Slashdot Mirror
Ask 'Hitchhiker's Guide' Exec. Producer Robbie Stamp
After nearly three years of waiting, the movie version of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is almost upon us. I've been impressed with the casting, and with the trailers I've seen of the film -- enough that I'm taking the rather unhappy early review posted the other day with a large grain of salt. Now's your chance to ask whatever you'd like of Robbie Stamp, the film's executive producer; we'll pass on to Robbie some of the best questions and publish his answers as soon as he gets them back to us. (As usual, please -- confine yourself to one question per post.)
How faithful to the spirit of the book will the movie be?
http://tech-hawg.blogspot.com
Will the full trilogy (5 books) be made or is it being played by ear to see how the first goes?
I like muppets.
What is the Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything?
It had to be asked.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
Which of the characters in the movie was the most difficult to find an actor for and why?
42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
In Making the Film, what was the most difficult cut that had to be made? What scene from the book do you wish could have made it into the movie?
Can you appreciate Brittish Humor?
Who do I have to blackmail to get some representation around here!?!?!?!?
Was there an effort made to appeal equally to both fans of the original books and those who have not read the books, or was it slanted towards one group over the other?
"Me? Lady, I'm your worst nightmare -- a pumpkin with a gun."
Was investing in a franchise with such a purist fan base ever a concern for you, and what audience do you see this film appealing to most in light of such concerns?
How about doing another interview after we've seen the movie?
Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
...furthermore: is it too late to add this famous joke back in?
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
In making the film, was it ever a consideration to create a film that will appeal to people who have never read the books or heard the radio broadcasts? In making adaptations from literary works, especially ones with rich, stand alone universes, much time is spent on exposition of material that is well known to anyone who has read the works. While needed for people unfamiliar with the milieu, exposition rarely makes for riveting entertainment. But then again, so many people have read the books or heard the broadcasts, who actually makes the decision? It it just left up to the screen adaptor?
I understand from film makers that I know that it's very difficult to bring a book to film. Many things that work in a novel just don't work on film.
I'm curious as to what decisions you made regarding editing, changing, or even adding things to the plot to bring the story to film?
What was the driving inspiration behind the look for the movie version of Marvin? Fans are all aware of the "brain the size of a planet" lament, but what's with that giant round head? A new play on words? For laffs? Because all the other MP3 players seem to be going with that look nowadays?
Starkle, starkle, little twink.
If more films are made how will the refrences to God (The babelfish entry) and God's message to his creation be handled? In the current politically correct world will these be dropped or edited to refrence something different?
I like muppets.
Douglas Adams wrote multiple versions of the screenplay, including the one used in the movie. The "new" characters, such as the one played by John Malkovich (sp?), were added by Adams specifically for the movie.
If Adams wrote it, grilling the producer about it seems pointless.
Also, fans of the Guide universe(s) will already know that the books, the TV series, the radio series, and all the other media versions have all been contradictory. Douglas Adams himself lost track of how many variant plotlines there were. Having read the interviews and seen the trailers, I'd say they're as close to following "the spirit" of the books as they can be.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
How hard was it dealing with studio exec's who neither read nor understood Douglas Adam's work, while attempting to transition the original stories to film?
What do you feel is the single compromise made in the name of satisfying studio demands that the fans of the originals will be least likely to accept?
While making the movie, did you ever start to panic and then see copy of the guide and realize, "Oh yeah DON'T PANIC"?
Where is your towel?
Douglas Adams has likened getting a movie made in Hollywood to "trying to grill a steak by having a succession of people coming into the room and breathing on it."
Given the considerable success of his books and their large following, why wasn't a film adaptation released earlier? What hurdles had to be overcome?
On a scale of 1-23, how challenging was the task of casting mattresses for the part of Zem the Mattress? I mean, I've never even seen a talking mattress, I've only read about them in books. Do they have a seperate guild in Los Angeles, or do you have to go abroad to find talent? Enquiring minds want to know.
I like how eBay tries to sell me '42' items when I search google for 42:
Huge selection, great deals on 42 items.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
It seemed that a lot of the reason that Hammer and Tongs was chosen to do this film was their unique style, and in a lot of ways, it works with Douglas Adams' creative vision. However, it's being distributed by Touchstone Pictures, a division of the Walt Disney Corporation, and the quirky nature of Hammer and Tongs doesn't seem like it'd mesh with the culture at Disney. Additionally, I'd imagine the "suits" would have a lot of problems with a faithful treatment of Adams' work.
My question: how was the working relationship between the filmmakers and Disney (Touchstone)? Were there elements of the movie that were cut by Disney because they "just didn't get it," or were they pretty supportive of the decisions made by the filmmakers?
Why the decision to go with an almost totally American leading cast)? Other big book to movie adaptations (Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings) did outstanding with a fully british, and very mixed (respectively) cast. Was this by design to win over American audiences, or studio pressure, or just because they were the best auditioned actors these right roles? and also, were they the 1st choice for the roles. NOTE: I love Sam Rockwell, Mos Def and Zooey Deschanel, so these are not to be taken critically.
What does the "movie-first" experience have to offer that the "book-first" does not? Or is this movie really just for the geeks that are already in love with the tale, and my wife will just think it's another of my quirks?
This forum Sig is licensed under the LGPL.
Did the studio execs want a flashy blockbuster like Men In Black, or were they projecting for a lower box office total with the production (and thus not as willing to pony up big effects dollars)?
Consider: Every "incarnation" of tHHGttG has had variations such that no two are alike. Not including this one, Douglas Adams had a direct hand from start to finish of each version, so one cannot make remarks about accuracy or authenticity.
While DNA started this one, he was taken from us before its completion.
