Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Hitchhikers Guide To Be Made Into A Movie

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the and-not-just-a-miniseries dept.

Movies 454

tonywestonuk writes "The Beeb are reporting that The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy series will be made into a Hollywood Movie. Apparently they are getting some other script writer to finish off Douglas Adams' final installment (I pessimistically wonder how awful this will make it.). It seems a shame that Hollywood had to wait until his death before they took him seriously...."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Or until his death.. (0)

fredistheking (464407) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277343)

Until they could get the rights.

Because it's a 3 0 r Blitz game, FUCKHEAD!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277404)

What a dumb piece of shit you are.

Re:Or until his death.. (3, Funny)

slickwillie (34689) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277514)

Maybe they were just waiting for him to finish the trilogy.

Re:Or until his death.. (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277570)

haha, I wish I could mod you +1 funny.

The estate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277522)

Copyright lasts for life plus 70 years. The studio still had to bargain with the estate for the movie rights to HHGttG.

So long, and thanks for all the laughs... (0)

renehollan (138013) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277345)

...what, you thought I was going to say fish?

NAVEWEISS SUCKS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277350)


Great! (1)

Locke!Erasmus (588304) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277354)

I loved Adams' books when I was growing up. They were very funny!

Re:Great! (1)

love2hateMS (588764) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277513)

Heck, I still love them. I read them once a year just for kicks.

Wasn't he... (1)

idontneedanickname (570477) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277356)

already working on this [right] before his death? (Douglas Adams)

My two word uninformed review (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277360)

Mostly humorless.

Greg's Previews has had info on this for two years (3, Informative)

merlyn (9918) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277362)

Always check Greg's Previews [] for useful information on upcoming movies. In fact, he used to be, one of my most visited sites.

Is it really? (2, Insightful)

doc_traig (453913) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277367)

It seems a shame that Hollywood had to wait until his death before they took him seriously....

Let's wait until we see the finished product before saying that. We just may be thankful Mr. Adams didn't have to suffer another Hollywood-ization.


Re:Is it really? (2)

JoeLinux (20366) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277395)

another? did he have an earlier Hollywood-ization?


Re:Is it really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277524)

no hollywood movie i know of. there was a BBC movie that was absolutely dreadful. fans of the books will still enjoy it, of course, but it really was bad. incidentally, if you have seen the bbc movie, you may also recognize that the horrible effects were similar to dr. who, as adams sometimes worked on the effects on dr. who (which is another series only true fans could love, as the effects in that were only marginally better than the Guide's effects). of course, me saying how dreadful both are might lead one to think that i did not like them; fact is, i grew up on such oddities, and cherish the memories of staying up late on sunday night to watch dr. who on pbs when i was little (often resulting in my falling asleep on the floor in front of the tv in the living room, but not always), or watching bearded arthur pulling scrabble tiles out of the bag amidst the native earthmen. - my parents were/are sci-fi nuts, worse than me!

Re:Is it really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277605)

Paul, that write-up was just dreadful. Dreadful i tell you.

Who cares? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277368)

The British ruin everything anyway.

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277371)

goat sex []

Yeah.... as if it wouldn't have happened... (1)

tvadakia (314991) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277376)

About time.

The Movie Making Machine Takes Time (1)

Real World Stuff (561780) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277377)

A movie can take several years to be produced. Look at the Bourne Identity, the original printing of the Ludlum book was in '75.

Good story fit for the effects technology available.

Out of sheer respect... (1)

cornjchob (514035) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277378)

I guess I'll be seeing the movie 47 times

Re:Out of sheer respect... (4, Funny)

0123456789 (467085) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277392)

Surely that should be 42 times?

oh for sarks sake I told him it was 24 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277565)

never could write anything down when I was speaking to him

claimed it was all a big mistake
42 looking like 24 well I told him again and again well at least he followed my advice about the beach house



Why 47? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277418)

Really... why 47? Did you just pick that number out of a hat?

47 equals forty-two plus 5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277501)

Seeing the movie 47 times would imply seeing the movie forty-two times, bringing a friend for five of the showings.

Re:Why 47? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277526)

He picked it out of a rabbitskin bag.

