Quote: Darren Goldsmith @ July 3, 2007, 5:33 PM

Admittedly, the show looks a little ropey now but it stil knocks spots off the movie for content and warmth... and the humour that only DNA could write in that special way of his.

View original

Interesting, since although yes, it does come across as a bit "ropey" to a modern audience, I think that the style of the H2G2 TV series suits the content, humour and 'message', if you will, vastly more successfully than the film does. It was all far too slick and perfect in its effects. And anyone who's read the book(s) or heard the radio series' will know that that's exactly what H2G2 isn't.

It was nice having Stephen Fry as the voice of the Guide though.

And Mos Def was fit.

That's all the positives I can think of.

Quote: Aaron @ July 3, 2007, 11:11 PM

Interesting, since although yes, it does come across as a bit "ropey" to a modern audience, I think that the style of the H2G2 TV series suits the content, humour and 'message', if you will, vastly more successfully than the film does. It was all far too slick and perfect in its effects. And anyone who's read the book(s) or heard the radio series' will know that that's exactly what H2G2 isn't.

View original

They screwed around with the sequence as well, which I think was a major mistake. For me, teh sequence of the original was as close to perfect as you could get. It was too...yeah, slick is a good word. Entirely unsuited to the format. Also I loved the idea that the heroes were all English sounding. You don't get enough of that.

Bill Frankyn was supposed originally to do the book, but sadly he was too ill.

Quote: zooo @ July 3, 2007, 11:57 PM

It was nice having Stephen Fry as the voice of the Guide though.

View original

Yeah... Pity he was only in it like twice. They vastly cut the book back.

Quote: Aaron @ July 3, 2007, 11:11 PM

Interesting, since although yes, it does come across as a bit "ropey" to a modern audience, I think that the style of the H2G2 TV series suits the content, humour and 'message', if you will, vastly more successfully than the film does. It was all far too slick and perfect in its effects. And anyone who's read the book(s) or heard the radio series' will know that that's exactly what H2G2 isn't.

View original

I agree totally. But that's what's weird... everything I've read about DNA's reaction to the TV show says that the 'clunky' nature is the very thing he was unhappy with. He wanted the slick, big budget look. He spent the rest of his life trying to get producers et al interested. He didn't want a $40 million movie, he wanted an $80 million + movie.

I think he would have been very unhappy with the movie too though... if he were alive and fully involved. There would have been compromise that irked him.

It's almost as if he never really understood his audience. They loved the clunky charm.

Yep, true. However, there's slick and there's slick. The film was slick for the sake of being slick, not slick to emphasise the story or add to it or whatever, with great effects and so on.

I guess that's what you were getting at though.

Quote: Aaron @ July 4, 2007, 11:14 AM

Yep, true. However, there's slick and there's slick. The film was slick for the sake of being slick, not slick to emphasise the story or add to it or whatever, with great effects and so on.

I guess that's what you were getting at though.

View original

Yes... and I think DNA, if he had been granted the time to work on the movie, would have had to compromise... which would have resulted in the same slick-for-the-sake-of-being-slick mess that the movie turned into.

A real shame... but hey, we still have the books and radio/TV shows!

Quote: Aaron @ July 4, 2007, 7:10 AM

Yeah... Pity he was only in it like twice. They vastly cut the book back.

View original

I think the reason they cut the book back is that audiences (US ones) don't really like being read to. It confuses them. They can look at a newscast, but as to have a disembodied voice speaking for a while...I think most of them have one of those anyway.

Quote: Ed Parnell @ July 4, 2007, 1:05 PM

They can look at a newscast, but as to have a disembodied voice speaking for a while...I think most of them have one of those anyway.

View original

LOL!

Sub-Hitch-Hiker's, sorry.

I wasnt expecting so many pages 3! DUNDUNDUN....
Urm yeah they need the movie, even if its not the original cast douglas adam will make it work. I agree it was stupid after the Nano bots rebuilt the whole crew! and how could thye have stolen the ship in the first place?

Yeah...

Quote: Aaron @ July 4, 2007, 11:14 AM

Yep, true. However, there's slick and there's slick. The film was slick for the sake of being slick, not slick to emphasise the story or add to it or whatever, with great effects and so on.

I guess that's what you were getting at though.

View original

Slickness has nothing to do with that train wreck of a film.

The fundemental flaw with the adeptation was the (suspicously American) misconception that punchlines are the only part of a joke.

"Here's a towel, towels are important" was no substitute for the wonderful build-up that made the joke. Nor was Ford Predef scooting down the street with a trolley full of beer for; "In, as you say, the Mud." and it's surrounding sequence of brilliance.

In many ways HHGTTG is the worst film ever made purley for the fact that they started with such wonderful source material. I find it heart breaking that such an awsome cast and some rather stunning visuals were wasted on hollowed out joke shells.

But I, and by 'I' I mean 'we', digress...

Red Dwarf...

Like I said, I would settle for an hour special were something, anything, is resolved. I don't care how old, fat, or crack-addicted anyone is. I want my ending.

If they could do it for Giligans Island, surely they could do it for the show that made us laugh, filled in for doctor who on our sci-fi fix, gave us something to stumble home drunk to, united nerds and alcoholics, etc.

I want closure damnit!

Don't let RD be another Tripods (which seems to be out on DVD to break the hearts of a whole new generation of children)

H2G2: Good point re source and product. On that scale, it almost certainly is the worst film ever.

I recently heard the 'Red Dwarf' film was going ahead.