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!

Ask 'Hitchhiker's Guide' Exec. Producer Robbie Stamp

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the time-to-get-the-hang-of-thursdays dept.

Movies 490

After nearly three years of waiting, the movie version of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is almost upon us. I've been impressed with the casting, and with the trailers I've seen of the film -- enough that I'm taking the rather unhappy early review posted the other day with a large grain of salt. Now's your chance to ask whatever you'd like of Robbie Stamp, the film's executive producer; we'll pass on to Robbie some of the best questions and publish his answers as soon as he gets them back to us. (As usual, please -- confine yourself to one question per post.)

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

One question (4, Interesting)

tech-hawger (874902) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235789)

How faithful to the spirit of the book will the movie be?

Um. (5, Informative)

devphil (51341) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235919)

Douglas Adams wrote multiple versions of the screenplay, including the one used in the movie. The "new" characters, such as the one played by John Malkovich (sp?), were added by Adams specifically for the movie.

If Adams wrote it, grilling the producer about it seems pointless.

Also, fans of the Guide universe(s) will already know that the books, the TV series, the radio series, and all the other media versions have all been contradictory. Douglas Adams himself lost track of how many variant plotlines there were. Having read the interviews and seen the trailers, I'd say they're as close to following "the spirit" of the books as they can be.

Re:Um. (1)

tech-hawger (874902) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236005)

They've apprently had some screening recently and some people didn't take too kindly to it. But then again, they probably weren't big fans to begin with and might not know the "history". You're right in how grilling him about the "spirit" is basically pointless. I'll think of something else.

Re:One question (4, Informative)

Yonder Way (603108) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235942)

Not very [] .

Re:One question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235949)

How faithful to the spirit of the book will the movie be?

I doubt it will be very close. After all the book is a farsical romp through the Galaxy, whereas the H2G2 movie is a murder-mystery set in Alaska. About the only similarity is that the earth gets blown up and the character names are almost the same.

Re:One question (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236061)

The better question is how faithful is the movie to Adams' final version of the script? We already know that it is different from the books and radio series by intent and necessity.

Why? (2, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235794)

Why'd you take out the jokes?

Do you realize how many people will miss "Beware of the Leopard?" Almost all the dialogue in that skit is gone, so it's not even a joke anymore.

Re:Why? (4, Interesting)

Sebastopol (189276) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235890)

...furthermore: is it too late to add this famous joke back in?

Re:Why? (1, Offtopic)

Karma Sucks (127136) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235909)

Also, why did you stop beating your wife?

HHGG (5, Interesting)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235799)

Will the full trilogy (5 books) be made or is it being played by ear to see how the first goes?

Re:HHGG (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236097)

full trilogy (5 books)
A trilogy of 5 books? That is a somewhat impressive feat, I always though a trilogy consisted of three instances of an object.

Re:HHGG (1, Informative)

MynockGuano (164259) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236190)

Thus the reason they're dubbed the "Increasingly Innacurately-Named Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Trilogy".

(Yes, I know you put a sarcasm tag in there, but I'm not quite sure that you actually meant it in that respect.)

What is the answer? (5, Funny)

EnronHaliburton2004 (815366) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235803)

What is the Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything?

It had to be asked.

Re:What is the answer? (2, Funny)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235838)

43, with a margin of error of +-1.

Re:What is the answer? (2, Interesting)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235931)

> 43, with a margin of error of +-1.

"W-H-A...T" What!

"D-O-Y-O"? Doy-oh, "u-G", Do you Get!


"...n,u,s-O-n-E!" Plus or minus one!

"What do you get if you multiply six by eight, for values of eight moderated up or down by +/-1?"

(I always thought there was something fundamentally wrong with Slashdot moderation anyways.)

The only question that really matters: Whether he'd have approved or not, would DNA have laughed while watching your "re-imagination" of his work?

Re:What is the answer? (3, Informative)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235865)

Everyone knows that! We want to know the QUESTION.

Re:What is the answer? (4, Funny)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235978)

"Sorry, please phrase your answer as a Question."