Re:Out of sheer respect... (1)

kmac06 (608921) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277426)

Yeah I think you mean 42 sheesh

Re:Out of sheer respect... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277436)

42 times

42, you idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277591)

As in the subject line:

42, you idiot.

hmmm (2)

Jonny Ringo (444580) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277380)

It seems a shame that Hollywood had to wait until his death before they took him seriously...."

What are the odds of Holywood taking a guy that's super funny seriously? 1,000 to 1 against.

Re:hmmm (2)

IPFreely (47576) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277586)

It seems a shame that Hollywood had to wait until his death before they took him seriously....

More like, it took his death for the rights to transfer to someone who would actually give Hollywood permission to make the movie. DA probably held out. Whoever inherited the rights isn't holding out.

Re:hmmm (1)

Colin Bayer (313849) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277640)

Wrong. Read "A Salmon of Doubt". The movie had been stalled in production (with his full support), but a few weeks before his death, he met with the executive producer and got the process unjammed.

Who'll play Ford Prefect? (2, Funny)

sgtron (35704) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277382)

Might I suggest Ali G?

Ford Prefect - Jeff Goldblum? (2, Insightful)

Hentai (165906) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277653)

Actually, I've always seen Jeff Goldblum as Ford Prefect; the description of someone whose social behaviors are just a little 'off', who smiles a little too eagerly and too earnestly, and who very deadpanly explains the end of the world just somehow pings off in my mind as his traits (especially look at his earlier, campier performances, like Buckaroo Banzai or Earth Girls are Easy)

Re:Ford Prefect - Jeff Goldblum? (2)

Dan Crash (22904) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277703)

Now that you mention it, Jeff Goldblum would make a great Ford Prefect. Great casting call. But what about Arthur and the rest?

Re:Who'll play Ford Prefect? (1)

TQBrady (548381) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277686)

That would SUCK!!! Ali G is an ass . . . who is capable of being funny on occasion, but not playing a role such as this. The guy from Snatch and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and that new Woo movie would be way better

Hooray! (2)

ffatTony (63354) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277384)

Now my friends will finally be happy and I'll stop complaining that a "Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy" would have been a much better move to make then LOTR. (Note: I like LOTR, but I love Hitchiker)

oh no! (3, Insightful)

anzha (138288) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277385)

I am having flashbacks of another favourite author's book being made into a non-existant-movie (at least in my world). Heinlein would have mourned _Starship Troopers_ and now its ole Doug's turn to spin in his grave...

Please. Make the pain...stop. Thinking about this is making me ill...

There's a glimmer of hope tho with the whole treatment that LotR has received.

Re:oh no! (1)

ianaverage (168691) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277441)

keep in mind that it was adams that has been working on the screenplay up until his death. if i remember correctly, he was quite pleased with the idea of having the jay roach direct it (wasn't there something about that is salmon?). i mean sure, they still can butcher it, but it is not like they are starting from scratch....

Re:oh no! (1)

Clue4All (580842) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277454)

True, but it would have done Erich Maria Remarque proud (author of All Quiet on the Western Front, for the uncultured).

Re:oh no! (1)

protohiro1 (590732) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277552)

I think watching Starship Troopers would be an effective intelligence test. The film is satire, and rather brilliant in that regard. Forget about the book, watch the movie again and ask yourself: who were the bad guys?

Re:oh no! (1)

WankersRevenge (452399) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277467)

Right - but the director of Lord of the Rings wasn't Jay Roach [] - whose latest work was that abhorrid movie "Goldmember". I liked Meet the Parents but I don't think this guy does intellectual funny. He does situational funny really well but that's about it. I could be mistaken about this guy, but I for one, I am not holding my breath for it.

Bring on the towers!

Re:oh no! (3, Funny)

garcia (6573) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277486)

X-men, Spiderman, Hulk.

LotR, Guide, what's next? Xanth?

Re:oh no! (2)

dswensen (252552) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277662)

More likely, Dragonlance with Jeremy Irons as Lord Soth and Matthew Lillard [] as Tasslehoff Burrfoot [] . Sarah Michelle Gellar as Laurana, I'm sure.

