Fun Stuff > ENJOY

The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy

<< < (9/17) > >>

Trillian:

--- Quote from: zerodrone on 02 Feb 2008, 18:40 ---words

--- End quote ---

I wasn't stating that you aren't enough of a fan.  The comments that you made previously seemed rather abrasive so I was just stating that I didn't agree with your approach and that I do not agree with your sentiments on the matter.  Whatever misunderstanding happened within that process I guess is just unfortunate, but it really isn't all that important.  Sorry if I came across as being harsh.

I also don't agree with an all or nothing mentality in most instances, but I do believe in being diplomatic.  I suppose, this too, is just a matter of preference--in methods of communication as opposed to books/authors.

De_El:

--- Quote from: Johnny C on 02 Feb 2008, 23:58 ---I thoroughly love the Hitchhiker's series, but Mostly Harmless was a great novel that wound up being part of a series it didn't really have a place in.

--- End quote ---
Truth.  I liked all of Douglas Adams' books when I read them, but I think The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul is still my favorite. And like zerodrone said, I would be kind of hesitant to re-read the Hitchhiker's Guide series again for fear of it losing its charm.  Maybe if I imagine Stephen Fry reading all the bits from the Guide, and Alan Rickman as Marvin it will retain some yum.

Scruffy:
I really loved the books and the movie was pretty good, but Douglas Adams once said that he wanted every Hitchhikers creation to be different, even if it's covering the same basic plot structure.  Your not going to find the same exact plot twice unless someone didn't get the memo.  Thats why when Trillian and Arthur hooked up in the movie, I wasn't exactly throwing a fit.

I know a few people who feel like the book has lost steam over time, claiming it's a childrens book.  But I think the real truth is that it's a great book at any age, but reading it a second time is tough.

singeivoire:
I loved those books when I read them in high school - still go back to them if I'm needing giggles.

It strikes me that the movie was a bad idea in the first place. It's one thing to adapt that kind of absurdist source material into a British radio show, it's totally another to try and squish it into a 2-hour film that can be marketed in the US.

That said, I didn't hate the film - not at all, in fact. Parts of it are quite entertaining. The books just don't lend themselves to the movie format. To pull it off, they had to add a plot, a love story, resolution - all of which don't really gel with the original spirit of the books themselves.

I still haven't managed to read them straight through a second time. I wonder why that is.

Joybee:
I liked the book when I read it in grade 8, but I tried to read the next one in grade 11 and I just couldn't get back into it.

Also, the whole "meaning of life" thing being 42 seemed like a funny idea to me when i was reading the book but then after the movie came out it just got really annoying whenever someone mentioned it because everyone knows that the answer is 42 now, but noone knows why because they never bothered to read the book or pay attention to the movie.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page