This is Double Jeapardy

Re:What is the answer? (1)

LMCBoy (185365) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236142)

Actually, we know the Question, don't we? Marvin read it in Arthur's brain waves, and offered to tell everyone what it was, but no one was interested.

Later, he told it to a mattress, right before the Krikkit robots stole his leg for the wicket key. The Question is this:

"What number am I thinking of?"

Re:What is the answer? (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235874)

Didn't you read the book? I'm pretty sure that it's in there somewhere and referenced in thousands of online journals, sigs, blogs, etc.

Re:What is the answer? (2, Funny)

jhines0042 (184217) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235974)

What is this Sig you refer to?

Re:What is the answer? (1)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235879)

what is six times nine ?

Re:What is the answer? (1)

thatnerdguy (551590) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235936)

what does 54 have to do with anything? I think you meant "What is six times seven?"

Re:What is the answer? (0)

jhines0042 (184217) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236025)

6 times 9 = 42 ........ in base 13.

Douglas Adams seems to have not known this, but highly approves of the coincidence.

Re:What is the answer? (5, Funny)

Nothing Special (700074) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236089)

Yes, but nobody would write a joke in Base 13. It just isn't funny.

Re:What is the answer? (1)

theguitarizt (773106) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236051)

it's base 13...

Re:What is the answer? (2, Funny)

jspoon (585173) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236060)

what does 54 have to do with anything? I think you meant "What is six times seven?"

Nope, obviously he was simply using base thirteen instead of base ten.

6 x 7 = 30 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236069)


Re:What is the answer? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235891)

Google, as usual, is already on top of that. he+universe%2C+and+everything []

Oh Crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235812)

If /. is the kind of interviews he's getting, this movie is destined to fail unless it's a sleeper. :(

What on earth did you do? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235817)

Why on earth did you turn a classic book into a horrible movie? How could you do such a thing? I didn't know that was humanly possible????!?!?

Why attempt the impossible? (2, Insightful)

mattkime (8466) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235826)

Considering that there is zero chance that real Hitchhiker fans will be satisfied with the movie ... why do you even bother trying?

Re:Why attempt the impossible? (1)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236067)

Considering that there is zero chance "real" fans of any book will satisfied with its corresponding movie? Two reasons in my opinion:

a.) Money. Despite the fact that the "real" fans will be disappointed, they will go see it anyways. Most likely more than once.

b.) Raise awareness of the book. When people see the movie or even hear about it, they might be more inclined to pick up a copy of the book and read it. I know I had never heard of this series until I started reading Slashdot.

Re:Why attempt the impossible? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236071)

Yes, because it's not worth trying to make a good movie that might possibly be a big hit if a few dozen "real Hitchhiker fans" won't be completely 100% satisfied.

Re:Why attempt the impossible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236074)


If you can't figure that out, I'll give you a hint: To make money.

Re:Why attempt the impossible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236098)

Considering that there's zero chance that any one person will be a rock star, why try?

Because if anybody succeeds, it is good. Likewise if anybody likes the movie, that is a good thing.

Why attempt the impossible: pleasing sassy fanboys (1)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236127)

Considering that there is zero chance that real Hitchhiker fans will be satisfied with the movie ... why do you even bother trying?

My, aren't we bold and bitchy this morning? You presume a lot with your question. I haven't read up on all the fanboy gossip about the film, but from the trialers, I have seen, yes, the movie diverges some from the book. Why is this a big deal? As long as the film stays true to the spirt of the works, (i.e. Life is random and absurd, so shutup and enjoy the ride) why does it matter?

What do you want, a exact re-creation of the book, so you can sit in a theater and silently mouth the dialouge with the actors? As an additional point, did you see the first Harry Potter flick? It was exactly like the book, and it was dull as hell. If you love the books that much, go read them again.

So what? (1)

bhsx (458600) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236146)

How many "real Hitchhiker fans" are there? I'm guessing that making money off the people that will pay to see it is why he'd "even bother trying." This movie is going to rake-in piles of cash, just wait and see. Plus, even if the "real Hitchhiker fans" hate it... guess what? They bought a ticket. Why bother doing anything, though really, right? I mean, if you're not going to be satisfied, then everyone should just stop doing everything.
Don't be such an ass.

