h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well, I am planning to finish it, I suppose. Do I just have to write about the tone? That confuses me quite a lot but I'll see what I can do, I guess.

Sorry Niwt - you must feel I have hounded you

We were just going through the 'sleeping' entries in PR and as you are a regular author then I knew they wouldn't be abandoned, but perhaps forgotten!

I have never seen the film, so have to wait for Mikey to come and chat about the tone

Hi, Newt!

Do you read film reviews in the newspapers (or online, for that matter)? One of the differences between that style of writing and this, I think, is that yours is basically a play-by-play description of some of the events of the movie, while film reviews try to give an idea of the basic plot, but also of what the experience of seeing the film is like. Personally, I find the latter more useful -- if I haven't seen a film yet, I'm not looking for a play-by-play, I'm looking for info that will tell me if I'm likely to enjoy the film or not.

Does that make sense?

Okay, I get that, and I would write a whole lot of other stuff in a normal review, but as I said at the start of the thread, because this was for the guide I didn't want to put too much stuff in that could be debatable etc. Um I could add some more stuff or remove from PR and try and shove it somewhere else, I guess.

I don't think EG entries have to avoid all opinion entirely -- we certainly have quite a few in the EG already that do not. I just think it's important to:

* make it clear when you're stating facts, and when you're mentioning an opinion

* back opinions up with facts -- i.e., cite specific examples in the film that led to an opinion

* be well-balanced -- try to incorporate other opinions than only your own

I do think it is difficult, however, to write an entry on the average popular film like this and have it still be interesting and useful, and also meet all the guidelines. It's one of the reasons I generally discourage entries that are about a single book or film.

I suppose it is possible to say that 'xyz can lead the viewer to feel A or B but when K happens the viewer often feels D'

Thanks guys!

Based on that, I actually had a marvellous brainwave of more stuff to write when I was brushing my teeth...hopefully I'll be able to remember it when I come to write it, probably tomorrow (as always) and that you think it's better

I don't believe it! That was 4 weeks ago! Procrastinating Award goes to Niwt!

,laugh> does that mean you have done it then?!!!

Oh no. I was planning it for 2006, but it's looking like it might have to be delayed another year.

Well, I've done something at least, but probably not enough.

And now we await the return of Niwt

Still working on this?

You could get it accepted by next week if you worked on it this weekend... hint hint...

cheers...what more do I have to do?

I don't really know. I think it's good as it is. Does anyone else have an opinion?

I've left my opinion repeatedly throughout the thread, and it really hasn't changed.

Looking at other EG Entries on films, this is as good if not better than most of those, so as far as I'm concerned is quite enough for a concise description of an enjoyable film.
HF

Come on Niwt, don't get disheartened about this one, I still think it's a grand introduction to a nifty little film. Do the icing on this and let's boot it into the EG
HF

Well, Mikey does have a point - it is certainly more an analysis than an enticing review, but it depends on one's view of the Guide's place in this sort of thing.

One mistake I spotted:

"bad plots, scrip and acting" - missing 't' in 'script'.