|
Going into any movie adapted from another medium,
Be it books, comics, television, or whatever, you
know there are going to be differences. The
director is going to make decisions based on his
own vision of the story and the demands of a
theatrical movie are different from a novel or
television series. When the subject matter is a
popular book series, TV series, etc., the danger
of alienating the existing fan base is potentially
disastrous.
First, let me say I am a fan of Douglas Adams's
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", in all it's
forms. Somewhere in my vast collection of odds and
ends, I've even got an LP of the radio show. I
watch the 1981 BBC television series every chance
I get and have been known to quote lines from it
in conversation. You might guess that I am
somewhat less than an unbiased reviewer.
I have to say I was worried about what might have
gone horribly wrong with this movie, when the dolphins
sang "So long, and thanks for all the fish."
Fortunately, it's the only musical number in the
film and it was kind of funny. From there, we're
introduced to Arthur Dent, soon to be the last
Earthman in existence. My problems began with
these opening scenes. My brain began filling in
the missing dialogue. The clever turns of phrase,
the witty banter, it all seemed condensed. I can
only assume this was done to accommodate the slower
members of the audience who can be counted upon to
become lost in the "Britishisms". They're not all
gone, but they're truncated.
The set-ups for many of the classic jokes I
remember from the books and TV show are there, but the
payoff is somewhat lessened or missing. Yes, it
bugged me.
Of course, the special effects are vastly
superior in the movie version, which doesn't suck, but nothing
you wouldn't expect from a decent budget. They
could have saved some of those dazzling effects
and used the money to buy the missing dialogue.
Of the main characters only Marvin, the
manically-depressed robot, comes through intact.
Unfortunately, most of his lines were cut. All we
get from him are a few odd complaints.
But I'd have to say, my biggest complaint is
that in a movie titled "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the
Galaxy" we get to see damn little of the Guide
itself. In the radio and TV series, and in the
novels, the Guide segments fill us in on the story
elements that we need to know, or give us
entertaining background on the characters and
history. Such as:
The Book: "It is known that there are an infinite
number of worlds, but that not every one of them
is inhabited. Therefore there must be a finite
number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number
divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes
no odds, so if every planet in the universe has a
population of zero, then the entire population of
the universe must also be zero, and any people you
may meet from time to time are merely the products
of a deranged imagination."
I suppose what I'm getting at is that this movie
misses the mark. It substitutes flashy special
effects for quality characterization and dialogue.
I had hoped for more, but what I got was a kind of
cardboard cut-out, a pretty picture lacking depth.
See it at a matinee or just save the ticket price
for the September 30, 2005 release of "Serenity"!
|