Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[robot_roll_call]

The Rotten Tomatoes Review page

This is pretty much what I figured would happen. The reviews are either "This  is way off from the source material!" or "this movie follows the source material very well!" But it's good to see that it's got people on both sides instead of being resoundingly bad. It looks like your opinion of the film boils down to how much you wish they put every single word from the book on the screen.[/url]

[CortJstr]

The Rotten Tomatoes Review page

This is pretty much what I figured would happen. The reviews are either "This  is way off from the source material!" or "this movie follows the source material very well!" But it's good to see that it's got people on both sides instead of being resoundingly bad. It looks like your opinion of the film boils down to how much you wish they put every single word from the book on the screen.

Didn't the radio drama come first? Wouldn't that mean that the book is "wrong" thus ruining their entire basis of whining?

[Choop]

Indeed, Cort.

Incidentally, read this article about the film.

Most of the changes to the material for the film were initiated by DNA, and he was always proud of the differences between versions of the story.

[robot_roll_call]

Didn't the radio drama come first? Wouldn't that mean that the book is "wrong" thus ruining their entire basis of whining?

I agree, people complaining about change in a series where change is an established tradition seems kind of odd to me...

Anyways, we'll see how it is on friday.

[AugustWest]

I think what concerns me about the trailer is that the movie doesn't look like it's going to be funny.  If I knew nothing about it, I couldn't tell that it was a comedy from the trailer.  That concerns me.

[CortJstr]

I think what concerns me about the trailer is that the movie doesn't look like it's going to be funny.  If I knew nothing about it, I couldn't tell that it was a comedy from the trailer.  That concerns me.

it strikes the right off-kilter, humorous tone. Fans of the books and TV shows should be pleasantly surprised.

I hope so.

[jough]

To put it bluntly, they have cut most of the jokes out. I’m not being metaphorical here, they really have, in a very literal sense, removed the jokes from the story. There are scenes where all we’re left with is the set-up dialogue, there are jokes where we get the feed-line but not the punchline. It’s astounding.

I think this was the first review, written after a fan club screening last month:

http://www.planetmagrathea.com/shortreview.html

[robot_roll_call]

I think this was the first review, written after a fan club screening last month:

http://www.planetmagrathea.com/shortreview.html

Yeah, I'm ignoring that one because it was the most nitpickey fanboy review I've ever read. (This is going to be a long post, people)

From what I understand, the guy who wrote it was a potential candidate to head the movie. So I'm sure he sat there the entire film thinking "I could have done this better!". I mean, the dude is pissed off that they didn't include the fact that the "Vogon ships were floating in the sky like bricks don't", which is a narrative description from the book. How could they convey that? Have characters say it?

Arthur: Those ships sure are hanging in the sky like bricks don't!

Pretty awkward if you ask me. And the whole review is like that. At one point he complains they gave the whale an extra line. Boo-fuck*ng-hoo.

Other such gems:

The Heart of Gold ends up on the planet Viltvodle (not Viltvodle VI, as in previous versions)

Dear Christ!

Zaphod, Arthur and Trillian enter Humma Kavula's temple, the entire design ethos of which is based around noses. That is supposed to tie in with the Great Green Arkleseizure theory although it seems odd that the Jatravartids would have considered the Arkleseizure to have a human nose

Secondly, it's lemons that make it work, not Arcturan mega-lemons or anything science fictional like that. Throughout the film, there are lots of throwaway jokes of this sort, involving Earth things (like dancing bloody hula dolls) rather than oddball variants of Earth things, which is what Douglas Adams' universe has traditionally been filled with. We see this with the Heart of Gold: every item that it transmogrifies into is an Earth item. A flower or a ball of wool or a teapot; not an alien-looking flower or a sentient ball of wool or a five-spouted teapot.

An audience would not understand they were looking at a Jartravid nose or an alien flower.

This review is four pages of a child throwing a temper tantrum because they didn't throw every word on the screen. This is hands down the worst movie review I have ever read and I read aint it cool news on a regular basis. It's just too bad that this review seemed to poison the well for a lot of people.

[jough]

Hey, I didn't say that I wasn't going to be sitting in the theatre watching this bitch tomorrow afternoon, just that from various reviews (I can't find the link, but the BBC web site has already reviewed it and found it unfunny and potentially confusing for people who haven't read the books too) that the movie is NOT a comedy.  It's a slightly strange sci-fi movie with LOTS of big-budget effects that crowd the film.

From the trailer only I'd say that's an accurate accessment, although I'm still going to see the film and decide for myself.

[robot_roll_call]

Hey, I didn't say that I wasn't going to be sitting in the theatre watching this bitch tomorrow afternoon, just that from various reviews (I can't find the link, but the BBC web site has already reviewed it and found it unfunny and potentially confusing for people who haven't read the books too) that the movie is NOT a comedy.  It's a slightly strange sci-fi movie with LOTS of big-budget effects that crowd the film.

From the trailer only I'd say that's an accurate accessment, although I'm still going to see the film and decide for myself.

Oh, none of the bile was directed towards you. A lot of reviews are saying the same thing as the one I discussed in the above post, but they say in less words in a more mature and less angry fashion than that review. Whatever the movie turns out to be, even if that review is right, it's still a bad review.

But yeah, every bad review that hits on rotten tomatoes lessens my eternal optimism for this film a little more.

[robot_roll_call]

Just got back from seeing the movie. While it wasn't quite as good as I was hoping, it certainly wasn't the trainwreck that many reviews suggest.

It was funny. Not hilarious, but it make me laugh a few times and smile throughout most of it.

Things I Liked:

The dolphins' song: A funny little tune that reminded me of Monty Python, which is exactly what this movie should do.

The guide entries. They were right out of the book, and the little animations that go along with them are excellent. I only wish there were a few more.

The overall visuals: The movie has a great design aesthetic. I really liked The Heart of Gold, Marvin, Deep Thought, and of course the Margrathea factory floor was spectacular.

Mos Def as Ford: He didn't have a lot to do, but he makes an excellent Ford.

The new scene where they visit the Vogon homeworld: I thought it was very funny and fit right in with the established material. It worked well to add a second act to a story that didn't really have one.

Slartibartfast: Wow. The best performance in the film, very charming and funny.

The changed ending: I know a lot of people will bitch up and down about the changes made to the ending, but I honestly liked (most) of them, except for the little bit when that love story subplot comes creeping in.

Things I did not like:

The love story subplot: it's not necessary, it doesn't work, but it doesn't ruin the film either. It'll make you roll your eyes a little bit, I'm sure, but it's mostly harmless.

The John Malkovich part: Pretty pointless. But it's hard not to like John Malkovich.

Zaphod: Sam Rockwell was great, but they could have toned him down juuuust a bit.

General incoherence: They rush some stuff and don't really explain some other stuff, so the movie feels kind of disjointed.

So what we have here is a very likeable film that's on the edge of being really good but never quite crosses it. I know I'll go see it again though. If you were forcing me to grade it, I'd give it a B. High marks for effort, but it could have been just a little better. Nonetheless, I think Douglas Adams would have walked out of the theater satisfied.

[Bozack]

Curses! You beat me!
I just saw it too, and my feelings are exactly identical to yours. Everything you said, I felt as well. I think this will actually get a bunch of people interested in the source material, which is good; when my girlfriend and I walked out afterwards, she immediatly asked to borrow my copy.

[Choop]

I haven't yet seen it, but I've read all of DNA's books but two and the missus has just started them, and I'm going to see it tomorrow, but I'm going to respond to part of rrc's comments. Be forewarned with that terrible sentence.

Things I did not like:

The love story subplot: it's not necessary, it doesn't work, but it doesn't ruin the film either. It'll make you roll your eyes a little bit, I'm sure, but it's mostly harmless.

DNA initiated this change, partly to appease Disney, partly to shape the story for such reduction as a vast radio drama to a book-n-a-half to a film. I truly hope it works to make the film salable.

The John Malkovich part: Pretty pointless. But it's hard not to like John Malkovich.

You must not have seen Rounders.

Zaphod: Sam Rockwell was great, but they could have toned him down juuuust a bit.

Tone down Zaphod? As hoopy frood as Zaphod cannot be toned down. Sam Rockwell? It ain't tough to key him up, given his other performances. I'm excited to see him in this. Who would you have cast?

General incoherence: They rush some stuff and don't really explain some other stuff, so the movie feels kind of disjointed.

Which is exactly opposite the Guide and the novels. I've heard much of this, but the wife finds the guide entries boring, so it might be what the film needs to become a commercial success. You never know when people are going to attend in droves. (bad example, but, My Big Fat Greek Wedding.)

So what we have here is a very likeable film that's on the edge of being really good but never quite crosses it. I know I'll go see it again though. If you were forcing me to grade it, I'd give it a B. High marks for effort, but it could have been just a little better. Nonetheless, I think Douglas Adams would have walked out of the theater satisfied.

As long as I don't retch like some slashdot geek, I'll be satisfied. To hear an opinion that states DNA would approve is good enough for me.[/code]

[robot_roll_call]

Tone down Zaphod? As hoopy frood as Zaphod cannot be toned down. Sam Rockwell? It ain't tough to key him up, given his other performances. I'm excited to see him in this. Who would you have cast?

I'm not saying I wouldn't have cast Sam Rockwell. He did an excellent job as Zaphod. He's just all over the place, especially when that second head comes into play. It's just that he's always set at  11, and you kind of wish they'd bump him down to 10 every once in a while. It's hard to explain. Maybe you'll see where I'm coming from after you see it.

I would just like to add that this movie had the worst set of trailers I had ever seen preceding it. The Steve Martin remake of the Pink Panther looks painful. There is also a new Herbie movie starring Lindsey Lohan's breasts. Rounding it all out was this awful new Martin Lawrence movie (is there any other kind) where he coaches basketball or something. The only thing more painful than these trailers was the fact that they were getting laughs from the audience.

[miles]

There is also a new Herbie movie starring Lindsey Lohan's breasts.

They were so good in Mean Girls!