I know, I know... for God's sake, keep my voice down...

Re:oh no! (2)

Fesh (112953) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277585)

Does that mean that Uncle Orson has to kick it before we get to see "Ender's Game" onscreen?

Re:oh no! (1)

Phyrexia (55710) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277602)

Starship Troopers, on its own, was a rather brilliant film. It's hard to compare the book to the movie, because they're both very different.

Sure, it didn't follow the book, but it's not a bad movie.

Final installment (-1, Flamebait)

Alari (181784) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277389)

The published "final installment" (book 5) was a slap in the face to Hitchhiker's Guide fans and a big "fuck off I don't want to write it anymore" statement. He should have stopped at book 3, or book 1 even.

I can't even imagine how bad book 6 would have been.

I hope they re-write the entire goddamned thing. =)


Re:Final installment (2, Funny)

Jonny Ringo (444580) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277473)

Geeze man, calm down or i'll read you my poetry.

Re:Final installment (1)

cbuskirk (99904) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277558)

Final Installment is a very big mis-nomer. In the book, "The Salmon of Doubt" the story bearing the the same name comprises about 50 pages in the book. After he moved on to other pursuits, he began to write causally off an on an formed an idea for a third Dirk Gently book. As he began to write, though he found the material lent itself more to a new Hitchhiker's book. The bulk of "The Salmon of Doubt" is various interviews, essays, rants, on everything from why everything from his strong athieism to the future of technology. Not to mention a 3 page letter to the Walt Disney Pictures on differnet ways to get in touch with him, about the Hitchhiker's Movie. All in all it was pure Douglas Adams, laugh out loud funny, a bittersweet rememberance of my favorite author.

They forgot something.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277406)

Re:They forgot something.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277431)

correcting the above URL [] (next time I'll use 'preview')

hopefully this is better than the one I saw (1)

octover (22078) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277417)

I got the BBC's movie of the Hitchikers Guide, and well it sucked. One of my friends who watched it with me told me I should've skipped the movie and just read the book. We still don't know how we watched the whole thing.

Re:hopefully this is better than the one I saw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277542)

Hmm... yes. I saw the first episode of the beeb's HHGTTG. I didn't bother watching any others. I enjoyed the corresponding part of the book far more.

Re:hopefully this is better than the one I saw (1)

JosefK (21477) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277545)

It wasn't a movie, it was a TV series, made in the grand, lo-tech tradition of British Sci-Fi TV. Mostly crappy, sometimes amusing; cool animations of the book.

If you'd like to achieve true enlightenment, find the original radio series.

Re:hopefully this is better than the one I saw (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277673)

the problem is that the BBC radio series Ruled... it absolutely RULED. I still have 1/2 of the episodes on cassette somewhere. they were Illegally pirated and then Illegally trafficed over the Atlantic ocean and Illegally smuggled past customs so that I was able to Illegally recieve the STOLEN intellectual property.

Wow, I've been a crime lord my entire life! I had them shipped to me by my penpal in London when I was in Highschool. This is the same penpal that sent me cassettes of BBC programming cince 1978 and I sent him cassettes of Dr. Demento and american programming..

I am a evil fellow.. and the cause of all the financial ruin in the intertainment industry!

I guess I should go out and hang myself for my dastardly deeds.

nahhhh.. I'll just have hillary Rosens face painted inside my toilet bowl.

oh, no! not again! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277424)

i lost another loan to [] !

god damn it!

Someone didn't wait (1)

Maverick TimeSurfer (536379) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277432)

until his death to take him seriously. My local BlockBuster has a movie of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Can't remember who made it, though.

Re:Someone didn't wait (1)

BabyDave (575083) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277544)

It was probably the BBC's television series version of it. Essentially it was the first series of the radio show (fits 1-6), but with some ideas taken from the first two novels (e.g. the black ship being Disaster Area's stuntship, not belonging to the Hagunenon), and probably some random other DNA ideas as well (it's been quite a while since I watched it).

