The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005)
Here's the deal: This film version
of Douglas Adams' seminal novel, the first in what
is now amusingly called a five-part trilogy, isn't
something that fans of the work are going to exalt.
In fact, many of them will quite rightly hate it.
But it is amusing and nice enough to win the author's
work new fans and that, sadly, may be its biggest
benefit. One wishes that the film would blow us all
away, fans and neophytes alike. But in this day of
Hollywood films by committee, such an idea is little
more than a pipe dream. This is a film to take the
tweeners to, a fun Hollywood sci-fi goof that just
might make your twelve-year-old son or daughter want
to pick up the novel. That, at least, would be something.
The film was written by Adams (with
kiddie movie scripter Karey Kirkpatrick), based on
his original radio play which eventually became a
novel and a 1981 BBC miniseries (a better version
of the novel than this film) among other incarnations.
Adams wont seemed to be to change up the story for
each derivative and the author, who died in 2001,
did so in his script for this film. But his changes
are largely lame and do nothing to add to the cleverness
of the work. The shovels that hit people in the head
on the planet Vogon is so stupid that one thinks Adams'
must have been pretty sick and near death when he
came up with such drivel. Likewise the inclusion of
a character called Humma Kavula. (Get it?) This lame
character addition not only adds nothing to the story
but also gives us a plot point that is totally unresolved
in the film (leading us to believe that a sequel is
inevitable).
At least the film does get some
things right. The three most important segments of
the book; the Babblefish, the whale and the geranium,
and the introduction to the "Hitchhiker's Guide" are
all here. Adams' most important work is here and the
scenes that play out best, as always, are the scenes
that are lifted directly from the book. The "Guide"
is done as simple computer animation and this is most
effective and proper.
The biggest flaw in the film is
the casting and the approach. The latter finds the
piece being very "British" and taking on that sort
of Monty Pythonesque feeling to comedy. This is most
obvious in the opening credits song "So Long and Thanks
for All the Fish," which is just abysmal and not silly
at all. This "British" sort of approach doesn't help
sell the quirky and goofy humor that tries to overpower
the film when it later takes on a more Hollywood feel.
Why not set the film in America? That would be unique
and different. Why not go all out for Hollywood style
sci-fi humor (other than the fact that it hasn't ever
sold. Even Mel Brooks "Spaceballs" was rather unimpressive
when it came to grosses in the 80's. It has, of course,
become a cult classic of late).
Anyway, the real problem is the
casting. Mos Def as Ford Prefect will eventually come
to be considered the worst casting decision in the
21st century. Def is totally out of his element here
and seems as lost and confused as the audience on
many occasions. He's not witty and he certainly has
no timing or delivery to speak of. His mumbling gets
irritating before he and Arthur Dent even leave Earth.
Prefect was a smarmy, smug, and somewhat pedantic
character in all other incarnations, Def plays him
as a subdued idiot, a likeable goofball. Apparently
Prefect found Ritalin in the 90's.
Another big problem is Zooey Deschanel
as Trillian. I have loved this actress in numerous
film. She's fantastic in "Elf." But here she seems
totally spaced out. Her make-up and costumes are horrible
and her face looks awful. Here eyes are wild. If Prefect
is on downers, then so is Trillian. She apparently
hooked up with that fat ass Rush Limbaugh and found
a load of pain killers before Earth exploded.
And let's not even talk about Sam
Rockewell as Zaphod, Stephen Fry as the narrator,
Alan Rickman as the voice of Marvin or Bill Nighy
as Sartibartfast. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
is an awesome work of art. The five novels, which
are collected together in many available anthology
books, are perhaps the most important works in the
area of Secular Humanism and Existentialism to ever
come in to existence. The Hollywood adaptation needed
a better director and a stronger studio behind it
to make it work. It occurred to me while watching
the film that the perfect director for the adaptation
of the books would be Richard Linklater, whose ruminations
on the meaning of existence have produced several
amazing films including the essential cinematic thesis
on the subject: "Waking
Life." Another great choice would be Spike Jonez,
who was, in fact, at one time, attached to direct
this film. (He is thanked in the end credits). Jonez
sadly had to drop out and suggest Garth Jennings,
a music video director who works with another guy
in a company called Hammer and Tongs. Jennings is
definitely not up to the task and allowing a freshman
filmmaker such a marvelous work as "The Hitchhiker's
Guide" for their debut film is one of the biggest
mistakes imaginable. But it's only the beginning of
the errors that plague the film and turn what could
have been a masterpiece into substandard Hollywood
fare. Adams has never seemed mediocre until now.
Notes
Also with Martin Freeman, John Malkovich,
and the voice of Helen Mirren.
The film has been in developmental
hell since the 80's. At one time Ivan Reitman was
going to make the film with Bill Murray and Dan Akyroyd
but decided on "Ghostbusters" instead.
Jay Roach, who was at one time going
to direct the film before getting sidelined by the
Fockers
is credited as a producer as is Adams. He gave the
script to Spike Jonez who eventually passed it on
to Jennings. Roach was going to cast Jim Carrey as
Zaphod.
The first end credit in the film
reads: "For Douglas."
Viewed in Austin in April 2005.