SO, my question is : Which "divergences" in this version were done (by/under the guidance of) Douglas Adams and which (if any) were done by other folks after his passing.
FWIW, I plan to ignore the critics and go see this film with a child-at-Christmas expectation. It should be great Eye Candy if nothing else.
Could you please respond to the review located at http://planetmagrathea.com/shortreview.html , in particular rebutting the parts that suggest the movie is poor in quality, is a travisty, or is otherwise unworthy of the name HHGTTG?
Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
In the end, how did you choose, from this range of sources, what sort of Hitch Hiker's Guide you actually wanted to make?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
To me, the essence of the Hitchhiker's Guide lies in the unpredictable turn of events that Douglas sets up to the reader. From a little girl with the answer to Vogon poetry, leaping to dolphins and mice. How do you retain these elements in such a straightforward media as the movies? How did you manage to "guide" the viewer without loosing the "in this page, for something completely different, we will talk about dolphins"?
Please read this most-recent interview with Robbie before posting any (more) questions that have already been answered.
Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
This is true: two years ago I was watching "The Office" at a co-worker's house (I'd never watched a whole episode before), and realized that Martin Freeman struck me -- out of the blue -- as exactly the way I would have expected a real-life Arthur Dent to look, gesture and sound, right down to the mooning for dawn, and the look of frustrated annoyance that he occasionally beams at (or rather just past) Gareth.
At the time (having no head for celebrity news), I didn't realize he'd been cast already as Arthur, and figured some other, well-meaning but inferior actor had been cast in that role. "It's too bad that they're already shooting 'Hitchhikers,'" I said, "because that guy *is* Arthur! Anyone else will pale in comparison to the flesh-and-blood Arthur who is playing Tim in this bizarre English-type sit-com!" My better-informed co-worker let me in on the good news, and my casting prowess was confirmed (to me, anyhow).
However, I'm curious how he came to the attention of the film's makers -- or was it vice versa? Was it because of his role in The Office, or was it his idea, or what? Was he already an Adams fan, or was this just happenstance?
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Peter Jackson reportedly said that he got the inspiration to work on Lord of the Rings when he finally realized that no one else was going to do it. What motivated you to get involved with Hitchhiker's? And secondly, what project would you love to see someone do?
Education is the silver bullet.
Thanks,
.. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
1. If Douglas Adams were still alive, what do you believe would be his thoughts and opinion of the final version of the movie?
2. Do you believe the movie would be noticeably different if Adams had survived and had more of a hand in its making? If so, in what ways?
Is Zaphod's other head in his chest because of midichlorians, you bastard?
-Peter
This movie was in deadlock for a long time until Douglas Adams died. In a reasonably short time span after this, things began moving.
My question is what things did Douglas Adams block that have now gone ahead?
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
All of the trailers I have seen on televison recently make the movie seem like an action flick. In keeping with the spirit of the book, I think this clearly isn't the case. However, the trailer I saw before Sin City last night, actually made the movie seem like more of a comedy. Is this just a case of marketing to different demographics? For instance, the audience for Sin City is most likely into comics, sci fi, etc. and will already know what the book and movie are about. However, the average schlub watching televsion will have no idea, so the trailer tries to draw them with lots of explosions. Is this indeed the case?
I guess I fall into both categories, so I will be there for the humor and the explosions. ; )
SiO2
2) With the six books in the series on Arthur Dent, Ford Prefect, and Zaphod Beeblebrox, how did you choose to keep some material and not show other material? Did you do this with the the thought of a sequel in mind?
3) In the Introduction: Guide to the guide: Some unhelpful hints from the author, will the movie update the contact info on "How to leave the planet" with current contact info to NASA, The Whitehouse, The Kremlin, and the Pope, with the addition of Virgin Galactic at www.virgingalactic.com ?
4)So Long, And Thanks For All The Fish
Most movies force the producers into some sort of comprimise due to budget/time/movie length restrictions. If these restrictions were lifted so that you could add one more thing to this movie, what would it be?
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
but is unnecessary for the overall gag: namely that the notice was on "public display" in a very unpublic place.
No, the joke is 100% that it's a comedy of excess.
There's nothing funny about a "public display" document being inconvenient to get at. That's what most of us call "everyday life."
However, a "public display" document in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet in the back of a disused lavatory with a sign on the door which says "beware of the leopard" is fucking hilarious.
Taking it out would be like re-editing the last reel of The Blues Brothers so they would only be chased for five miles by two or three cop cars. The scene would be shorter, cheaper, still contain everything "needed" to tell the story, but it would not funny.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Are you kidding me? People around here seem to love writing jokes in all your base.
Free yourself. Everything else will follow.
We have heard a lot about scenes being in and out of various cuts, suggesting that many of the things long-time fans will miss in this movie may have been filmed.
So, my join questions: Are there plans in place to have an extended cut? and Are there any particular scenes that come to mind that you believe should be added back in?
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
In my opinion, what made Douglas Adams' H2G2 books special was their combination of light-hearted wacky humor with a quite serious undercurrent of bitter socio-philosophical commentary.
The movie trailers look as if they capture the light-hearted wacky humor, but my big concern is that the movie will fail to capture and blend in Adams' commentary on society. And as others have pointed out, with Disney involved somehow in the making or distribution of the movie, I doubt the suits would have let much bitter or deep underlying social commentary into the film.
Do you think you actually correctly identified, related to, and captured in film format the social commentary aspect of Adams' writing?
Adams had a George Carlin-esque approach that was key: he pointed out the asinine flaws in mainstream human thinking and behavior, which are things we all notice but few dare to explicitly point out or belittle. To lose that would be a an artistic shame.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.