Hitchhikers Guide Movie Might Become a Trilogy

Noiser writes "The BBC reports that The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie could be turned into a trilogy. I wonder if they mean that it might turn into a trilogy in five parts, just like the book? I wish it did - unlike some people, I liked all of them..."

Comments

ok..

[aixou]

ok, I think we can start panicking now.

Scripts

[someguy456]

Of course, one of the redeeming properties of the movie is that Douglas Adams wrote the script himself, before he passed away.

Unless he personally wrote out the additional scripts, or at least laid out an extensive outline (plot/characters, etc), I don't think any more movies would be as successfull as the first, which couldn't really be considered a blockbuster per se.

Re:Scripts

[ari_j]

I still refer to Star Wars as a bi-trilogy.

Well, it damn well wasn't a sexology!

If they were to bring in Terry Gilliam as director

[jpardey]

I would stop panicing.

Re:A Trilogy, why not?

[magefile]

Close, but no cigar. You're looking for the word pentateuch.

Re:Well...

[zachtib]

I actually thought it was very true to the book, except for a few minor things. I saw it on Saturday and reread the book today. As far as movie adaptations go, I was impressed, several passages were taken word for word from the novel

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Ugh. What a disappointment.

[Grendel Drago]

Will they make Arthur into a romantic lead again, instead of the hapless bumbler he was meant to be?

Oh, oh! You know how whenever Hollywood is making a romantic comedy, someone thinks, "hey! This movie needs explosions to draw in the boys!", and adds some shit blowing which makes no goddamn sense? No?

Well, then why the fuck did they insert a turgid romance into the middle of a darkly ironic SF comedy of non sequiturs? To wit:

Arthur Dent, as the romantic lead, is playing opposite Trillian. And when the small white mice are about to carve up his head (they left out the "DICED!" line, but that's a minor quibble), he cries out that no question has ever brought him happiness, and that for him there's only been one question ever, and it's "Is she the one?" and the answer is "Yes!---It's always been yes!".

And then he uses his superheroic strength to break through his bonds and smush the small white mice. Slartibartfast smiles. Earth Mark II having been recreated and all the people on it restored, Arthur and Trillian go off in the Heart of Gold, happily ever after.

And that is why I wish to piss in the Cheerios of whoever made the choice to smear that shit on the movie. That's all.

Oh, and when the characters are all waiting in line, keep an eye out for the Marvin from the original BBC television series. He makes a cameo. I thought that was cute.

And the Earth is made whole again and no one's really dead and... ugh. It wasn't true to the spirit of the books, and it didn't even manage to be true to the letter in a lot of places.

And those of us who liked the original work are left sort of gesturing and lamely telling disappointed fellow filmgoers that, really, it wasn't like that at all.

Pfah. Take your sequels and shove 'em.

--grendel drago

Re:Ugh. What a disappointment.

[Edmund Blackadder]

I completely agree that the romantic story screwed up the whole movie.

I am not against romantic stories per se and I always wanted Arthur to get it on with Trillian ASAP, so generally I would have welcomed it. But it was SOOO badly executed. It was very out of place with the whole rest of the movie and was not at all believable.

Basicaly, you have a couple of pieces of incredibly cheesy dialogue inserted in a sarcastic story. So for the time of this dialogue it feels like you are watching a completely different movie.

Also, there was the whole stupid Hollywood obssession that characters must have "arcs", and male leads have to "change" or be "redeemed" in order to "earn" the woman.

That sucks!

[Chairboy]

I'm outraged! They don't support OGG vorbis or-

wait, what are we talking about? I'm not sure what we're being outraged about today.

Why does everyone keep doing this?

[spoco2]

Why does everyone keep saying "This was the same as the book", "This was different" etc. etc.

Surely you all know very well by now that Adams changed the story to suit the medium (and his own fancy). The radio play, books, TV Show and now movie are ALL DIFFERENT.

They share a LOT in common, but why people get all ansy(or is that antsy) about what's different in the films compared to the books is beyond me.

Re:Well...

[cluening]

Keep in mind that the book wasn't even true to the book. Or something like that.

Really! The radio plays, the book, the BBC TV series, and the towel all had slightly different and often contradictory story lines. Having the movie differ is just another evolution in the story.

More movies seem pointless (SPOILERS)

[Mr. Neutron]

****Movie Spoilers, read at your own risk****

The whole thing that drove the books on was the fact that Arthur was alone and lost in hostile universe, with more and more of his home Earth ceasing to be. At the end of this movie, Earth is restored and Arthur gets the girl. What's the point in continuing? To see Arthur fly around the galaxy sight-seeing, with a great girl by his side, knowing all along he can return to his home whenever he gets sick of it? That's not Hitchhikers.

They'd have to re-blow-up the Earth and set up another love triangle with Trillian or something.

Re:A Trilogy, why not?

[The Taco Prophet]

"Close, but no cigar. You're looking for the word pentateuch."

Spoken like... well, like a man who didn't get the joke.

Re:A Trilogy, why not?

[The Taco Prophet]

Alas... I've mocked someone for being a dumbass only to be proven a dumbass myself. Truly, this day I am a slashdotter.

Top Grossing Film for Weekend=Sequel to Hollywood

[Absentminded-Artist]

After pulling in $21 million and ranking number one for the weekend I am not surprised that Disney is talking sequels. My largest concern is that the script felt a bit lackluster, though I enjoyed the movie. I just didn't think that many of the actors brought their characters to life. And Trillian's role was reduced to a damsel in distress who lowered her expectations in order to find love since her beau never truly overcame his cowardice.

If they do more, I'd want to see more sarcasm and wit brought into the dialog. I'd like to see Ford be less of a tree hugger and more of a pithy saw with his comments. Zaphod and Ford were far too kind to Arthur in this version, IMO...

Re:If they removed the Vogons who made the movie..

[Moofie]

I thought that Mos Def nailed Ford Prefect in about ten seconds. I liked Zaphod as well. Arthur was great, and Trillian was, well, around way too much. I could really have done without the love story, although Zooey Deschanel is easy to look at.

I enjoyed the movie thoroughly. I didn't think for a moment that they'd do the sperm whale joke, but they did. I was happy.

Re:I've seen the movie

[mrchaotica]

I agree completely. I didn't walk out on it, but I sat there in a kind of horrified trance. It was the details that made it funny, and they just... weren't there. For example (in just the first few minutes of the film):

• There should have been bulldozers reflected in the mirror when Arthur was brushing his teeth
• What happened to "beware of the leopard?!"
• Even worse, why didn't Mr. Prosser end up lying in the mud?
• Vogon ships are supposed to be yellow, and for a reason: they're supposed to resemble the bulldozers.

All in all, it was a movie that was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike The Hitchhiker's Guide.