More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Advertisement

Overall Rating
2.92

Awesome: 6.52%
Worth A Look34.24%
Average: 25.54%
Pretty Bad: 12.5%
Total Crap: 21.2%

13 reviews, 106 user ratings


Latest Reviews

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri by alejandroariera

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri by Peter Sobczynski

Justice League by Peter Sobczynski

Mumon: The Land of Stealth by Jay Seaver

Geek Girls by Jay Seaver

Fashionista by Jay Seaver

I Love You, Daddy by Rob Gonsalves

Jailbreak by Jay Seaver

Attraction (2017) by Jay Seaver

Thousand Junkies, A by Jay Seaver

subscribe to this feed


Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The
[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by Scott Weinberg

"Doesn't exactly measure up to the book ... but what does, really?"
4 stars

I was excited and skeptical, optimistic and cautious. Here it was, after so many years of waiting and wondering: the "Hitchhiker's Guide" movie and all its wild and wacky widescreen glory. Was there stuff missing? (Yes.) Were there augmentations and alterations that didn't sit entirely well? (Again, yep.) But, after all was said and done, was the cinematic version of Douglas Adams' wonderful world brought to life in fine and funny form? Actually ... yeah! Warts and all, here it was, and while I can't accurately opine that this version is an excellent film from stem to stern ... it was certainly good enough for this fan to have a giddy good time.

Full disclosure: I’m a true-blue Hitchhiker’s GEEK. I’ve read the five-book “trilogy” at least thrice, at each time I sat down to enjoy the otherworldly weirdness of Douglas Adams’ creations, I found myself creating the movie version in my head. I’d seen the BBC television version, which I found both very kitschy and quite appealing … but that’s not exactly Hitchhiker’s getting the full-blown Hollywood treatment, now is it?

For years I wondered who would play Ford, what would Zaphod look like, how adorable would Trillian be, and what would Marvin’s voice sound like? I wanted to see the massive showroom in Magrathea, the shape and size of the sleazy Vogons, and the ill-fated whale who was born only to plummet to an instantaneous death. So now, after all those years of hopeful optimism and geeky wonderment, here comes this swanky new movie version of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, and guess what? It’s actually pretty darn good!

Let’s get one thing straight right at the outset: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is about as “unfilmable” as a book can be. The entire series is laden with high-concept strangeness and outer space insanity that absolutely defy a physical interpretation. Plus it’s not like the books are your typical A to B to C plot narratives, and that really is an impediment to any filmmaker looking to deliver a linear plot as the backbone of their film.

Although the basic plot is fairly simple (an unassuming British bloke and his alien friend escape from Earth a few seconds before it goes kerplooey, thereby leading them on a series of truly improbable adventures across the cosmos), Adams would often digress into chapters about flower pots, sperm whales, mega-computers, and mattresses. How would a filmmaker be able to include all the sundry stuff while still maintaining a cohesive plot for the uninitiated? Bottom line: it’s a tough assignment.

So when a pair of British filmmakers, known only for music videos and TV commercials, earned the gig, I thought “Sure, why not? Let some young, hungry filmmakers take a whack at the beloved source material and see what they come up with.” Aside from perhaps Terry Gilliam, I cannot think of any director who’d be “perfect” for this assignment. Working from a screenplay by the late Mr. Adams, with the assistance of Chicken Run screenwriter Karey Kirkpatrick, producer Nick Goldsmith and director Garth Jennings set to creating a Hitchhiker’s adaptation that would (hopefully) thrill the millions of fans while keeping the newcomers happy as well.

And while I cannot speak for the newcomers in the audience, this longtime Adams fan had a darn good time with the big-screen adaptation. And while it’s certainly nowhere near a flawless film, I found myself wondering how this book could have made it to the movie screens in a better form than this. And I came up with nothing.

