Look. I know it's not going to be the same. I KNOW it might not end up being very good at all.

But that cover looks RIGHT.

And I am excited about it.

WTF?

You just can't do that. You can't write another Douglas Adams book, but not by Douglas Adams. Write your own series if you're any good, you chiseler.

It was announced/commissioned some time ago.

http://community.livejournal.com/zz9/36070.html

I've never read Hitchhiker's Guide. Should I? It has never really appealed to me. The people I know who rave about it are generally cunts.

That's an excellent line to end on to make sure you don't get any replies. I shall have to use it myself some time.

Haha I'm referring to a few people I know in the real world. They're cunts, and they love it. I'm not saying there's definitely a pattern! I'm genuinely asking you lot, because you're not cunts.

Yeah, but Adams most certainly wasn't one.

I'd certainly give it a go and make up your own mind; he has a lovely turn of phrase.

Or maybe pick up the radio series (has been re-released on CD) and listen to that; half of the pleasure for me is the superlative delivery of Peter Jones, as The Book; Simon Jones, as Arthur Dent . . . etc.

I first stumbled upon Hitchhikers on radio 4 back in the late 70s/early 80s, so I may be biased towards the radio series.

The books are superb, with the exception of the fifth one which is absolutely hideous.

The third and fourth one aren't exactly mind-blowing either, frankly, although both have enough moments to make them worth reading, I guess. To get the best of the thing, I'd suggest buying the original radio series, and then maybe the first two books and leave it at that. (The Infocom game's also pretty good, but absurdly tricky.)

As for this new book, I'm not too fussed. Given how Adams left the series and how utterly miserable Mostly Harmless was, due to his life at the time, I'm actually thinking it could be a good thing to move the series on. However, without Adams around, and no notes regarding how he'd have taken the story on, it all seems a little pointless.

I love the third and (especially) fourth books, but I don't give a rat's cock for the radio series.

I rather enjoyed Mostly Harmless, bleak though it was, and am currently taking the radio series at a leisurely pace.

Jane Horrocks as Fenchurch is great casting.

The fourth one is my favourite by far.

downloading the 3rd and 4th book as a podcast surely made some great cycle trips

I liked the first one, but not the rest. It's funny and iconic, so I'd say read it, I wouldn't say it's vitally important though. You'll find copies lurking in charity shops if you don't want to spend too much on it.

What Stu said. EXACTLY what Stu said.

Ah, he's finished it then?

I can think of worse people to handle it than Colfer, but I still hated him on principle when this was announced. What a bunch of pathetic cunts. I hope gypsies shit on their coffins.

Hmmmm maybe I just read it at the right time in my life to appreciate it, namely that I was a bit fucking miserable too (as Adams was when he wrote it).

There's a sharp bleakness about it, and it's funny too.

What you said.

I didn't particularly enjoy it the first time I read it (probably too young to appreciate it), and was indifferent to it a few years back. Read it around Christmas last year and thoroughly enjoyed it.

I know I'm risking an eternal ban-mnation for saying this, but I actually quite liked the Hitchhiker's film. Yes, I'm aware it excised bits and bobs from the book and TV adaptation, but as a film in its own right I thought it was moderately enjoyable.

It's weird to think that - despite hitting #1 in the box office on both sides of the pond, it still has that feeling of "underrated"ness about it.


(With all due apologies.)

I started reading the first book some considerable time ago but didn't really like it. I loved the radio series and tv series though.

Mostly Harmless > So Long...

Because So Long.. is a load of old bollocks.

They excised the jokes, though. Odd choice.

But..."So Long...." was worth reading ENTIRELY for God's final message to creation. A message that makes so much sense and does indeed - as Arthur Dent pointed out - make you go "oh well, that's alright then".

The one good thing about "Mostly Harmless" is that I got to meet Adams at a book signing when it was released. Let's just say he wasn't exactly a "People person". He clearly, demonstrably didn't want to be there. No eye contact with customers, and he didn't say a bleedin' word to anyone.

The nicest famous peeps I've met are Terry Pratchett and Stephen Fry, doncherknow.

I wouldn't say it's under-rated; it is however a clear 73% film.

It's about as good as it could have been.

The majority of the changes were down to Adams himself though.

The thing is, the film came out a few years after his death, so I expect they didn't want to entirely throw out the new bits, whether they thought they worked or not.

And a lot of the essential stuff was filmed but not used. More Guide entries and that are on the DVD.

I loved the casting in the main; Arthur was perfect casting, Trillian was stunning, Ford was surprisingly great. Zaphod, hm, a bit less so, but not too bad.

The film did need another half hour or so to work properly though; the TV series was three hours in all, and not much faster paced.

I find it easy to believe that douglas adams was an alright bloke, but not when forced to sit and pretend to be nice to hundreds of strangers. I would probably be a right moody bastard as well, not out of contempt for my fans or whatever, but just because I'd rather be left alone to watch a film and have a sandwich, thanks.

I thought Arthur was immensely lazy casting. It was so obvious as to be *too* obvious.
I agree about Trillian, but that's just because I love Zooey Deschanel.

As for the books, I preferred The Meaning of Liff myself.

Edit: Yes, I'm aware it's not a Hitchhiker book.

I and a chum went to his office and interviewed him for a school paper when I was about ten or eleven. We were there an hour or so, and were not offered a seat at any point.

Entirely worth it though.

(I remember his computer had some kind of joke about Kit-Kats as the screensaver. I do not remember the joke.)

Yeah, Adams played about with the story with every iteration - the books were different from the LPs, which were different from the radio show, and so on.

I can well believe the film would have been completely different once more - I think the jarring thing for me was the completely different ending point.

Although the whole Golgafrinchan 'B' Ark/Earth prehistory story line makes for a downbeat ending, so I'm not surprised there.

I think the fact that Trillian loved Arthur was possibly the most pathetic part. That and "I don't need it; I'm a woman", just to get amateur feminists going. I mean, Trillian doesn't even LIKE Arthur, that's kind of the whole point of their relationship.

I hated the film. Loved both TV and Radio shows.