Which character was the hardest to Cast? (5, Interesting)

jhines0042 (184217) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235828)

Which of the characters in the movie was the most difficult to find an actor for and why?

So whats it like raping a corpse? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235831)

You hack.

Question (5, Interesting)

smorpheus (868363) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235835)

In Making the Film, what was the most difficult cut that had to be made? What scene from the book do you wish could have made it into the movie?

Re:Question (1)

Heian-794 (834234) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235873)

Which scene was most difficult to craft, considering what your mind envisioned when reading the book?

The books (5, Funny)

rkrabath (742391) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235851)

Can you appreciate Brittish Humor?

Re:The books (-1, Troll)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235970)

Mod down please. There's no such thing as Brittish humour (I'm from the UK). It's a DARK sense of humour, lots of sarcasm and general "meh-ness".

Re:The books (1)

Nos. (179609) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236064)

You of course are welcome to your opinion, but I would disagree. The humour (especially from the 70s and 80s) that game out of Britain is noticeable different from comedy originating out of the US. Canadian humour (I'm Canadian) seems to fall in between somewhere, but leans more towards British comedy. Certainly British and Canadian humour can be more dark at times, but I find, if anything, that these styles of humour tend to be much more intellectual, whereas US humour tends to be more slapstick. That's not to say there aren't exceptions. This is just my viewpoint.

Re:The books (1)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236162)

I see where your comming frome ntirely and if you had said 80s and 90s I'd agree 100% it's very different. But I have to disagree that the whole place has the same humour today. "British humour" is long dead now, political correctness killed it out right (Dr who seems to be a minor revival in sarcastic comments not involving little girls). So I wouldn't say "Understand british humour" more "do you not understand the humour of the British in that time frame"?

Hell if you read the five books "back to back" you notice a HUGE shift in humour between them. Where the first is very intelligent and almost insultingly complex at times. The fifth book is far more serious and the moments of comedy seem more slapstick (Ford in the HHGG building for example).

[give me] my money back (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235852)

Dear mr stamp, how does it feel to make a sci-fi so terrible that it will/has replaced spielberg's A.I. as the worst implementation of text to screen?

problem with that statement (1)

mandrake*rpgdx (650221) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236050)

A.I. was never really a book, just a sci-fi rendition of Pinocchio with some inspiration of a few PKD short stories thrown in for good measure (Super Toys Play All Summer Long, I think was the one). That's like saying "O Brother Where Art Thou?" is a terrible rendition of "The Odyssey". And besides, I doubt if AI would have been better if Kubrik would have directed it- it seemed too light hearted for his slow and panning style of film making. I personally enjoyed the movie.

Re:problem with that statement (1)

VAXcat (674775) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236183)

PKD had nothing to do with "Super Toys Play All Summer Long". That was by Brian Aldiss. Speaking of movies, last night, it occurred to me who could actually make a movie out of "Neuromancer" and not have it be a disaster...Quentin Tarantino!

MJ Simpson? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235867)

So is the movie really as bad as MJ Simpson says? You can tell me, I won't tell anyone else if you agree with him.

Universal appeal to book readers/non book-readers? (5, Interesting)

JeTmAn81 (836217) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235877)

Was there an effort made to appeal equally to both fans of the original books and those who have not read the books, or was it slanted towards one group over the other?

HHG2G Question (5, Interesting)

unique alias (862076) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235884)

Was investing in a franchise with such a purist fan base ever a concern for you, and what audience do you see this film appealing to most in light of such concerns?

Re:HHG2G Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236135)

Come now, interviews are supposed to be polite. There's no need to use that tone of voice.

No matter what, money's there... (1)

PornMaster (749461) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236172)

Even if people say it sucks, the purist fan base will still check it out to see for themselves what it is.

Great Timing! (5, Insightful)

Relic of the Future (118669) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235887)

How about doing another interview after we've seen the movie?

Re:Great Timing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235927)

I downloaded the torrent a week ago. This adaptation makes Jar Jar seems like a great idea.

Re:Great Timing! (4, Insightful)

GoodbyeBlueSky1 (176887) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235972)

Why? Everybody here is clearly already an expert on the movie which they have never seen and yet are so sure it will suck.