I can't help but wonder... (2, Insightful)

chrisbolt (11273) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277439)

I can't help but wonder how good the movies can be when the books are transferred to the big screen. I know this can be said of almost any book, but I think this would be especially hard. A lot of the humour in the Hitchhiker's Guide was in the way Adams described things, and unless the movie is narrated I don't see how that part of the books can be retained. I've seen the BBC miniseries [] and I certainly didn't think it could compare to the books.

The trilogy was a novellization. (3, Insightful)

KFury (19522) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277520)

How soon we forget: The books were novelizations of the Hith-hikers Radio Scripts, a 12-installment radio programme.

"We had nothing in common: I liked watching movies made from books I'd read. She like reading novelizations of movies. It's no wonder she finished Lord of the Rings so fast."

Looking Forward to It! (1)

Nashville Guy (585073) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277440)

The guy got screwed, but his work pretty much stands on it's own, so his legacy there is secure. I just hope that they do the story justice. I am really kind of looking forward to seeing the special effects, given the advancements we have been hearing about lately.

If nothing else, I advocate Brockian Ultra-Cricket at all staff meetings!

Will the Movie answer these questions? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277448)

Whoa! I FINALLY did it. Hi, my name is Earl. I am a Senior at the Cage de Folles High School in Topequanga Mississippi. I like using Linux and have 1,378 MP3 files on my boxen. I beleive in essenshial liberties and that the MPAA and RIAA are evil fronst for Macro$hit.

Now that you know a little about me, I can tell you why I am so excited. Nooo not because there is a kernal release. It is because I finally am limber enought to suck my own dick. I was a little overweight so my gut would keep me from getting my mouth on my penis, but I lost weight and streched evary dat. My friend Ryan helped me by pushing on my back. It took 4 weeks this summer to get limber, but today I took off all my clothes and sat on the toilet, bent over and did it. At first I was worried that it means I am gay, but it is all I could think about at school today. Anyways as I sat on the toilet I could smell myself and I farted a little. I had to wait because it smelled bad. After the fart smell cleared up I tryed again and I put my thing in my mouth. It was funnt at first, but it ws like licking my fingers after eating BBQ chicken. It felt good. If you have read this all the way you are indeed a fag and need to kill yourself.

Are dub bul yew ess ?

Just like Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277455)

Alternating between loving hollywood when they 'get it', hating hollywood when they f* up a really great novel, and hating hollywood whenever they buy a senator.

So which is it today? I'll bet #2 just because Adams died (tragic :-( ). If he were alive, I'd bet #1.

And there'll be 4 slightly elevated (score 2-3) posts bashing the MPAA.

Oh well at least its not Thursday.

Going to Reserve Judgement on This One (2)

DaytonCIM (100144) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277458)

The scriptwriter for Chicken Run, Karey Kirkpatrick, is to complete the script from a draft version written by author Douglas Adams before his death
last year.

Really not sure how to take this one: Chicken Run was funny and well-made, but... It must difficult for Kirkpatrick to step in and finish something a lot of people consider a masterpiece. I don't envy his job.
Austin Powers director Jay Roach is to direct, and Adams will be posthumously credited as an executive producer.
Joy Roach is a good director (did a fabulous job on Austin Powers; although he did have a good cast and excellent script).

I have a lot of hope for this project. It's nice to see Hollywood making at least one "non-teen-idol goes on a road trip/goes to college and finds them self" movie for next year.

The HitchHiker's is not very good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277464)

It's one of those cult things that doesn't have much to show for. At best, it is a mildly funny fantasy story - not sci-fi, for there isn't much in the way of science to it. At worst, it is downright silly - no matter how deeply in awe many may be at Deep Thought's answer to the question of life and everything.

Re:The HitchHiker's is not very good (1)

darkgreen (599556) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277669)

At best, it is a mildly funny fantasy story - not sci-fi, for there isn't much in the way of science to it. At worst, it is downright silly - no matter how deeply in awe many may be at Deep Thought's answer to the question of life and everything.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you wouldn't happen to have given any thought to the fact that that's the entire fucking point?

sometimes I actually enjoy my light reading to be... well, um, light. If it can be silly and witty and not just a little irreverent to the genre or life in general, I think that's great, too. Hell, if you can't appreciate tongue-in-cheek humour, don't bother reading HHG, by all means, take things too seriously and you can keep your ulcers to yourself.

