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

hmm I never much carred for the animated version....especialy that really weird folk singer they have going on in the background of the whole thing....I think we are talking about the same thing anyway


()

Ahhh...well. There have always been split sides on the animated version.

what fun would it be if we were all on the same side

()

Throws flan...

*not sure where the is getting thrown so decides to duck*

()

*ducks the just in case, then adds a or two to the fray*

The Nazgul were slightly better in the animated version (although, as I have pointed out, the one's in Peter Jackson's film are still magnificent!). I just found them slightly more creepy, especially when they "change"

Everything else is much better in Jackson's film, especially the hobbits. And sorry, but I think Viggo Mortensen was superb as Strider and better than John Hurt!

Heathen !!!

I've actually never read the books or seen the cartoon. The closes I've been is reading the Hobbit as a comic But the movie was great. And I liked the Strider character, though I could really have lived without the "Let's hunt some orc" comment. He might as well have said what it really meant. Sadly when I saw the movie I was too aware I was in the cinema so I couldn't get sucked in properly. And they had a break in the movie which didn't make it any better. I think I will have to go watch it again.

The scenography was also really great. And the hobbits were quite hobbish. I think Balrog was stupid though. You get build up to some sort of cthulu like being dwelling under the Earth. And then you get a black troll on fire that runs straight into a cliff. I liked the rest of that scene though, the whole shooting arrows thing was good. But the orcs wasn't very orc-like to me.

Strider is much better in the animation. John Hurt just uses his voice to its ful potential.

*ahem* I think its my business when I'm good or not! I *still* haven't seen the animation (sorry Zarniwoop) so I can't really have an opinion.

hmmm I was talking to a friend about the movie and he seems to think that strider (the one from the movie not the one posting on H2G2) did not look reagal enough...my argument was basicly it is not until latter in the story when he goes from the grungy ranger human outcastlooking thingy bobber to king material...so do you think this actor will clean up good sort of speak

()

thats the point tho. hes not suposed to look regal! hes bin living in ditches & stuff for the past so many years, facing deadly perils et al...
read appendix A in the book if u want more info!

so you agree with my argument then
so the question would be do you think this actor will beable to portray the other side of the charactor

(

We'll just have to wait and see, won't we.

i think he will

why does next x-mass have to be so far away

()

Hadn't seen it when thread started but have now so my tuppence worth





Sit far back - we were too close and the large action scenes were very hard to take in.

Aragon casting inspired, just as I pictured him - close ups of him, Frodo and Gandalf show that "Eyes are the windows of the soul"

15+ years since I last read book so I didn't notice "liberies" re-reading now and can see them and agree with earlier comments on Gimli/Legolas relationship not being developed, Why did they not show the blindfolding debate? This shows well the old animosity between elves and dwarfs.

All the elves were "a bit camp" to quote a friend - ideal - everyone knows elves are as camp as they come

The best bit was when a friend of mine at the end, asked if it was the interval, she thought this as it hadn't "ended" we had to break the news that it was only part 1 of 3 to her.

And as to the effects, I almost got vertigo/dizzy during some shots, like the one from the top of Isegard tower thing with Gandalf all the way to the forges etc underground.

I'm also glad they skimmed the first bit, all that mucking around in the shire, I always skip the first 200 pages in the book (though not this re-read)

I'm also glad they have given Pippin and Merry some more character, always felt they were a bit bland in the book and almost interchangable.

Well that's my say anyway. Oh I thought it was the best film I have seen for 10+ years

CH

But Merry and Pippin were only comic relief in the film. They were much better developed in the book. Merry was a tad more intelligent and knowledgeable, and Pippin was bumbling lad whose curiosity got him into trouble. I wouldn't have known which was which in the film if they hadn't kept Pippin's rock tossing (or skeleton tossing, as it were).

Merry and Pippin aren't really characters until they meet up with Treebeard in the Two Towers... There's still some development to do.

On the subject of Aragorn - they chose their actor well. Strider is far from being regal - when it's revealed that he's the heir, it comes as a surprise. When it's time for him to rule, I think he'll clean up nicely.

There was some confusion/discussion between me and hubbiness about the orcs, trolls, goblins, and the Balrog. The Balrog is the shadow-creature that the dwarves awakened in the Mines of Moria. The trolls and goblins are ancient creatures, along with the wolves. But the orcs used to be elves, but are horribly changed? I thought that in the book, orcs came from a cross between goblins and elves - or something like that. In the movie, they're transformed elves. I've read the series several times, but for some reason, this detail just didn't stick with me. (Guess I should go read it again!)

I noticed that Gimli and Legolas weren't blindfolded in Lothlorien, and I was a little disappointed. I was willing to sacrifice a little plot detail, though - you could tell that the movie was at the limits of attention span for those people who were interested, rather than avid fans. (Anybody that wants to show a movie to an audience for the purposes of judging its success, should tape the crowd noise, and then match it up with the movie and see where the crowd gets louder.)

While a few details were missed, the spirit of the story came across - I told somebody the other day that it's very much like seeing a Shakespeare play performed. The characters were saying the same things that they say in the book, but with emotion.

The tower of Saruman was better than I had ever imagined, and that's the first time I've said that about a movie adaptation of a book.