The movie could turn out brilliant and the trolls here will still complain about the towel reference from page 140 that, unforgivably, is not in the movie.

The obvious (1)

mr.newt (244023) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235892)

How much change is there in this movie from the "spirit" of the other Hitchhiker productions? To put it another way, how true to the original works will this movie be?

Wide audience (4, Interesting)

Tlosk (761023) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235894)

In making the film, was it ever a consideration to create a film that will appeal to people who have never read the books or heard the radio broadcasts? In making adaptations from literary works, especially ones with rich, stand alone universes, much time is spent on exposition of material that is well known to anyone who has read the works. While needed for people unfamiliar with the milieu, exposition rarely makes for riveting entertainment. But then again, so many people have read the books or heard the broadcasts, who actually makes the decision? It it just left up to the screen adaptor?

Book to Film (5, Interesting)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235904)

I understand from film makers that I know that it's very difficult to bring a book to film. Many things that work in a novel just don't work on film.
I'm curious as to what decisions you made regarding editing, changing, or even adding things to the plot to bring the story to film?

I haven't been impressed with the trailers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12235905)

it looks like they've taken out the humor, and put in special effects. Anyone who has seen the BBC version is quite aware that the special effects suck. But that only helps the movie. The wonderful think about HHGttG is it's not meant to be taken seriously. From the trailers, it seems like it is. That's a mistake.

I'll still watch the movie (I was totally wrong about Fight Club when I saw the trailers), but from what I've seen so far, I don't think I'll be impressed.

Marvin's look? (5, Interesting)

Pengunea (170972) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235913)

What was the driving inspiration behind the look for the movie version of Marvin? Fans are all aware of the "brain the size of a planet" lament, but what's with that giant round head? A new play on words? For laffs? Because all the other MP3 players seem to be going with that look nowadays?

Re:Marvin's look? (4, Interesting)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236006)

Douglas Adams said he wanted Marvin to look round and sleek, not like his TV series counter part. Today "sleek and cool" is an iPod with legs.

If.. (5, Interesting)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235918)

If more films are made how will the refrences to God (The babelfish entry) and God's message to his creation be handled? In the current politically correct world will these be dropped or edited to refrence something different?

Heart of Gold (1, Offtopic)

GoodbyeBlueSky1 (176887) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235920)

The Heart of Gold is great and all...but can it run Linux?

Re:Heart of Gold (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236002)

...imagine a beowulf cluster of those?

Re:Heart of Gold (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236014)

How improbable is a beowulf cluster of them?

Hey... (2, Funny)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235932)

Maybe they got the Vogon captain to rewrite the script?

Process question: (5, Interesting)

DCTooTall (870500) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235948)

How hard was it dealing with studio exec's who neither read nor understood Douglas Adam's work, while attempting to transition the original stories to film?

What do you feel is the single compromise made in the name of satisfying studio demands that the fans of the originals will be least likely to accept?

Panic (4, Funny)

provolt (54870) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235980)

While making the movie, did you ever start to panic and then see copy of the guide and realize, "Oh yeah DON'T PANIC"?

Re:Panic (1)

mitsuhama (587060) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236101)

Well if you have seen the tralier (well the one they are showing on TV in aus) there is no "DON'T PANIC" on the front of the book, just a fist, like it's going to punch you in the face.

Where is your towel? (5, Interesting)

slash_dot_dash_dot_s (876117) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235983)

Where is your towel?

What took so long? (5, Interesting)

joshdick (619079) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235984)

Douglas Adams has likened getting a movie made in Hollywood to "trying to grill a steak by having a succession of people coming into the room and breathing on it."

Given the considerable success of his books and their large following, why wasn't a film adaptation released earlier? What hurdles had to be overcome?

question (1)

Pinefresh (866806) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235985)

Is there any chance of a sequal of some sorts to put in what was left out in this movie?

Why (2, Insightful)

afstanton (822402) | more than 9 years ago | (#12235995)

do the ads look like a terribly unfunny movie?

