Hitchhiker's Guide

Well, since ES is down, looks like I'll have to post this review here. I just went and saw the movie today (opening day w00t) and I have to say I was partly disappointed by the movie. I couldn't help but feel that a lot of the acting was forced and that many of the scenes were kind of thrown in there just for the sake of following the book to some extent.

A big annoyance I had was how they changed/added the whole love-line to the movie, even though they only lasted a few 30 seconds at a time, they were annoying.

I'm too tired to write a full review of everything, overall I'd give the movie a 6/10 though. Decent, but not as good as I was expecting it to be.

I haven't seen it or read the book but I also have heard that it isn't very good.

Meanwhile I thought Amityville was pretty good.

I have seen two excellent movies this month, unfortunately Hitchiker's wasn't one of them. Acting was bland, plot was boring, and too much of it for me was just over-the-top sit-com silliness, nothing like the book. Too bad too, since I really like Sam Rockwell. 4/10

If you want to see great movie that are currently in theaters, I highly recommend Kung Fu Hustle and Sin City.

Why do people care what another's opinion of a movie is?

If one person says a movie is bad/good, it doesn't mean much. When a LOT of people say its bad/good its a decent indicator of the movie's quality. Just helpful if you are considering what you want and don't want to watch. Not fool-proof mind you, I've seen quite a few movies where my opinion differed greatly from the mass concensus.

Since its entertainment and people's opinion on what a good movie is differ so greatly I just don't see the point. IMO especially when they are trying to deter you from it.

Well, you could apply that same ideology to video game reviews, or book reviews, or any other review on the face of the planet.

Which I do :)

The opening/ending song was rather nice, though. :)

It was an alright movie, but it could not follow the books. A lot of the humor seemed kind of forced and the only real good parts were the beginning song and the parts where they simply read excerpts from the book.

I also hated the romance in the movie, it just wasn't in the book.. They also added a lot and took a lot out...that bothered me.

They missed the Douglas Adams style of the story which is what made the book so funny.

Seems overall not too many people were happy with it so far.

And yah, the "Thanks for the fish" song was awesome, everyone was humming it on their way out of the theatre, haha.

I have to disagree strongly with you all, I cant remember the last time i laughed so hard at a film, definelty one of the best i've seen in a long time. The part with the slap stick things when people had a thought, i cried.

Maybe it's because im British, maybe it's because i've never read the books, but id give it a firm 9.5/10

>>They missed the Douglas Adams style of the story which is what made the book so funny.

I agree entirely! I don't think the film was bad, but i wouldn't say it was good either. It middled at entertaining but i probably wouldn't watch it again. The reason that the books were so good were because of Adams' writing style and this wasn't conveyed in the film, the narrative just wasn't strong enough.

how does the film compare to the old BBC tv series from the late 70's(maybe early 80's)?

Was really looking forward to seeing this, sounds like i'm gonna be disappointed!

Wow

We're all idiots.

We all agreed ( including me ) that it didn't have the 'douglas adams touch' to it. I just recently found out that Douglas Adams himself wrote that screenplay.

lol, that should shut all you critics up :P

Quote:

---

Wow

We're all idiots.

We all agreed ( including me ) that it didn't have the 'douglas adams touch' to it. I just recently found out that Douglas Adams himself wrote that screenplay.

---

Saying he wrote the screenplay for this movie is like saying "Chainsaw Massacre" is based on a true story. The movie has been in production for over 20 years, Douglas Adams has helped out and given ideas to the many many producers and directors who considered doing the movie over that time. Thus they decided to give him a posthumus screenplay credit even though he had little to do with this movie other than suggesting a couple of new characters like the priest. The man has been dead for four years, do you really think he had much say in how this movie was created?

He wrote a screenplay before he died. He tried to get a movie made, nobody would make it. Finally these people decided to use his screenplay and make a movie.

I loved the movie. ::shrug::