So long, and thanks for all the Hrrmfs!

There's more dolphins nibbling for fish here. (1)

El Jynx (548908) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277478)

Adams died relatively recently. I'm betting Hollywood couldn't do jack up to now because Adams refused it for some reason or other... and the end of the Guide isn't particularly positive, is it? Which was probably what Adams wanted in the first place and it certainly fits the strange script as I feel it should. Hollywood movies are wont to yield happy endings, a simmering love story and, as far as movies of books are concerned, often worthless translations of otherwise perfectly fine literature. I wonder if they'll also try to cram it into 90 minutes.


Nah. They won't. (see reason below)

Re:There's more dolphins nibbling for fish here. (1)

JosefK (21477) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277637)

RTFA(tm). Adams himself was working on a script.

HHGTTG has been in development hell for I don't know how long - at least since the mid-80's, when I saw Adams at UC San Diego (it would have been prior to the publication of So Long and Thanks for All the Fish) where he gave a reading and talked about, amongst other things, LA and dealing with Hollywood types.

Adams was very interested in getting a movie made, and was quite willing to give it to the Hollywood system (probably in part because Hollywood is very much not unlike the universe in his books).

I heard him talk about it once. (4, Interesting)

Irvu (248207) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277482)

It seems that he's sold and re-sold the script several times. Each time the project appears and gets cancelled for one reason or another, usually a total lack of comprehension.

He told a story about the time he sold it to one producer (if memory serves it was James Cameron of Aliens and Titanic fame). Anyway he worked on the script for a while in preparation for his first meeting with the producer.

When thay meeting came around the first thing that he discovered was that the producer (cameron) the man who had bought the screenplay, had never read the book. When he was talling it, Adams allowed as how the book was very long and the great man might not be able to spare the time.

However, he had read the executive treatment of the book (doubtless by the cliffs notes people), and he was very excited about the prospects for the film. But, before they could get going he wanted to discuss a few questions about the script.

He began by asserting that he loved the fact that the earth blew up in the beginning that big, powerful, awesome, domething that would grab them into their seats. However, he had a real problem with the fact that they didn't get it back. He felt that they should devote a little more time in the script to a quest to regain the lost earth (he didn't specify how). But, he said that they could deal with it.

The real issue was that whole question of life, the meaning of life was an important quest, a noble quest. It was big, and it would keep people emotionally in the movie. He also felt that it was good that they found it eventually... but... 42? Isn't that really...anticlimactic? Why isn't it an important message, meaningful, or something?

Apparently there were some other sticking points too about how little of a role Arthur Dent played. The producer really felt that he should be leading the charge more rather than hiding. In short he really felt that Arthur Dent should be more Arnold Schwartzenegger.

According to Douglas Adams it fell apart after that.

BBC already made a TV version ... (2, Informative)

Titusdot Groan (468949) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277497)

There is a truely excellent BBC version of this already made for TV [] back in the 80's

The Hollywood version is sure to disappoint after this practically word for word BBC version.

Since Hitchhiker's was originally a radio play it would be a lot of fun to start a pool on what a hollywood screen writer will have to do to the story to make it "work" for film :-)

Re:BBC already made a TV version ... (2)

rcs1000 (462363) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277649)

Clearly this is some new meaning of the phrase 'truely excellent' that I was previously unaware of.

Anyone who loved the radio series and the books found the TV series... well, disappointing at best.

There is just too much surrealism to make the transfer to cellulose, or even the small screen, all but impossible.

Take the moments after Arthur and Ford are picked up by the Heart of Gold: it is full of wonderful images like Southend washing up and down while the water remains still and the infinite monkeys that have just completed the works of Shakespeare. Remove the wonderful, joyeous surrealism and the books become suddenly much more ordinary.

That said, I will watch the movie. And probably cringe, too.

Two words (5, Insightful)

Schnapple (262314) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277498)

Terry Gilliam [] .

Truer words were never spoke (2)

cryptochrome (303529) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277639)

I can't imagine anyone BUT Terry Gilliam pulling this film off properly.

w00t! (4, Funny)

blazin (119416) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277500)

42nd post!!!

