the Vogons, and in most of the other Adams villains who are evil simply because they exist. Or in any of the passages where Adams seems to be saying, "Look! Look at the funny horrors that have happened due to modern hypocritical beaurocracy!" I find that this kind of subtlety hits "like a slice of lemon wrapped around a large gold brick."

      If anything separates British from American films, it's not so much the direction of the plot as it is devotion to the plot. In most American films, you see the plot, you grab on to it, and it is the sole driving force for everything the characters do. Wheras in most British films, plot is more of an afterthought to explain why the characters are doing anything in the first place. The plot is there to eventually tie the next segment in with this one. It can be very disjointed...try following the plot through an episode of the Young Ones, you'll see what I mean.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  28. Re:its gonna suck by cozziewozzie · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't think you can take a guy who spent most of his life surrounded by other Monty Python characters (and drew THOSE animations) as representative of anything, really.

  29. Can we stop bashing the US by kahei · · Score: 4, Insightful


    There are a lot of posts here claiming that Americans just won't be able to get the subtle British humor of HHGTTG, and pointing to various great Brit comedies to support this. The thing is, when people talk about 'British comedy', they mean the comedy of one particular period, the golden age of really great British comedy from about 1965 - 1985, when Fawlty, Python, and HHGTGG flourished.

    Now, that was indeed a great flowering of the comedian's art, the like of which has not been seen elsewhere. But it's not an eternal immutable aspect of the US & UK population; it's an event that happened to occur in the UK. There's junk UK TV -- in fact, they produce rock bottom TV by the ton -- and there's great US TV.

    So please can we discuss this with reference to appropriate cultural phenomena, sure, but not with reference to this imaginary 'irony gene' that only British people have? It's only encouraging that class of annoying English people who go on and on about Americans not understanding irony like it was the only way they could think of to make themselves feel special.

    Hrm, well, my rant is over.

    I'll get me coat.

    --
    Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
    1. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by sela · · Score: 2, Insightful


      I beg to differ.

      The point isn't whose better. The point is: what's the best way to keep the true spirit of Douglas Adams's books when doing a movie out of it.

      True, not everything americans are doing is bad. I like Seinfeld and the Simpsons and Southpark, and lets not forget that the Coen brother are american as well ... but yet, when I have to choose, still Monty Python, Douglas Adams and the Black Adder would win (for me), hands-down over the best american show you can think of.

      And one more thing: as you can easilly tell from my poor grammar, I'm not english speaker myself, which means I'm neither British nor American.

    2. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by nathanh · · Score: 5, Insightful
      There are a lot of posts here claiming that Americans just won't be able to get the subtle British humor of HHGTTG, and pointing to various great Brit comedies to support this. The thing is, when people talk about 'British comedy', they mean the comedy of one particular period, the golden age of really great British comedy from about 1965 - 1985, when Fawlty, Python, and HHGTGG flourished.

      Umm... Black Adder, Red Dwarf, Men Behaving Badly. The golden age never ended. The Brits keep churning out brilliant comedy.

      The only good comedy sitcom to ever come out of America was Frasier.

    3. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by the+pickle · · Score: 3, Funny

      The only good comedy sitcom to ever come out of America was Frasier.

      You misspelled "most British."

      p

    4. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by Laxitive · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seinfeld. Genius. Pure genius. Uniquely American and utterly unique.

      But yeah, most of the other American stuff is shit.

      -Laxitive

    5. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by wantedman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Frasier? What about:
      - Simpson
      - Futurama
      - Family Guy
      - King of the Hill
      - Everyone Loves Raymond
      - Steifeld
      - Married with Children
      - That's 70's Show
      - Cheers
      - M.A.S.H.
      - A.L.F.(at times)
      - Golden Girls

      The only thing British comedies do better tending to end at the correct times, while American comedies tend to die painful deaths of teh unfunny.

    6. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by Cryogenes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And don't forget 'Yes, Minister', a true gem of british comedy the like of which patriotism-blinded America could never do.

      But I will admit there is one american comedy series I really did appreciate for its often-times absurd humour - Ally McBeal.

    7. Re:Can we stop bashing the US by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Informative

      There have been a lot of good absurdist comedy series on American TV in recent years, many of them originating on Fox. Besides the obvious cartoons (Simpsons, Futurama and Family Guy), there's Malcolm in the Middle and the new Ron Howard series "Arrested Development," which is, simply put, a stroke of genius. Like M.A.S.H. or Frasier, only I actually laugh at it.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  30. I've still got some hope for this movie by tfbastard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of course it'll never replace the imagery Adams planted in my head, but it might turn out to be a really decent movie. And I can really see Mos Def as Ford.

  31. Re:American to be the screenwriter for h2g2 .. hmm by Random_Goblin · · Score: 2, Funny
    Well, it's probably unimportant that the writer inherit concretely from the British class so long as he implements the Satirist interface.

    I don't know what's worse; that you constructed this evil phrase... or that we find it funny.

    waiter!... I need a life over here please, this ones a bit stale.

  32. Re:its gonna suck by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 2, Funny

    It doesn't matter what you think any more

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  33. No, no, no. The best cut is DIAGONAL. by Roman_(ajvvs) · · Score: 2, Funny
    if he's an honorary brit, then wouldn't he presumedly have to be an actual something? I mean, being an honorary anything would be meaningless if you weren't able to be anything in actuality, since the whole "honour" part of being honorary anything revolves around the fact that you're not really an actual something... It's like saying the squirrels are honorarily possessed, or something silly like that.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I have to study for my triangle-cutting exam...

    --
    click-clack, front and back. I'm not moving this car otherwise.
  34. Chicken Run == Hollywood formula by acb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The character development arcs in Chicken Run were done to Hollywood formula (i.e., the Mel Gibson character's journey of self-discovery). It could well have been plotted using the screenwriting software commonly used in Hollywood (and probably was).

    The Wallace & Gromit films, in contrast, have a charming naivete about them. The characters aren't instances of a Hollywood-developed psychological model, embodying drives and motivations and moving along like cogs in a well-oiled machine, but just characters, gleefully violating the rules. To a Hollywood studio executive, this would be crude, sloppy characterization (and if Hollywood money was involved, it would be sent to a script doctor to fix it before it ever got to filming); yet it works, and seems to have more soul than the products of Hollywood.

  35. Re:a$!#&#@ by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dude, the "*#&!" crap in his interview wasn't about self-censoring. It was humor. Look into it.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  36. Don't Panic! by Crazy_MYKL · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sure whatever happens will be Mostly Harmless.

    --


    <jedi> There is something funny here. You laugh. </jedi>
  37. Family Guy by bobobobo · · Score: 2, Funny
    Miles: Well Frasier, you're so corpulent that when you sit around the magnificently appointed tuscan villa, you sit around the magnificently appointed tuscan villa.

    Peter: Wow! This is the smartest show on TV!

  38. No 42 is actually.... by kikensei · · Score: 3, Informative

    A particular blend of Earl Grey tea sold at Harrod's. Adams used to drink it all the time.

    1. Re:No 42 is actually.... by kikensei · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here's a Pic...:

      Pic

    2. Re:No 42 is actually.... by darkpixel2k · · Score: 2, Funny

      Great. I'm about two hours late seeing this post. By now geeks everywhere have ordered every last bag of Herrods Earl Grey #42.

      --
      There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)