Barring the fairly atrocious inclusion of a new subplot involving a missionary named Humma Kuvala (as played by John Malkovich), I have to say that this is just about the best adaptation that the Hitchhiker’s fans could have hoped for. Jennings’ film is a scattershot and episodic affair, but then again so were Adams’ novels, so that’s hardly a fair complaint. The plot is almost secondary to the tone and attitude of the movie, but here it is:

Arthur Dent is a schlub. He wakes up one morning to find that his house is about to be demolished to make way for a new highway bypass. Just as Arthur lies down in the mud to prevent a bulldozer from doing its thing, up pops Dent’s old pal Ford. Only Ford is not, as Arthur had always assumed, a human being. Ford is an alien who’s been spending time on Earth doing research for “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” which is an electronic encyclopedia that’s trusted all over the universe. Arthur and Ford “hitch” a ride upon a massive Vogon spaceship just seconds before our planet is destroyed, and the duo quickly meet up with Zaphod Beeblebrox (president of the galaxy!), human cutie Tricia “Trillian” McMillan, and Marvin the Paranoid Android. And the crew spends the next 2 hours jaunting from planet to planet while hunting for the answer to “Life, the Universe, and Everything.”

Perhaps best described as Monty Python meets Star Wars by way of something else particularly goofy, the books have enjoyed a long and healthy life as cult classics extraordinaire, which means that the movie will be dissected by millions of passionate fans who really WANT to like the movie, but realize that they probably won’t. And while I could easily point to a half-dozen missteps and moviemaking blunders, the simple truth is that I had a darn good time with this particular incarnation of the Guide.

The casting choices are nothing short of fantastic. Martin Freeman (best known from the BBC version of The Office) is the perfect Arthur Dent: drab and unassuming, but still effortlessly likable through and through. Mos Def, an actor I’ve always liked, kicks back and gets a bit silly with his portrayal of Ford Prefect. He’s not exactly the Ford I expected to see, but the guy’s having a lot of fun here, and it shows. Sam Rockwell, as the two-headed and perpetually arrogant President Zaphod, gets most of the flick’s biggest laughs, and Zooey Deschanel, that blue-eyed sweetheart, lends the adventure a much-needed dose of sweet-natured humanity. And in a third-act supporting role, Bill Nighy steals a few scenes as the meek and mild planet engineer who takes his orders from a pair of white mice.

As I mentioned earlier, the only true misstep is the one involving John Malkovich. Not only is his performance oddly dull, but the character serves no real purpose aside from setting up an admittedly flimsy plot structure. Delivering the voice of Marvin the perpetually depressed robot, Alan Rickman is perfectly dry and droll – although he’s never actually funny. And in the books, Marvin was pretty darn funny.

I fully expect this film to split the hardcore fans right down the middle, while leaving lots of the newcomers scratching their collective head in confusion. Unfortunately for most, this is a movie that works best if you’re already very familiar with the source material – and, in the world of big box office, that’s not exactly a good thing.

As a stand-alone movie, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy works as a crazed and colorful concoction, and one that I think lots of sci-fi fans will grow to appreciate ... especially when we get the three-hour DVD director's cut that I just bet is on the way.

Those who come in expecting a sci-fi comedy full of high-end action and daring escapes may walk out disappointed, but those of us who welcome a worthwhile combination of strong British wit and interstellar insanity should absolutely have a real hoopy time.

link directly to this review at http://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=11932&reviewer=128
originally posted: 04/29/05 18:13:21
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