24 how many times ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4277595)

its 24

I give up


So is this going to be .. (3, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277504)

The movie of the original radio plays?
The movie of the books of the original radio plays?
The movie of the TV series of the books of the orginal radio plays?

Because they were ALL different. And I much prefer the radio plays.

(And I think there was also a soundtrack recording of the TV series in there as well)

It's often said... (1)

molrak (541582) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277509)

...that true genius is recognized by the masses until the genius has passed this plain. While the books are genius, if you ask Joe Blow on the street if he knows what H2G2 is, he'd probably think you're on crack. The real problem, as stated elsewhere, will be the end product. The thousand monkeys in LALA land have been known to ruin pretty much everything once they get their hairy hackneyed hands on books. Let's hope the BBC or Adams' estate insure that we get something that would have made him proud. If 'Salmon of Doubt' is any indication, it should be at the very least, quite acceptable.

I hope the special effects budget is big enough (1)

plagioclase (454483) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277512)

I'd like to see the infinite improbability drive really given the treatment it deserves.

Who will play Arthur Dent? (2)

teamhasnoi (554944) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277518)

I'm thinking Dana Carvey should shoehorn himself into this role and redeem his "Master of Surprise".

Robin Williams would probably be a better choice, though.

The Rolling Stones(old and dead) would make a good Disaster Area, or perhaps The Who...(loud and louder)

Re:Who will play Arthur Dent? (2, Funny)

Oriumpor (446718) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277663)

Gotta be someone Six feet tall ; P and they gotta look like an ape... any suggestions?

In case anyone doesn't know (3, Interesting)

sydb (176695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277521)

H2G2's first incarnation was as a radio series. I'm pretty sure it's also the best way to enjoy Adams' work.

The asides into the eponymous electronic 'Guide' seem a more natural fit to the dramatic medium of radio than to the books Adams released later (though I have read and enjoyed them all). Like a book, you get to use your imagination, unlike a book, you get an atmospheric soundtrack (and nice Vogon voices).

The BBC sell the tapes of the original series. Also available as illegal MP3s at a P2P network near you...

Cast? (2, Interesting)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277533)

It'd be interesting to see who they'll cast in it.

Dent: gotta be someone who can play "a complete kneebiter." British. I'm out of ideas on this one.
Trillian: Elizabeth Hurley?
Zaphod: No need to actually hire someone, just do some computer modifications to John Travolta's character from Battlefield Earth.
Slartibartfast: Anthony Hopkins or William Shatner.

Any other ideas?

Re:Cast? (1)

TQBrady (548381) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277660)

BRILLIANT I have always thought Hurley for Trillian. That seems obvious to me. How about Hugh Grant for Zaphod? He has to be charming, but annoying, simultaneously. I think Grant MIGHT be able to pull that off. The fellow from "Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels" and "Snatch" would be good for Ford Prefect. I, too, am at a loss for Arthur. Perhaps Ewan MacGregor? Too young looking, I think. Your choices for Slartibartfast are perfect. Absolutely brilliant. There are not too many roles that would be served equally well by those two choices, but this is one. Diferent reasons, but similar results.

I'll believe it... (1)

Lordfly (590616) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277534)

...when I see it. And ten bucks says it's a worthless pile of crap.

The books are among my favorite to read, but I don't really think it would make a good American Hollywood Movie. It's all about the subtle British humor. And American audiences don't like narration much, which you would have to do in the movie, I would imagine. And do alot of it.

A hollywood director, with hollywood actors, doing a hollywood movie, about a British cult-classic book. It's going to be on par with Battlefield Earth, I bet.


Recipe for success: (1)

NME (36282) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277537)

David Lee Roth as Zaphod Beeblebrox.


This must be a Thursday... (5, Funny)

ocie (6659) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277547)

I've never quite gotten the hang of Thursdays.

Well... (0)

your_name (248483) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277566)

"It seems a shame that Hollywood had to wait until his death before they took him seriously...."

Let rearrange those words:

Hollywood took him seriously [by] waiting for his death to shame him.
Ahh, there we go!

