MovieChat Forums > The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1982) Discussion > I like this more than the 2005 big budge...

I like this more than the 2005 big budget movie

posted 19 years ago by twr
12 replies | jump to latest

Hi -

To my surprise, I actually liked this older version more than the 2005 movie. (Part of it is that there is simply more material from the books, since it is longer. The one thing from the 2005 movie that really stood out to me was the "So Long And Thanks For All The Fish" song.)

On one hand, the 2005 movie seemed to have this tone of just how clever it was, and to the degree it tried to imitate Monty Python style zany humor (fairly often, IMO) I thought it failed.

Marvin looked a lot cooler in the 2005 movie, but I enjoyed his sarcastic tone in this version.

Of course, I have never quite understood the fanatic following the HHGG series seems to have had over the years. Perhaps it helps to be British...

TWR

[–] contact-300 19 years ago

Quote: "...Of course, I have never quite understood the fanatic following the HHGG series seems to have had over the years..."

If you've read the books, you will understand. ;)

[–] bookwoman53 18 years ago

Marvin isn't really meant to be cool . He is after all a semi failed prototype.

[–] contact-300 18 years ago

...And yes, you are right, you definately have to appreciate the British sense of humour. :D

[–] Nicky_G 18 years ago

I think one reason why you didn't like the movie is that you're missing one important fact: It's not supposed to be like the books, or the radio series, or even the computer game for that matter. Douglas intended for each version to be completeley different from each other, and that's what we got.

Knowing this helped me aprreciate the movie much more, that and the fact that everything they added in the movie was Douglas's idea.

But I like the Miniseries, too (though not as much as the movie).

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

[–] UnlovedSeason 17 years ago

It's very hard to judge between versions*. The books are magnificent (and if you like those, you must read Adams' Dirk Gently novels) and, for long-time fans/purists such as myself, the radio series remains definitive (and of course is the longest performed version of HH) – though even that was arguably improved upon in places by the same-cast re-recorded album releases!!!

As for film vs this TV series, as someone said – we are talking about very different animals. It's very hard to see why Adams remained unhappy with the TV programme, unless it really was simply that some of the effects weren't as good as he had imagined in his – and in his listeners' – imaginations. Nature of the beast, I'm afraid. For my money, the additional visual gags and directorial and performance touches make this an absolute treat. Dixon as Ford Prefect is notably perfect. And the mould-breaking animation work was and is astounding.

When the movie came out, in advance I had been very wary about the Transatlantic casting. And some of the liberties taken with/trims made to the more familiar elements from earlier versions did jar initially as I was watching. BUT, I was totally blown away (and totally revised my actor worries – Mos Def was, e.g., a revelation as Ford). Best of all, there was so much NEW material in Adams' script. The whole Humma Kavula subplot, Vogsphere, the glorious title song, the reworked mice confrontation... MARVELLOUS!

*So... ultimately, I won't even try. There are many diifferent versions of HH. And I am forever grateful for that. Now, if only someone could get a Restaurant movie sequel together...

[–] Sic Coyote 16 years ago

it's not Doug's movie, it's Disney's he lost control of it when he died, if you don't believe me ask him.

[–] clenchedbrain 17 years ago

They are all good and entertaining versions. But I was 10 or 11 when this series came on: I was incredibly excited about it, and loved it beyond belief.
The great Peter Jones, I believe, was in the radio verion, which I never heard. It's his voice, as The Book, in combination with the beautiful graphics, that will always stay with me from the TV series. The writing, the graphics and the voice-over are a truly wonderful combination. My brain is hard-wired to go into pleasure overdrive when I view these bits, it's some of my favourite TV ever.

[–] Edwardcole 16 years ago

This series was great. The radio series was just as good. I read all five books, and I consider all of them to be money well-spent.

As for the movie, to quote Marvin, "I've seen it. It's rubbish."

[–] twist_o_freak 16 years ago

I have to agree that the series (IMHO) is the better of the two. I don't know if this is 'cuz the British half of me is what gives me the dry sense of humor to appreciate it, or what. Maybe it's just that I happen to like it more because Douglas himself was involved in the production.

[–] Slopmaster4001 16 years ago

I have to agree, I really think the TV series was better. Now, thats not to say the movie sucked, it was actually good but I think the TV series was throughly imbued with Douglas Adams wit and cleverness. I think that same "spirit" was missing from the movie maily because D.A. was gone. Another explanation could be the fact that the actors & everyone else on the movie was taking it too seriously because it was a big budget studio movie of which much was expected.

Obviously not much was expected from a fairly low budget TV series so I think the actors (good ones)probably had a more laid back approach to the series which honestly Hitch Hikers is not meant to be "very serious" Maybe seriously funny.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BeautifulGreenBeast 16 years ago

I liked it a lot more too. A lot of it is because it's older and doesn't use the CGI we use today, like the fact that marvin looked shíttier added to the hilarity of him being depressed. The fact that it was tv show added to the classic British humor, for me that made it more enjoyable.

Unfortunately, killing is one of those things that gets easier the more you do it.