12/24/15 brian If you have no expectations, it's nice lightweight fun. 4 stars
10/08/14 me worth a look 4 stars
7/28/12 Silkworm Dreadful rubbish - Just ask revolving Douglas !! 1 stars
2/15/12 Ron Larson Enjoyable, good cast 4 stars
5/14/11 Chipzsz First time i couldn't understand s**it, after reading the book is excellent, specially Marv 5 stars
6/14/10 LINDA DOWDY Hard to follow story line...was there a story line? 2 stars
6/09/10 Harvey Scott Fun but see the English version first. 3 stars
1/27/09 Shaun Wallner Very Interesting 4 stars
9/07/08 Samantha Pruitt did a good job re-telling the book, the effects were great! 4 stars
12/16/07 Jason The TV show sucked, this was only marginally better. 3 stars
5/20/07 fools♫gold Damn funny at times and even thoughtful. Seaver knows... 4 stars
4/18/07 Stevo UK Watching Harry Potter suck his cock is more tolerable than this. 1 stars
2/20/07 Beau literally one of the worst overrated movies i have ever seen, utterly pointless crap 1 stars
1/05/07 Don't see the movie, read the book please please please read the excellent book and don't judge it by this crap 1 stars
1/02/07 Jamie I actually thought that is was a decent movie, ya'll need to shutup, if you don't like it.. 5 stars
11/14/06 Matt Read the book, then dont waste ur time on the movie 2 stars
10/10/06 Diana Starts out great, slowly gets worse, the end is terrible and sugary (PS- READ THE BOOK) 3 stars
9/02/06 Chad Thomas Okay... not great! 3 stars
6/05/06 Pete Smith Utter rubbish. Watch the BBC TV version instead. 1 stars
5/21/06 millersxing Sci-fi silliness. I'm no more likely to read the book than before. 3 stars
5/19/06 drydock54321 kind of dull 2 stars
3/30/06 alley brauwnstine 5 stars
3/13/06 Roderick Cromar Very disappointing. A wasted opportunity. Poor value. 2 stars
2/12/06 adamathwaxman you all are styupid. this is the best film in years.pick yourself with a sharp object. 4 stars
1/24/06 Michael Shaw If anyone thinks this movie was worth watcvhing they should get their head examined 1 stars
1/20/06 Mike Pulido Boy this movie sucked! 1 stars
1/18/06 DARIJA VAN HOUTEN IT WAS OK, BUT I'VE SEEN BETTER 3 stars
1/15/06 Perry Mason nice opening, down hill from there. 2 stars
12/14/05 deadfishrman maybe I just need to watch it again for 1 more star 3 stars
12/03/05 Jennifer S. Martin Freeman is pretty good in this, but Zooey Deschanel is her usual annoying self. 3 stars
11/13/05 cypress wasn't too impressed, expected more from this one 2 stars
10/27/05 East Asian Piss Fairly Good 4 stars
10/25/05 daveyt not worthy of the title... absolutely butchered 2 stars
10/09/05 Anus Adams is rolling in his grave. 1 stars
10/07/05 Chris Knight I was open mouthed it was so dreadful 1 stars
10/03/05 CaDizzle Don't judge the book by this movie, book is millions of times better 2 stars
9/27/05 rafi I actually liked it alot , fun movie! 5 stars
9/20/05 Vaughan What a disappointment, they ruined the jokes! 2 stars
9/19/05 Jonathon Holmes dogshit 1 stars
9/15/05 Tom Burns Not a great movie, but the scenery is pretty cool. 3 stars
9/06/05 chrissy b absolute rubbish - dire remake - why bother 1 stars
8/12/05 zaw is this movie based on a piece of crap book or what? 1 stars
8/09/05 Glagg Just not interesting or funny enough, gives book an undeserved bad rep. 2 stars
8/06/05 Zack DON'T PANIC! 5 stars
8/05/05 Kathy terPlugg Wasting away again in MAGRATHEAville 2 stars
7/22/05 Seen the movie, TOTALLY regretted it The movie was a REMAKE of Penis Spaceship movie of the 1960'70s 1 stars
7/09/05 Rebecca It implies the book itself is a piece of shit. It isn't. 3 stars
7/03/05 Eddie DUMBEST PIECE OF RANCID ANTI-CHRIST SHIT! 1 stars
6/28/05 Joe Pesci The film is crap. BUT READ THE BOOK - ITS AMAZINGLY GREAT. 1 stars
6/24/05 Eric Rollins The mini-series is so superior, skip this mess 2 stars
6/19/05 Sean Lane Awesome alternative to the regular garbage derivations. Didn't read the book. 4 stars
6/11/05 Krisan Graves what did i just watch? 3 stars
6/11/05 Captain Craig The only move I ever walked out on! A waist of money all around. dont bother! 1 stars
6/09/05 elpintogrande ADAMS ROLLING IN HIS GRAVE 1 stars
6/05/05 Ubu the Ripper Failed Disney attempt to cash in on pre-Star Wars hype. A true waste of film and my $10. 1 stars
