The same problem seems to be taking place with the new Battlestar Galactica, and I don't relate to that sort of complaint at all. I'm a huge fan of Douglas Adams (which is why I was The Electric Monk for the Penguicon 1.0 masquerade) but never watched Battlestar Galactica before the new series. I don't care at all that Starbuck is now a woman (for instance), I just judge the new work entirely on its own. This infuriates Bill Putt who, like so many SF fans, is a scriptural literalist exhibiting an inexplicable fetish with returning to the fountainheads.
He doesn't mind the changes in HGttG, because you have to take into account with Hitchhikers that it has never been consistent from the radio script to the BBC TV version to the book in any case. And that was under the control of its creator. So changing it is, paradoxically, in keeping with it. The changes that were made were concessions to the format which they had to work with, and in most cases were improvements on the original(s), such as the Heart of Gold and Marvin. I've been drawing Douglas Adams fan art for years, all of which I believe would have served very well in this film, and yet my hat is off to the designer.
I did, in fact, watch a few episodes of the original Battlestar Galactica. It was as awful as everyone says. I haven't had the chance to see the new series, but I'm told by friends whose taste I trust that it's quite good. I'd like to see it, sometime.
I agree that Hitchhiker's has altered in its various forms, but because Adams was involved in the creation of most of them, the same absurdity combined with weird logic still shines through. I liked the last version I saw (I think it was the BBC version, rented on DVD). That struck me as more faithful to the books plotwise, but this movie looks more the way I've always imagined the Hitchhiker (model of the) universe. (Except for the exterior of the Heart of Gold, and Marvin). :-)
P.S. It's Deep Thought, not Deep Throat!
Ooops. Talk about a reverse Freudian slip! Fixed now. Thanks.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
He doesn't mind the changes in HGttG, because you have to take into account with Hitchhikers that it has never been consistent from the radio script to the BBC TV version to the book in any case. And that was under the control of its creator. So changing it is, paradoxically, in keeping with it. The changes that were made were concessions to the format which they had to work with, and in most cases were improvements on the original(s), such as the Heart of Gold and Marvin. I've been drawing Douglas Adams fan art for years, all of which I believe would have served very well in this film, and yet my hat is off to the designer.
P.S. It's Deep Thought, not Deep Throat!
(no subject)
I agree that Hitchhiker's has altered in its various forms, but because Adams was involved in the creation of most of them, the same absurdity combined with weird logic still shines through. I liked the last version I saw (I think it was the BBC version, rented on DVD). That struck me as more faithful to the books plotwise, but this movie looks more the way I've always imagined the Hitchhiker (model of the) universe. (Except for the exterior of the Heart of Gold, and Marvin). :-)
Ooops. Talk about a reverse Freudian slip! Fixed now. Thanks.