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

I found I understood more when i read the book, there was some stufff that I haddn't realised, and is probably why a lot of the poeple i know dislike the film, I watched it again after reading the book and I enjoyed it a lot more.

planet of the apes
the 68 film is great and has a really good social commentary, everything about it is good, the original novel is quite different and is the end is as shocking as the different film end, so I'd say that the 68 film was a very translation of the novel, the 2001 film aint worth the time of day by comparison, its neither one or the other or something completely new.

I watched 2001 without reading the book the first time, at my boyfriend's insistance; he said it was way more amusing without knowing what was going on, and made the movie seem really drug-induced... then I read the book, and watched the film again and I thought the film was BRILLIANT! Once you understand the full story from the book, the movie is an absolutely wonderful translation... at least that's my opinion.

As for Planet of the Apes, I haven't read the book? When I went to see the new movie I did NOT get the ending, so we went to the bookstore and were looking for the book, but we found like four Planet of the Apes books...? Who wrote the first one, anyway?

I agree with what's been said, also, that is the movie will always disappoint at least a few people because everybody pictures something different while they're reading... I try to always read the book first, so I can imagine it my way first...

year 2001 was a lot better after reading the book, now i'm reading 2061, after having read 2001, 2010, and 3001 is next

planet of the apes is by pierre boulle, and you would need a english translation, I got mine off the internet,

the end of the 2001 film was terrible, it ruined the film

books and radio is always good because the pictures are so much better

the ending of 2001 the book was the same as 2001 the movie!

and btw. Arthur C. Clarke wrote the book AFTER he and Kubrick had finished the script for the movie! so, what you really should be asking is, was the book as good as the movie!!!

sorry, i've had this conversation before, and it irritates me.



"No matter where you go, there you are."

I've read 2001, 2010, 2061 and 3001 and seen the two films... the thing that piques my interest is that the monolith thing is never entirely resolved... and I wonder if Clarke meant it tob e that way, or if he kept putting it off and then couldn't find a good way to explain it all? I love the books though... the 2061 movie was way less "drug induced" as my dear boyfriend would say... no psychedelic sequence!

sorry i meant the end of the 2001 version of planet of the apes,

I thought the 2001 a space oddessey book was written ast the same time?

what is the second 2001 film like I've seen the dvd but have held off from buying it

Stanley Kubrick wrote the 2001 film at the same time as Arthur C Clarke wrote the book. There were changes made to both as this process continued, due to the fact that the two men were in constant communication. Both the film and the book were adapted from a short script that Clarke wrote for a BBC competition (it never placed). Kubrick was supposed to be credited as the co-author of the book but in the end turned down the credit. Check out the 'trivia' section for this film at imdb.com for information.