Re:Why (1)

TodPunk (843271) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236171)

I mean no offense, but when you use words like "unfunny" in your critiques (and that's really what your post is, as it's not a serious question), I don't think your opinion is looked upon with a higher validity than if it were, say, in actual language. If you really want to express your disgust and further your cause of "this is film does not look entertaining" you might consider writing something people want to hear, rather than something that just sounds you're whining in your illiteracy.

That's not to say I think you should have perfect English. That's really not the point at all. I'm just saying presentation is half the message, and you might want to consider that in future tirades.

Mattresses (5, Funny)

publicenemy23 (875823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236003)

On a scale of 1-23, how challenging was the task of casting mattresses for the part of Zem the Mattress? I mean, I've never even seen a talking mattress, I've only read about them in books. Do they have a seperate guild in Los Angeles, or do you have to go abroad to find talent? Enquiring minds want to know.

One question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236007)

Based on the MJ Simpson's review and detailed plot analysis, there can only be one simple question:

What the FUCK were you thinking?!

Stylistic conflict between filmmakers & Disney (5, Interesting)

LoadStar (532607) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236024)

It seemed that a lot of the reason that Hammer and Tongs was chosen to do this film was their unique style, and in a lot of ways, it works with Douglas Adams' creative vision. However, it's being distributed by Touchstone Pictures, a division of the Walt Disney Corporation, and the quirky nature of Hammer and Tongs doesn't seem like it'd mesh with the culture at Disney. Additionally, I'd imagine the "suits" would have a lot of problems with a faithful treatment of Adams' work.

My question: how was the working relationship between the filmmakers and Disney (Touchstone)? Were there elements of the movie that were cut by Disney because they "just didn't get it," or were they pretty supportive of the decisions made by the filmmakers?

On casting (5, Interesting)

Nothing Special (700074) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236026)

Why the decision to go with an almost totally American leading cast)? Other big book to movie adaptations (Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings) did outstanding with a fully british, and very mixed (respectively) cast. Was this by design to win over American audiences, or studio pressure, or just because they were the best auditioned actors these right roles? and also, were they the 1st choice for the roles. NOTE: I love Sam Rockwell, Mos Def and Zooey Deschanel, so these are not to be taken critically.

What would Douglas think... (3, Interesting)

danhorn (876115) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236028)

As an enormous Hitchhikers fan and Douglas Adams friend, I'm curious how you feel he would view the movie in it's final rendition. Since it's not about the accuracy to the books but about the intent, spirit and truth to Douglas' vision bracketed by the financial and operational limitations of a movie in todays economy would Douglas smile and have another drink or just get drunk? He worked for many years to get this on film and now that it is ready for release, as a friend and knowing him as long as you did, how do you think he'd feel you did?

"Us vs Them", a LotR Redux (5, Interesting)

TodPunk (843271) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236030)

What does the "movie-first" experience have to offer that the "book-first" does not? Or is this movie really just for the geeks that are already in love with the tale, and my wife will just think it's another of my quirks?

Goals for the Film (4, Interesting)

grungebox (578982) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236043)

Did the studio execs want a flashy blockbuster like Men In Black, or were they projecting for a lower box office total with the production (and thus not as willing to pony up big effects dollars)?

How much was added/changed after DNA'a death ? (5, Interesting)

ygor (662265) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236052)

Consider: Every "incarnation" of tHHGttG has had variations such that no two are alike. Not including this one, Douglas Adams had a direct hand from start to finish of each version, so one cannot make remarks about accuracy or authenticity.

While DNA started this one, he was taken from us before its completion.

SO, my question is : Which "divergences" in this version were done (by/under the guidance of) Douglas Adams and which (if any) were done by other folks after his passing.

FWIW, I plan to ignore the critics and go see this film with a child-at-Christmas expectation. It should be great Eye Candy if nothing else.

Question (5, Interesting)

pgpckt (312866) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236054)

Could you please respond to the review located at , in particular rebutting the parts that suggest the movie is poor in quality, is a travisty, or is otherwise unworthy of the name HHGTTG?

Re:Question (1, Funny)

Holi (250190) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236169)

Oh yeah thats a great question.

"Can you please tell us why your movie is not crap."

