TV Series or Movie?! - The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1982) Discussion

[–] Startanew 19 years ago

um. well, the 'original' as you call it is a MINI SERIES and the new one is a MOVIE. They were both written by Douglas Adams. So you can't really compare them as a 'remake'.

www.notebookinhand.com - hang out for writers, artists, actors, musicians, etc.

reply

[–] so_called_chaos 19 years ago

I didn't like the movie that much, the whole thing with Zaphod's head was a bit weird, he's supposed to have two at the same time, that guy played by Joh Malkovich wasn't in the books or radio show (as far as I'm aware), the same goes for a lot of the storyline. The first bit of the film was perfect, it was exactly how Hitchhiker's has always been, but there wasn't enough of the storylines form the radio/books/series...
I wasn't too keen on the casting either, though I think the new Zaphod actor was fab.
Hitchhiker's was somehting I never really imagined ot go to Hollywood...

"Until Next Time Sleep Tight"
But Yvvy, I'm an insomniac....

reply

[–] Startanew 19 years ago

yeah, but though we can say 'ooo i didn't like *that*...' Douglas adams DID write the new characters in etc.
What i DID like was how you saw a whole lot more of the Vogons, even though they cut out that cool scene where they were trying to convince the vogon guard that he should like music etc... and they didn't express/explain the poetry well enough. But it was cool seeing their planet!

www.notebookinhand.com - hang out for writers, artists, actors, musicians, etc.

reply

[–] so_called_chaos 19 years ago

I'm surprised the "mostly harmless" thing wasn't in the movie...
I love the fact they used the themetune from the tv show =D

"Until Next Time Sleep Tight"
But Yvvy, I'm an insomniac....

reply

[–] Startanew 19 years ago

oh yeah. You'd think they'd say that he'd changed it to 'mostly harmless' wouldn't you. It would take like, 2 minutes.
I'm surprised they didn't even TRY to explain the towel thing. They didn't explain it all that well in the tv series, but at least they mentioned it...

www.notebookinhand.com - hang out for writers, artists, actors, musicians, etc.

reply

[–] so_called_chaos 19 years ago

They didn't even show that it said "harmless" in the first place...
The best thing about this film was definitely the new Zaphod. Me and my dad were discussing the transition from radio->book->tv->film over lunch, we've decided the film is quite good but we prefer the series, but overall the books were the best.

"Until Next Time Sleep Tight"
But Yvvy, I'm an insomniac....

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pmakholm 19 years ago

I would take less than 43 seconds to include the guide entry om earth. It is included in the Deleted Scenes part of the DVD.

reply

[–] The_paranoid_android 19 years ago

I prefer the movie to the series, all of the production quality, acting, and jokes are fantastic.

reply

[–] korahn 18 years ago

In regards to explaining the whole towel thing: The movie did more than just "explain it" It showed Ford using the towel for many different things. The mini-series explained that it's useful, but rarely showed a towel being used.

**I cannot eat 40 marbles; therefore, I would not make a good Hungry, Hungry Hippo.

reply

[–] DecapitatedHippo 19 years ago

the first time i saw the movie, i was some what disapointed( mainly because the film was out of focaus), now i have it on DVD and i have to admit its pretty damn funny and the movie story line that Douglas Adams wrote from the book was still pretty much him. i read the book before i saw the movie and im glad i did.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room"~ President Merkin Muffley

reply

[–] colshpots 19 years ago

I also read the book before I saw the movie (read all the books June this year, watched the TV series in july, and saw the movie on DVD this month)

The TV series is excellent, as well as the movie.

reply

[–] undeniablynikki_21 19 years ago

The miniseries stayed true to the books, but the special effects were laughable and the girl who played Trillian wasn't right at all. I love the actors who portrayed Arthur and Ford, though. I invision them whenever I read the books, now. I love the Marvin from the 2005 movie and Sam Rockwell as Zaphod. I also like how they did the vogons in the new film. If the movie hadn't added this new unnecessary stuff like the Vogsphere (although, those flyswatter things were pretty funny) and humma kavula, and then created the cheesy love story then it would be perfect.

