HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy!
 

Holy cow!!! I don't know if any of you out there are fans of the HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy tale, or of the old cheesy BBC series from '81, or if you even happen to know where the Trillian software or the AltaVista 'babelfish' translator engine got their names, but they're making it into a movie, finally!

Here's a teaser trailer. It's a DivX avi - so until it's officially posted on Apple trailers or somewhere, this is all we've got.

http://hitchhikermovie.free.fr/trailer_hitchhikers.avi


This book was such a huge influence in my life and is such a source of ideas, imagination and humor for me on a daily basis, I can hardly contain myself with excitement.

I really hope they don't screw it up.

Awesome! Totally excited as well.

Love the constellation 42.

Cool ! Thanks for the heads up.

I actually got to meet DNA several years back. An exciting moment in my life I must say, being a die-hard fan of the h2g2 series... :-)

There's some good info about the movie on this site:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2642384

Don't Panic !

The perfect excuse to finally get around to downloading that DIVX codec.

Just saw it. I found the whole thing to be rather... improbable.

My wife and I went this afternoon as well. What's probably not improbable is that there's plenty of territory left (all the way to the end of the universe, perhaps) for a sequel, or two. Lunch, anyone? :-)

Agreed! Looks like I'll meet you at the restaurant at (the other) end of the galaxy.

while i never read any of the 4 books and the short story nor the tv episodes, nor the radio show, nor the *insert paraphernelia here* i went with someone that did. while i liked it and started to grasp the offbeat brit humor my friend said that it was a horrible rendition of the books by choosing a happy ending because Arthur Dent in the book didn't meet a happy ending. thus, Touchstone (aka Disney) prevails once again.

i thought the planet building was awe-inspiring =).

As a major fan of the books, and professional film critic's brother (:P), I was disappointed by the movie. It only showed Douglas Adam's wit in select spots, and overall seemed rushed, lackluster, and flat.

Sam Rockwell was good as Zaphod, and Although I love Martin Freeman from the Office, I found him to be unsympathetic as Arthur Dent. The love story was contrived and even Marvin, the Paranoid Android wasn't done as well ashe could have been.

It's a shame cause it could have been so much better.

Yi Fong Yu - you might want to tell your friend that Douglas Adams was himself responsible for a lot of the changes to the story. Including John Malkovich's entire character. Also, Arthur Dent didn't really have a true 'ending' in the first book. The story pretty much went on seamlessly to the second book, some of which was covered in the low-budget BBC series. I really hope this film makes enough money to keep going through the books. The last book though, So Long and Thanks for All the Fish, will be very difficult to pull off - it's much less fantastical than the rest and is much more of a character piece.

I've been a long time fan and was terrified that the solid British humor would be completely ruined for a cross-continental release, but it really did capture the same feel and wit. It's biggest flaw was that it should have been much longer. Filling in some gaps and adding back some of the missing bits would pretty much fix all the problems several people have with it.

And I was delighted by Mos Def as Ford Prefect. I was very skeptical going in, but he nailed the off-beat comedic timing. Mos Def impresses me more and more with everything I see him in.

And also, if you haven't yet, check out the trailer on the official site. Makes hysterical fun of trailers...

http://hitchhikers.movies.go.com/

For those who saw both the movie and BBC series, which one did you prefer and why?

And no, 42 is not the correct answer to this question.

I actually own the BBC series on DVD and just watched it again about 2 months ago. It has its charm obviously, and because of the length of it, a lot more could be worked through. So in that light, I enjoyed the BBC series quite a bit. However, the budget is so awful, and they were so painfully obviously limited in what they could do, it's hard to overlook.

It's hard to compare the two. I would say for different reasons, I love them both. But you really can't compare a mini-series to a barely two-hour feature - it's not very fair. I will say though, if they continue in the series, I will most definitely love the modern version much more.

But they all fall FAR short of the expanded and immersive genius in the books themselves. So I pick the third option.

How would you compare the robots? I still love the robot from the BBC series. I just want to smack him upside the head, with affection.

Yeah, yeah, I'm gonna see the movie tomorrow.

In the original TV series the Vogon saying 'Resistance is useless' curiously became in Star Trek Borg lingo 'Resistance is futile' - I wondered at the time whether this had something to do with Patrick Stewart - the mice have a lot to answer for.

That phrase is definitely much older than both of these things. I could swear I remember hearing it in that old Hogan's Heroes show from the Nazis, and even that was a comedic ripoff of more serious usage. And I think Dr. Who used it too. I bet it goes back to Shakespeare or something - everything seems to.