How to choose a source... (4, Interesting)

jd (1658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236070)

There are many, many versions of "Hitch Hiker's Guide" out there. There's the radio series, the books, the TV series, the computer game, the tea towl(!) and even a vinyl record version.

In the end, how did you choose, from this range of sources, what sort of Hitch Hiker's Guide you actually wanted to make?

The essence (5, Interesting)

rfernand79 (643913) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236073)

To me, the essence of the Hitchhiker's Guide lies in the unpredictable turn of events that Douglas sets up to the reader. From a little girl with the answer to Vogon poetry, leaping to dolphins and mice. How do you retain these elements in such a straightforward media as the movies? How did you manage to "guide" the viewer without loosing the "in this page, for something completely different, we will talk about dolphins"?

How did Martin Freeman become Arthur Dent? (5, Interesting)

timothy (36799) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236138)

This is true: two years ago I was watching "The Office" at a co-worker's house (I'd never watched a whole episode before), and realized that Martin Freeman struck me -- out of the blue -- as exactly the way I would have expected a real-life Arthur Dent to look, gesture and sound, right down to the mooning for dawn, and the look of frustrated annoyance that he occasionally beams at (or rather just past) Gareth.

At the time (having no head for celebrity news), I didn't realize he'd been cast already as Arthur, and figured some other, well-meaning but inferior actor had been cast in that role. "It's too bad that they're already shooting 'Hitchhikers,'" I said, "because that guy *is* Arthur! Anyone else will pale in comparison to the flesh-and-blood Arthur who is playing Tim in this bizarre English-type sit-com!" My better-informed co-worker let me in on the good news, and my casting prowess was confirmed (to me, anyhow).

However, I'm curious how he came to the attention of the film's makers -- or was it vice versa? Was it because of his role in The Office, or was it his idea, or what? Was he already an Adams fan, or was this just happenstance?


Who takes the glory or the fall? (2, Interesting)

El_Smack (267329) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236140)

Does any one person have final creative say on a movie? Can the editors take a film and chop it up as they see fit thereby changing, for better or worse, the movie? Can the Executive Producer tell the director to change a character the EP doesn't like?

Whose opinion matters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236143)

Yours, or your audience's?

From my experiences in talking to h2g2 fans, the majority of your audience wants more fidelity with the book and existing broadcasts - two headed Zaphod, white Ford, less American-ized.

I think of existing British humor such as Monty Python that if had been American-ized just wouldn't be the same.

United States audiences (2, Interesting)

shadowlight1 (77239) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236144)

How well do you think this movie will go over with Hitchhiker newbies and United States audiences as compared to a "native" British audience? On a similar vein, did you go out of your way to make it accessible or concentrate on autenticity?

Large grain? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236147)

Wouldn't it be a very SMALL grain of salt? Or do I not understand the analogy?

Motivation (5, Interesting)

Viking Coder (102287) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236148)

Peter Jackson reportedly said that he got the inspiration to work on Lord of the Rings when he finally realized that no one else was going to do it. What motivated you to get involved with Hitchhiker's? And secondly, what project would you love to see someone do?

... the TV show and the Movie ... (4, Interesting)

ninjagin (631183) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236176)

I was a big fan of the early 80s BBC TV show and enjoyed the characters in it. When I think of Ford Prefect and Arthur Dent I think of the those guys. As you were making the film, how much of an influence was the television production on the film, particularly with regard to the casting and portrayal of the characters but also with regard to production design?


The Spirit of Douglas Adams (3, Interesting)

narcolepticjim (310789) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236177)

With Douglas Adams gone, one of the difficulties you most certainly faced was balancing your ideas for the film with loyalty to his work.

Without Adams to serve as a reality check and oracle for all things Hitchhiker, how did you divine what he would have enjoyed, recommended, etc., without forfeiting or neglecting your own ideas?

Preparation (1)

CrazyDwarf (529428) | more than 9 years ago | (#12236184)

How did you prepare yourself mentally for this project? Did you study the collective works of Douglas Adams to get a feel for his work, or did you have your own ideas about how to develop the film and about what were the important points of the story?

Can Deep Thought run Doom 3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12236188)

Well can it? And if yes, what's the fps in highest detail and highest resolution?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?