Just saw "most" of HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy, ask me anything

[Demonaut]

I guess "most" is a bit of a giveaway

[VTMechEngr]

1. How long did laugh at the whale scene?

[Demonaut]

5. Me?.....never got that far...left at Trillian getting released by the

Vogons, chuckled twice..mebbe three times the whole hour and half I could stomach it

[autorank]

2. OK, Did you see "What the #@$# are you?"

How do you compare the two? (This is a short essay question, worth 30% of your final grade)

[Demonaut]

6. shorter my a hair but mostly incongruent

[autorank]

10. Give that user an A+ for insouciance!

[truthbetold]

3. Weird.

I just got home from seeing it too....it's um, unique, to say the least.

[Demonaut]

7. you are very kind

[babylonsister]

4. Yeah, most usually indicates it sucked. nt

[Demonaut]

8. in spades, I've not walked out on a movie in a very long time

[yorgatron]

9. just say it.they fucked up.

they took a hilarious book and made a not funny movie out of it.
assholes :grr::mad:

[autorank]

11. I'd rather have seen them convert " The Illuminati " to film.

I have not read the book but I did find the film tedious. But what about that crazy book from the 70's. Now that was some serious stoner paranoia but a real flair!

[Seabiscuit]

12. Here's a stumper: Tell us all about the parts you missed.

:evilgrin:

[Demonaut]

13. fantastic! the made the whole plot coalesce into a complete work of art

actually the ride home was the kicker

[jobycom]

14. It's so odd... I swear I live in a different dimension

I've not laughed that hard in a movie since, I don't know, A Fish Called Wanda, maybe. The whole audience loved it, they sat around afterwards to watch the credits. My eleven year old wants to see it again, and so do I. I thought it was an almost perfect film, and raved about it for days to anyone who would listen.

On the other hand, I hated Lord of the Rings.

Then I see threads like this, and read the reviews... And I swear you couldn't have seen the same film I did.

I;m going to bed now, shaking my head in confusion, like a dog who just saw his first Oscar Meyer Wiener Mobile.

[hfojvt]

15. have you read the books?

ditto with Lord of the Rings - have you read those books?
I have not read Lord of the Rings, and I did not like the first part of the movie that I watched on DVD. I turned it off. I dislike how the bad guys seem to be nearly all-powerful. Maybe it reminds me too much of American politics that way.

[jobycom]

16. yeah, twenty years ago

I remember loving them, but I don't remember a lot of details about them. Oddly, the two one-liners I remembered most weren't in the film. I thought the film itself was clever, quirky, charming, with touching moments here and there, and amazingly dense. Kind of a high budget cross between Dr. Who and Monty Python, but with better writing.

I've read LOTR several times--it was an important book to me growing up. But what I hated about the films had nothing to do with the books. It was just so amazingly badly directed. Every single scene was an overused cinemagraphic device or cliche. Every line was melodramatic. The music was forced. The special effects were pretentious. The dialogue was flat. The plot was spotty, and seemed to have no narrative. Jackson put scenes in the film just because they were in the book, even if they didn't belong in his narrative. It was horrible film making with a big budget and good acting (I did like the cast, at least). It reminded me of Gigli or Ishtar, with more money.

And it won an Oscar. I'm just so out of step.

[hfojvt]

17. I always wonder about a critique like that

because I am thinking "wtf is a cinemagraphic device?" and what are pretentious special effects?
You know much more about film making than I do, and sometimes it seems like such knowledge can ruin an otherwise enjoyable movie. Or it could give you a higher level of appreciation when things are done well. Still, "counterpoint the surrealism of the underlying metaphor..."?
I suppose it has been twenty years since Hitchhiker came out, but I have done more re-reading. I am just afraid that they cannot do the book justice, that they will not be true to it as written, and they will not match the way I imagined it.

[jobycom]

19. I don't know any more about filmmaking

than you or anyone else, I just use bigger words. It's just stuff like: Gandalf's opening scene where he pretends to be serious then becomes familiar with Frodo, or later when Gandalf goes dark and his voice deepens, or at the council when everyone is fighting and Frodo quietly chirps out "I'll take it" and the council goes quiet and for a moment you see a closeup of Gandalf's face showing knowing regret... They were all scenes we've all scene in hundreds of movies. Pretentious special effects are things like the cliffs and the battle scene in the opening of the film--the cliffs were too high to be real, and so were the numbers of soldiers. Jackson just used those effects to look good, not to create the illusion of reality.

It just looked like every bad film I've seen for the last twenty years, but with better acting.

As for Hitchhiker, or for any film, I don't watch movies to see how they compare to the book, I watch them to see if they are interesting stories on their own. I thought the film was clever. I tried not to imagine it at all, and just to let the director show me what he wanted to do.

[LynneSin]

20. I agree with you and btw, Sam Rockwell stole that movie

I thought he was fabulous!

[jobycom]

21. Yes, he was. nt

[fujiyama]

18. I fell asleep

sometime through the film (maybe halfway through). I was nudged awake by my friend.

I thought parts were amusing (chuckles as you said), but nothing really LOL funny.

Then again, I haven't read the book either so maybe certain parts didn't make as much sense.

[autorank]

22. This one was almost as good as Lord of the Rings for sleep!