DescentBB

I've just finished reading an in-depth, spoiler-packed review of the Hitchhiker's Guide movie, and I don't think I've been this depressed for a long time. They killed it. The bastards absoultely murdered it. If there was any justice in the world, someone would die for this.

Short, non-spoiler review
Long, spoiler review

Did you expect any less?

heh.. when i saw the trailer i thought "crap, they star wars'd it"

Has any movie even been true to the book it represented.

LOTR did a pretty good job.

There were still some pretty bad inaccuracies in LOTR, but in general it was a pretty danged good representation of the books.

Further proof that Hollywood is a bunch of crap and does not get it.

The only reason I want to see it is because of Alan Rickman.

Has any movie even been true to the book it represented.

only 1 I can think of....Shawshank Redemption.

Greenmile was pretty close.

Does Sin City count?

I'm just hoping that the movie version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe doesn't get as royally ****ed as this was. God, I am pissed.

Movies based off books almost always suck. You'd think they'd stop making them...

Boo wrote:Movies based off books almost always suck. You'd think they'd stop making them...

Most movies are based off of either a book or a play- it's just the people who have experienced the original art that realize how much better it could be.

The Harry Potter movies/ Books fall into the kinda the same catagory. Of course a screenplay can't mimic a book. The movie would run way too long. Although skimming over the review, it sounds a lot like they hired someone out of highschool to write the screenplay.

One thing that my wife enjoys is the Harry Potter audio tapes. They are quite good as the orator takes on the different characters with different voices. It's kinda like listening to a movie.


Dune (the first movie) was horrible. I was stunned to learn that Herbert was on set most of the time as a consultant. o_0 There were some deviations from the story so radical, that it made me wonder why they were even put in the movie. The second release was much better. while it skipped sections of the story, it followed what it portrayed very accurately.

I don't know if I agree with that Dune assessment. Storyline deviations aside, the first movie's cinematic theme and acting was much better than the Sci-Fi version. The second was entirely too colorful and clean compared to what I think the Dune universe actually was.

Of course I read the "movie tie-in" version of the first book, but with the rest of the books it seemed to work just fine.

Doh, that makes me sad. I had even been re-reading the books in preparation to go see the movie with friends...

You know, I never liked the guy in Dune with the nasty case of acne that loved to eat blood for some reason. That guy was ass all over.

Tetrad wrote:Storyline deviations aside, the first movie's cinematic theme and acting was much better than the Sci-Fi version.

agreed. Dune is a "mental" book anyways. Not exactly "John Wayne". Dune had a lot of "thought Dialogue" which would REALLY be boring for a movie.
but come on... lasers against body shields?!?!? The book went to great lenghts to explain why that's a no-no.

Tetrad wrote:The second was entirely too colorful and clean compared to what I think the Dune universe actually was.

I don't honestly remember. You spiked my curiosity. Crap.. now I'll have to go rent it!

Interesting note: Kevin J Anderson lives three houses down from me.

Never seen the movies though. now I'll have to.

Top Gun wrote:I'm just hoping that the movie version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe doesn't get as royally ****ed as this was. God, I am pissed.

Wonderworks already has done a Live Action rendering of the first 4 books, From Lion to Silver Chair. Very well done IMO. W/ the exception of Prince Caspian/The Voyage of the Dawn Treader(sp?) each book (at least my copy) was done on 2 VHS Tapes. Prince Caspian and Voyage of the Dawn Treader were also sold a 2 tape combo, since, if memory serves me correctly, they were able to do 1 book per tape.
Linky

Fus

Take the Guidebot instead!

Duper wrote:Dune (the first movie) was horrible. I was stunned to learn that Herbert was on set most of the time as a consultant. o_0 There were some deviations from the story so radical, that it made me wonder why they were even put in the movie. The second release was much better. while it skipped sections of the story, it followed what it portrayed very accurately.

Frank's main gripe about the Lynch movie: It did nothing with the romance between Paul and Chiani, read the forward to "Man of Two Worlds" by him and his son.

Maxim gave it 4/5 stars. I'll wait to be the judge.

the first production of Dune was intended to be just over 6 hrs long but has never been published, there is another one called the Allen Smithee version at about 3hrs on laserdisk that shows the story better. judge dredd got its world almost spot-on except the acting and some time lines off eg:hershey and the ferg theres also a few of king, koontz and herbert which were very good but only shown on tv.

All right, I just got back from seeing the movie with a group of ~20 friends--some of whom had read the books, some of whom hadn't, and a few of whom went so far as to make sure they brought towels.

The consensus was that the movie was awesome.

High points:

- They really got the guide right. Many classic guide entries are quoted, accompanied by cute cartoons.
- Marvin. He was in the movie, and he was Marvin. Marvin rules.
- They put the doors in! The things were sighing pleasantly through the whole movie and it never got old. I swear I laughed every time someone walked through a door.
- Zaphod was freakin' nuts. Very much how I imagined him.
- Though a lot of the dialogue is changed, some of it isn't. There isn't much in the way of witty expressions, so the move isn't nearly so quotable as the book, but it retains the spirit of hilarious nonsense very well.

The not-so-high points:

- They didn't really bother resolving certain sub-plots. Mostly everybody just kind of wanders around and does stuff and has a good time. (But since the plot is part of the joke, I didn't really feel too cheated.)
- Zaphod's second head doesn't show up much, and his third arm only comes out once or twice.


Overall, I thought it was a total kick in the pants, and loved it. (And consequently, I'm ever-so-slightly ticked at this review: I almost didn't go because of it; I only went because friends invited me.) I probably won't buy the DVD, but I might go see the movie again. It's some funny, funny stuff.

I'd like to interject that DNA was working on this script for a long time.

Yes, he did have a problem with deadlines.

Thanks for the report. I've heard a few other favorable reviews myself, and I think I'm going to at least give it a chance. I'm hoping I'll be pleasantly surprised. If it turns out that that review was that incorrect, I'll be rather annoyed as well; it really turned off my enthusiasm for the movie and almost convinced me to avoid seeing it.

Worth Seeing IMO

They did it right, within the limitations of the format (((fairly) low budget) movie < 2 hours)

Maybe I'm easier on things as I get older? I don't know, but a lot of book adaptations seem like they're being very well done these days.

Top Gun wrote:I'm just hoping that the movie version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe doesn't get as royally ****ed as this was. God, I am pissed.

No Chance: TLTHATW is being made by New Zealanders. Just like LOTR.