6/04/05 Denise Gannon i loved the opening theme, but too much pointless chatting amongst charactors. 3 stars
6/04/05 Hack-SAW Don't know what to say about this... 3 stars
5/27/05 chris. this is what fans of the book like myself have been waiting for????? 3 stars
5/23/05 Green Gremlin Not as good as the classic BBC series, but still fun to watch 4 stars
5/22/05 Cham Book was pretty funny, but this is just plain bad. 1 stars
5/21/05 Tom Biegel Boring 2 stars
5/17/05 ad good for kids 3 stars
5/17/05 Hannah INSANITY!!! Don't see it in theaters...unless you are drunk! 1 stars
5/15/05 Bluto I wanted to like it so much, good visuals, thats about it 3 stars
5/14/05 MF A fun, if not wierd, movie that pales in compraison to the books. 3 stars
5/12/05 mwr truly awful, awkward and ugly - I fell asleep 1 stars
5/12/05 Jeff Baugh Read the books, seen the TV series, and heard the radio show. My rating? *****/***** 5/5 4 stars
5/12/05 Tyrantis The most entertaining film I've seen this year. 5 stars
5/12/05 maxomai Not the book. Who cares? Loved it. 5 stars
5/11/05 X worth the line wait 5 stars
5/10/05 nikki definately worth a look 5 stars
5/09/05 Snickerdoodle Weird in a good way, and very imaginative 4 stars
5/09/05 zeitgeist WTF is with the love story sub-plot? It ruined it. Stick to the book, kids 3 stars
5/07/05 Harry Knowles WORST. MOVIE. EVER. (ok, maybe not - battlefield earth holds that spot) 1 stars
5/07/05 Sir Spam-a-lot If only they had this kinda budget w/ the 1981 BBC Miniseries... 3 stars
5/06/05 KingNeutron Worst. Zaphod. EVAR. 2 stars
5/05/05 Christy Schultz Well, I have never read the book, but it was funny in some places, very stupid in others 2 stars
5/05/05 Ethan Acres Screenplay obviously written by Vogons 2 stars
5/05/05 ZF better than expected, very funny, great production design 4 stars
5/05/05 marya appalling, tripe, awful, unwarranted, Dear God, don't let them make a sequel! 1 stars
5/04/05 Integral Retarded, aimless, pointless, dull, WANT MY MONEY BACK!!! 1 stars
5/04/05 tmcmistress Lowtax: THINK. Idea-smiting shovels. on Vogon. Makes perfect sense. Well-done movie. 4 stars
5/04/05 Whatevr cool 5 stars
5/04/05 Mike Prentice Walked out after 40 minutes AND got my money back 1 stars
5/03/05 Aaron Smith Awful 1 stars
5/03/05 elpintogrande A pathetic attempt at forced humour. 1 stars
5/03/05 Tom Felt way more depressed than Marvin could ever be 1 stars
5/03/05 Lowtax So what was all that shovel face slapping time wasting crap about? 1 stars
5/03/05 Tommy It doesn't do justice to the book or to the fans. 1 stars
5/03/05 Anus HUGE STEAMING PILE OF BOREDOM. A DISGRACE TO THE BOOK 1 stars
5/02/05 jcjs loved it 5 stars
5/02/05 Elizabeth S Not very amusing; only enjoyed Rickman's excellent voice work. 2 stars
5/02/05 bullit16 What was laugh-out-loud funny in the book, just wasn't on the screen 3 stars
5/02/05 Teri SILLY 3 stars
5/02/05 Rageim Support the movie ,Maybe get better in next movie. 4 stars
5/02/05 Richard Sucked 1 stars
5/02/05 Dorothy Malm not bad but movies are rarely as good as the book 4 stars
5/02/05 Joe Buss Pretty funny 4 stars
5/01/05 herrinfamily none 3 stars
5/01/05 John Bale Strong supporting cast and Jim Hanson's monsters help this space satire 4 stars
5/01/05 Darren Shea Good, but not great. Likely to be a letdown if you've memorized the books,or other versions 4 stars
5/01/05 The Grinch Pretty damned good for 2 hours...I don't think Joe Moviegoer could've handled 3 hrs.. 4 stars
5/01/05 Titus Better than I feared, not as good as I hoped. Chuckle-worthy, not much more. 3 stars
4/30/05 Mahone Sucks beyond belief. Effects budget can't hide terrible effort. 1 stars
4/30/05 Gray tI could have been better but not much 4 stars
4/29/05 David M Rosonowski Played off elements from the radioplay, TV series and book. Loved it. 5 stars
IF YOU'VE SEEN THIS FILM, RATE IT!
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:


Discuss this movie in our forum

USA
  29-Apr-2005 (PG-13)
  DVD: 13-Sep-2005

UK
  N/A

Australia
  28-Apr-2005




Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
eFilmCritic.com: Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast