Comments on: HHGTTG

By: ad@m

ad@m — Thu, 12 May 2005 20:06:00 +0000

i saw HHGTTG last weekend and i’d have to say i wasn’t really pleased with it as well.
for starters, the arthur/trillian love fest was a bit annoying. as pointed out by ben it was kind of there in the books but nothing really ever came of it.
zooey deschanel isn’t really the best actress and i will agree that her lines just came across as “bleh blah blahbity blah blah” but i could easily over look that seeing as she makes my pants tight.
The P.O.V. gun plot made my head hurt. Zaphod could have easily had two heads NEXT TO EACH OTHER instead of that stupid head-in-the-neck crap they pulled off. Sam Rockwell did a good job being Zaphod. Sam Rockwell is pretty good at acting in general.
This is all becoming rather random now. Uh let’s see… what else.
I was glad the whale part was in the movie.

ok well i’ve lost my train of thought as i am having four conversations while writing this. i give the movie an over all rating of “ennnnh yeah…”

if you havent seen sin city i would recommend downloading that next.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Tue, 10 May 2005 15:43:30 +0000

I dunno, at first I really liked Zaphod; he was really over the top. I can accept the crazy second head-in-neck thing. But then there were those worthless scenes with John Malkovitch, and Zaphod was a drag after that, no longer funny at all.

I agree, the actress who played Trillian was pretty cute in glasses, but the way she delivered her lines just got on my nerves: almost monotone.

Haha, I also agree about the plot in the book. Even after reading all the books at least two times each, I still don’t have a grasp of the story as a whole. I was listening to the radio show a few weeks ago, and if you don’t pay attention ALL the time, you get totally lost.

By: benjamin

benjamin — Tue, 10 May 2005 15:34:28 +0000

well, i came away with a bit of a different perspective, and i think i know why. Adams was involved with the screenplay until 2001, obviously, it has had a lot of revision since then i’m sure. however, even he had no interest in making the movie follow the book or radioshow. heck even the book didnt follow the radio show. i suppose that if you were expecting the movie to follow the book it would seem bad. yeah, the plot isn’t real strong, but as i just reread the original book, i can safely say that the story feels more developed in the movie than it does in the book :) that’s just something you have to accept about adams.

on a couple of specific points–i agree with you on the vacuousness of the love story. the ground was set for it in the book, of course, but never central as it was in the movie. that is your concession to those who had not read the book.

i dont know what it would be like to see the movie without reading the books because i hardly remember a time having not read the books. i did, however, enjoy a number of somewhat random references which only ridiculous geeks would get. did you notice the vaguely mongolian features of the construction foreman trying to get Arthur out of the way of the bulldozer at the beginning?

i also thought that the zaphod’s head incident was kinda lame–but then i thought how they did the head altogether was kinda lame–which brings me back to your old comment about the difficulty of doing zaphod visually correct. i guess i dont really have any better ideas than what they did.

i disagree about zooey deschanel (trillian) not only does she have ridiculously large eyes, (and thereby being pretty attractive) i thought she did ok. i think the major problem was the change in her role for the arthur-trillian romance thing. overall, i have to say that i had a pretty good time–think about all the things the movie did right, i’d say.