The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy Review

Overall Rating

Largely in the spirit of Adams' work.

Too much dialogue was cut.

Zaphod's second head is woefully dealt with.

Douglas Adams must be sitting up in heaven, feet hanging over the edge of a cloud somewhere, harp slung happily over his should, sipping at a beer, generally happy with how those left behind completed his movie.

Or not. After all, Adams was an atheist, so maybe he's not even looking. Either way, after so many years and so much hot air, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has finally hit the big screen and for the most part it's worthy of the name.

First off, however, the obligatory disclaimers. Yes, I read the books, or at least the original (actual) trilogy. Yes, I own the BBC TV series on DVD - dodgy effects and all. But no, I've never really tracked down the radio series - I'm not that big of a fan. In that respect I wasn't going into the theatre looking for a copy of the books or, for that matter, the TV series. Instead I was expecting something with Adams' penchant for changes, yet something that remained undeniably Hitchhiker's.

The movie starts off in largely familiar territory. After a slightly repositioned Guide entry about dolphins, and an astoundingly catchy tune, we have Arthur Dent (Freeman) finding his home about to be demolished for a motorway bypass. Ford (Mos Def) arrives with beer and peanuts, rather successfully, if temporarily, deflecting the workmen from the task. Ford of course is an alien researcher for the Guide, stuck on Earth for many years. Sadly, the update from "Harmless" to "Mostly Harmless" is cut from the movie, leaving us with no payoff from Ford's research.

In fact, quite a lot of dialogue, much of it the wonderfully colourful and often tangential nature that made Adams' work so enthralling, is gone. Familiar exchanges have been sliced, and Guide entries have been shortened. Arthur's debate with Prosser now consists of a couple of short sentences. The Babelfish entry no longer references God. This kind of editing is sustained throughout the movie, leaving fans - even casual ones like myself - feeling as if somebody really didn't quite get the point.

Not only Arthur's home is scheduled for demolition, but the entire planet discovers they too are about to lose their homes as a fleet of Vogon space ships arrives to do the job. These creations from the Jim Henson workshops are quite remarkable. They look both fantastic and cheap at one and the same time. They fill a role that would have been ruined by use of pur CGI Vogons, and do it admirably in an 80s BBC production sense - if that BBC production had been able to utilise about ten times the budget. Simply put, they work and they work extremely well for the rest of the movie. These Vogons are not callous or evil, but they are the epitome of bureacracy and paper-shuffling - the exact kind of people Adams' had it in for in the first place.

Hitching a ride, of course, on the Vogon space craft, Ford and Arthur are soon discovered and subjected to the torture of Vogon poetry. More disappointment here in that the Guide entry for Vogon poetry is restricted to a pure voice-over during the reading. The Guide shines when it is on screen, such as the entries about, well, the Guide itself, and Vogons. The updated, yet deliberately understated style is wonderful without being twee, and Fry does great service as the voice.

Once thrown out, the two are inadvertantly "rescued" by a stolen space craft - half-inched by Zaphod Beeblebrox (Rockwell, playing dumb). Here begins the real adventure, and the main departures from the previous incarnations of the Guide.

British comedy has a history of being mutilated at the hands of the American studios. Often the very things that made it great are taken, surgically removed, and replaced with something that is largely unfunny and a shadow of its former self. Fortunately for us Hitchhikers isn't quite like that.

Yes, much of the dialogue has been sadly cut. Some of the great lines oft-quoted by fans are simply not there, for reasons which are hard to understand. There's an entirely new sub-plot - revolving around Zaphod's rival for the presidency and a kidnapped Trillian - added instead. It changes the flavour of the movie away from that of the books and the TV series. Yet you can feel Adams' hand behind the change, even if it feels distant and passed through a committee. Largely, it works. Sometimes it doesn't.

Visually, the film is a treat. The effects are good, and often subtle, in a way George Lucas simply doesn't comprehend. There are little prizes for the fans buried throughout the movie, from the old Marvin having a cameo of his own through to the appearance of Douglas Adams' head itself in tribute to the man who made it all possible. The Vogons, as mentioned, are brilliant in capturing the kind of red-tape loving creature they should be. I've seen much criticism of the new Marvin, but frankly Marvin works. The idea of this Marvin being a psychologically flawed attempt at a "plastic pal who's fun to be with" is easily swallowed.

Among the most glaring of flaws is Zaphod's second head, which is given a hideously awful incarnation and subsequently sidelined for most of the movie. Clearly even the makers knew just how bad their method of dealing with the head really was.

Acting wise, the cast do perfectly acceptable jobs with their alloted characters. Freeman works Arthur's new development path well. Mos Def is a surprisingly decent Ford, even with many of his best lines excised. Rockwell is fine, though the Zaphod he is given to work with is rather too much Homer Simpson. No longer cool and froody, Zaphod spends much of the movie being stupid. Deschanel as the love interest is perfect, though she spends too little time on screen.

As for the plot, I've seen it described as a mess. It isn't. It is, however, full of contrivance. The entire Humma Kavula sub-plot seems unnecessary and put in place purely to achieve two things - the removal of Zaphod's second head (which the writers and effects people seemed incapable of dealing with) and the set up for a funny, but hugely contrived, sequence regarding a certain gun. There are other changes to the original, as there should be, but largely the movie is recognisable as Hitchhikers, and carries with it Adams' unmistakable stamp. While he may not have approved every detail it seems certain that this, mainly, is the movie he wanted to make - mistakes and all.

There is, however, one completely unforgivable scene. Right at the end of the Magrathean plot, just before our heroes board the Heart of Gold, there's a sequence which is truly hideous. It's the "happy ending" in all its glory. It's an atrociously sickening concept seeingly aimed at making things "better". Yet it's a robotic, shallow, and creepy concept if you think about it. Either way, it should never have been. Of all the changes, of all the cuts, this was the one part of the film where I was left stunned, thinking why, why, why?

However overall, Hitchhikers is not the books. It is not the TV series (though it does have the same haunting opening score - that brought a strange shivering to my skin). It could certainly have been better, but thankfully it could also have been much, much worse. It is Adams - albeit watered down for the international audience. It is funny. And it is almost entirely unlike a bad movie. Almost.

7/10.