Hopefully it won't be anything like the TV show... (0)

zorg50 (581726) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277568)

I rented the DVD and could only stand to watch 3 or 4 episodes of it; it was just so BAD, especially Zaphod's second head. Hopefully the movie version will have better special effects than the "Escape from L.A."-quality crap.

Then again, the show DID do a pretty good job of remaining faithful to the plot, at least as far as I got. Once screenwriters get their hands on books, they tend to cut the plot to shreds, a la Starship Troopers and Battlefield Earth.

Re:Hopefully it won't be anything like the TV show (0)

zorg50 (581726) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277579)

Of course, the quality WILL be much better in the movie, I just had to tell how bad the show was...

Great in theory but... (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277572)

I can just see a whole bunch of Americans putting on very bad British accents being cast into the leading roles. Very, very bad prospect. The best interpretation of the characters I've seen was in the Illustrated HHGTTG.

As for the movie being a new thing, Douglas Adams was working on it on and off for quite a few years before his death - it just never got anywhere.

I hate to say this (1)

protohiro1 (590732) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277596)

But could we pick a book, and leave it a book? Is that too difficult? (comments about the story's birth as a radio show aside) Books are great. I used to think that I would like to see a "Snow Crash" movie. But I am pretty sure I don't. Sure, there is a 1% chance that it will turn out to be pretty good and not ruin the memory of the book (like LOTR). But it could always end up just sucking, (Bicentennial Man) so I think its something to be avoided. Unless Kiwi nerds want to make the film. They seem to not be tainted by the dripping evil of hollywood.

Re:I hate to say this (1)

changa_lion (567291) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277687)

It was a radio series first then a book and after that a TV Series.

The questions I ask (1)

scotay (195240) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277607)

How good Adams' draft and how loyal will the filmmakers be to the spirit of the initial series?

Kirkpatrick's work on Chicken Run and James and the Giant Peach were smart and retained enough of the British Sensibility that Hitchhikers is going to need to play for me.

Despite all the arguments, I think the handoff of Kubrick's A.I. to Spielberg went surprisingly well. I actually have hope for this new project.

don't panic (1)

sstory (538486) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277608)

Now's my turn, i guess, to feel like the lotr fans felt before the release. Nervous that it'll be too compressed, miscast, etc.

I think the problem here is, these stories are epic, and a 2-hr movie almost can't be. At the same time, breaking it up into 3 or more installments is fraught with danger.

Also, so much of the humor in THGTTG is the language and syntax in the writing, much of which would be hard to translate into film--hence the BBC's inclusion of many of these passages in the form of narration.

In conclusion, I guess the most important thing is, we'll all get to see a new interpretation of the material. It could be good, or it could fail, but if it fails, we've lost nothing. And if it succeeds, that's great.

I'm sure the movie will be (1)

rlangis (534366) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277611)

Mostly Harmless.

Brainfart (4, Funny)

ForceOfWill (79529) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277618)

When I first read the title, I thought "Hitchhiker's Guide To Being Made Into A Movie" like the article was about a howto on being turned into a movie :)

on topic:
Wasn't there already a movie made of this? Or was it just one book? (sorry for my ignorant attempt at on-topic-ness :)

" awful this will make it?" (1)

Shamanin (561998) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277645)


we apologize for the inconvenience (1)

JimBobJoe (2758) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277677)

they are getting some other script writer to finish off Douglas Adams final installment (I pessimistically wonder how awful this will make it.)

As opposed to how awful Adams himself coulda made it? :-) ....ok ok...that's really mean, but even Adams himself insisted that he kept on writing the series because his fans kept on wanting it, not because he thought that it should continue being written. he never really liked the new stuff anyway.

Eek! (2)

starseeker (141897) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277702)

"...before they took him seriously...."

If they're taking him seriously, they're even more insane than I thought! (I got a headache just trying to read it!) Although, it would explain a lot about Hollywood...

Please don't ruin this. (1)

adelayde (185757) | more than 11 years ago | (#4277705)

Please do not ruin this excellent story and serial like you have so many other foreign and US scripts. Please please please. Isn't LOTRs enough for starters. Keep Hollywood cash out of your culture, and especially out of my fucking culture.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>