I think the monkeys at the zoo should have to wear sunglasses so they can't hypnotize you.

reply

[–] Poukram 19 years ago

I prefer the TV-series. It was closer to the books, the characters has acted as original. Marvin for instance is the true Marvin from Adam's books. The most astounishing is, that all the "computer animation" within this series are only hand-drawings.

The movie is more for kiddies, a typical bad remake of the series!

"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, JUST ME"
(DEATH of the Discworld)

reply

[–] Startanew 19 years ago

But, it was written by Douglas Adams... keep that in mind.

www.notebookinhand.com - hang out for writers, artists, actors, musicians, etc.

reply

[–] Trog13 19 years ago

Sometimes great scripts can be ruined by bad directors. I thought the movie was ok, it should've been longer.

reply

[–] scottutsler 19 years ago

Unless I'm mistaken, there were three books in the series. Were miniseries or movies ever made from the other two books?

reply

[–] meriadoc1960 19 years ago

There were actually 5 books in the series, (hitchhikers guide, restaurant at the end of the universe, life the universe and everything, so long and thanks for all the fish, and mostly harmless). the mini series was actually the first 2 books but they never did the other three.

p.s did anyone else think that Sam Rockwell played Zaphod as if he where Beetlejuice?

reply

[–] Old_Painty_Cans_Ned 19 years ago

I would have to say that it was more like the mini-series covered the first 1 and 1/2 books. It pretty much got all the main points of the first book but it left out alot of the second book. Over all, I really enjoyed the mini-series but I was disapointed by the fact that it never told us what happened to Zaphod and Trillian after they went through the teleporter.

The movie as funny, but I felt that it should have included more enteries from the guide. I also really didn't like Mos Def as Ford Prefect, he just didn't seem to capture Fords character. I was particularly anoyed by the fact that he kept wanting to hug Arthur. Ford is NOT a hugger. I also flet that the term "nothing but a pile of dingo's kidneys" should have been worked into the script somehow.

So while I liked both, I would have to say that I liked the mini-series better than the film.

reply

[–] jeff-allison 18 years ago

The series is the 1st radio series...

reply

[–] taleya 18 years ago

In the miniseries, the guys who played Zaphod, Arthur, and the book itself <i>were</i> the original actors - the ones from the radio play. In fact the part of Arthur was written expressly FOR Simon Jones, who was a mate of DNA's :)

I agree with Dickinson sucking as Trillian...god, her voice just *shudders* nails on a blackboard to me. David Dixon was a brilliant choice as Ford though - he took the role, ran with it, and will always be my favourite Ford :)

The movie is an odd fish. I tend to look at it as a homage, not actually part of the Universe. I know DNA deliberately rewrote it massively - as he'd stated, "Why would I want to show you the books and the radio play? I've already told that story" but it still..it seemed more a selection of small scenes cobbled together rather than a movie proper. Still love the series, books and Radio Plays (Although the Quintessential Phase suffered badly in translation from book to play)

reply

[–] amandaprefect 18 years ago

Fancy seeing you here! (it's Penguin)

You've succeeded in summing up the movie perfectly, better than the two words I'd use for it (probably not best repeated in mixed company), or maybe I just have a predisposition for Beeb-made stuff. I dunno...

I'd better run or you know what we will turn this into re: Mr. Dixon... ;)

reply

[–] centurion_hero 19 years ago

The Movie definitely had better visual effects, but the acting, casting and screenplay where far better in the TV show. If the movie had stayed true to the book, as the sow did, I might say the movie is better, but as is, the TV show is an overall more enjoyable experience.

reply

[–] The_paranoid_android 19 years ago

"but the acting, casting and screenplay where far better in the TV show."

No...not really. I thought David Dixon wasn't that good of a Ford.

reply

[–] metro-retro 18 years ago

I disagree with the idea that David Dixon wasn't a good Ford. Ford was supposed to be "everyman", a guy who blends into the background. He also had a quirky kind of personality that I liked.

Mr Def on the other hand was not that kind of guy. The only places on earth that he would blend into would be NYC or LA and I don't mean that in a colour biased way but in an urban vs rural kind of way.

reply

[–] The_paranoid_android 18 years ago

Ford was always portrayed as the guy who looks normal, but then again doesn't look normal.

For example, they said that his eyes were hypnotic, Dixon didn't seem to have that while Mos Def had those HUGE eyes that look soo sympathedic.

The book also said that Ford smiled a lot and had sort of a demented smile at that, David hardly smiled and when he did it was WAY too much like a normal guy. Def, though not having the "crazy" portion of smiling, still had one that made you feel comfortable in your environment.

Also, no offense but there are african-americans in Europe.

reply

[–] metro-retro 18 years ago

No offense taken, but wouldn't they be Afro-Europeans?

Like I said I didn't mean that in a "colour" way. I just found Mos Def to be too Urban American. Too streetwise, like he'd been living in NYC not Guildford in Surrey. I see Ford to be more like George Sunday, all knowing about the universe but slightly lost regarding the nuances of earth culture.

reply

[–] The_paranoid_android 18 years ago

"but wouldn't they be Afro-Europeans?"

Oh yes I believe so.

"didn't mean that in a "colour" way."

Sorry if I souned like that.

"I see Ford to be more like George Sunday"

Who's that?

reply

[–] metro-retro 18 years ago

George Sunday (Thermoman) is the main character in "My Hero" played by Ardal O'Hanlon

reply

[–] korahn 18 years ago

I do like the mini-series better than the movie except for the following: Trillian and Zaphod.

The effects (Zaphod's head, etc.) I can forgive since this was filmed in 1980 with a low budget for BBC.

Trillian I found was better done in the movie and Sam Rockwell is EXACTLY how I pictured Zaphod acting when I read the books. The head-thing in the movie though definitely would have been cooler if both were there at once (they DO have the right technology now.

I really do wish, though, that either of them showed the scene where Zaphod is on his boat and then the FULL theft of the Heart of Gold.

I also like the movie Marvin better. Alan Rickman is PERFECT as the voice of Marvin - also how I imagined his voice.

mini-series: 8/10
movie: 7/10
books: (collective) 8/10
radio: haven't heard em all yet
Douglas Adams: Priceless

**I cannot eat 40 marbles; therefore, I would not make a good Hungry, Hungry Hippo.

reply

[–] vampuricacid 18 years ago

mini Series:9/10
movie:8.5/10
books:9/10
Radio:9.5/10

reply

[–] cheatachu82 18 years ago

The Tv Series captured the humour in the books that the movie didn't. So, obviously I prefer the Tv version.
Also, David makes a good Ford Prefect.

reply

[–] natwinston-654-967153 8 years ago

"african-americans" in europe? you are a true victim of the racist liberal mentality

reply

[–] SnoDawg 18 years ago

Agreed! I for one would love to see the Krikkit robots annhilate Lords and also to see and hear the Starship Bistromath schmooze past the camera!

reply

[–] eidofoor 18 years ago

Everybody seems to make the mistake that the series is based on the books. But the truth is that the RADIO series is the original hitchhikers guide to the galaxy!!
The 6 episodes of the TV series are roughly the same as the first 2 books. The books are written around the same time. The last 3 books, (Telling the stories of the least interesting sky in the universe, Fenchurch the hedgehog, and the daughter of the sandwichmaker.) are written after the series and all books should be viewed as rewrites.

"The history of the h2h2g is now so complictaed that everytime I tell it I contradict myself, and whenever I do get it right I'm misquoted.
So the publication of the omnibus edition seemed like a goog opperunity to put the record straight, or at least firmly crooked. Anithing that is put down wrong here is, as far as I'm concerned, wrong for good!" (Douglas Adams)

And as far as I'm concerned, this kills any discussion about how the movie doesn't stay true to the books or the radio/TV series.

reply

[–] MoshingPenguins 18 years ago

I know that the movie screenplay was written by Douglas Adams but im still disappointed with the movie. For one, the book entries in the mini-series were a lot better than the computer graphics of the movie and the fact that Ford was played by an american pissed me off and before you say anything i know that Douglas Adams said that Arthur should be british and the others chosen purely on ability.
I do have to admit that the Vogons do look better in the movie but thats just because we are in the 21st century.
I suppose what i didnt like the most was that bits from the mini-series that i loved were not present and i feel that no actors/actresses are worthy to replace the original cast

No that wasn't a gay joke, that was an Australian joke. Aww

reply

[–] shinobi_razor 18 years ago

the movie isnt bad, think of it more as the Americanized version of the whole story. the mini series is obviously the British version. but the movie had more humor aimed at American way of thinking (lower brow comedy, ie more slapstick and less witty humor). it was still written by DA, so its all good. ive never seen the mini series and im afraid the humor would be over my head since im only an 'idiotic' American.

reply

[–] The_paranoid_android 18 years ago

"The mini-series explained that it's useful, but rarely showed a towel being used."

They never explained why a towel was so important in the tv-series either.

reply

[–] BB-15 18 years ago

The TV series is my favorite by far. I'm a Monty Python fan and some of the parts in the TV series; such as Deep Thought and the Philosphers; were wickedly funny in a Monty Python style.

While the special effects in the new film are obviously better, amazingly the graphics of the Hitchhiker's Guide itself were better in the TV show. Anyway, I didn't mind the low budget TV special effects.

That being said; I'll contradict myself a little bit that the Zaphod in the movie was better cast. But other than him, I liked the TV series cast better including the voice of Marvin the manically depressed robot.

Now to the ending; If a Hollywood studio is going to spend 100 million dollars then we will end up with something like the 2005 version; which has a happy ending, boy gets girl. Ugh.

My advice. If you want to see more after you see the movie, and don't mind original Star Trek level effects, get the TV version.

Have a good one, BB ;-)

it's just in my humble opinion - IMHO -

reply

[–] ArizonaKnightWolf 18 years ago

I liked them both. I prefer the mini-series, there is more time to go into more details than there are with the movie. The MINI-SERIES is funnier, and the longer format gives time for the charactors to be more fully developed.

----------------------------------------------

It's a tough universe...If you're going to survive, you've really got to know where your towel is.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] The_paranoid_android 18 years ago

The acting in the movie was about 1000X better than the series. Yes, even Marvin.

reply

[–] laslopaniflex 18 years ago

The movie sadly missed out some choice gags, including the wonderfully absured

"I had to go down to the cellar"
"That's our display department"
"With a torch!"
"The lights had probably gone"
"So had the stairs!"
"But you did see the plans?"
"Yes, they were in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'beware of the leopard'...Ever thought about going into advertising?"

That would have taken another 15 seconds of screen time (but sadly doesn't involve someone falling over a chair, hence it being ditched!)

Also the "Oh yes i hadn't thought of that says God and promptly disapears in a puff of logic."

"That was easy says man and goes on to prove that black is white...and gets killed at the next zebra crossing"

sadly only appeared as a deleted scene...Shame.

reply

[–] BB-15 18 years ago

I agree with laslopaniflex.

The movie adds new scenes and in order to find time for all of the new stuff in the film, many of the jokes from the TV show are cut out.

The scenes about Humma Kavula and the Vogon planet which are not in the TV series are not very funny and to me slow the movie down. The movie is often not much of a comedy. It is as much an adventure / love story.

Examples of comedy being pushed out of the movie are two deleted scenes in the DVD;

1. The bit where Arthur complains that the earth is called 'harmless' and then Ford says it's 'mostly harmless'.
2. The explanation that the Babel fish is proof of the non existence of God.

- Another funny part is put in the credits where there is an attack on earth by space ships and the entire fleet of ships is eaten by a dog.

No matter that I thought the TV show did these bits better than the movie, I still think the film would have been funnier by including them and could have done with less Vogon politics and Humma Kavula. IMHO at least.

Have a good one, BB ;-)

it's just in my humble opinion - IMHO -

reply

[–] nhojnitrof 18 years ago

Both were amazing. But being a fan of the books I liked the series better. By
adding in certain gag's (ie. the ending of the movie: "the restuarant is at the OTHER end of the universe" and instead of the intellectual conversation getting the worker's supervisor to lay down in the mudd, having Ford show up with Beer) seemed to make it less intellectually hilarious. The movie wasn't very loyal to the books. Though it was one of the best movies I saw last year (the other being Star wars: Revenge of the sith).

I give the series 9.5 stars out of 10.

The movie gets about an 8 out of 10.

I just didn't think it was as entertaining.

"Klaatu Barada Nikto"

reply

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]