Friday, May 20, 2022

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

Ken Hanke started his review out by saying, “I have a kind of love-hate relationship with this film version of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, and no, my feelings about it aren’t grounded in any special fondness for the source material, since I only heard a couple episodes of the radio series and saw a few minutes of the BBC-TV film, and never read the books.”

Hanke continues, “My problem is based more on my desire to like a film that dares to be outside the realm of mainstream Hollywood product, which this one clearly does. Yet the movie tends to get in the way of that desire, or at least I think it does. When I first saw it last Thursday night, my reaction was that it was mildly amusing. Seeing bits and pieces of it again — and getting further away from it — I’m inclined to think it’s better than just mildly amusing, but that the film still misses being really successful.”

Maybe “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” released in 2005, just tries too hard. Or maybe it lacks the edge it would have had if it had been made 20 years prior, satire would have seemed innovative. The strange thing is that the satire hasn’t lost its importance – far from it. If anything, the film’s criticizes at humanity’s pride that humans are the end-all, be-all of creation, its mocking ability about religion, and its depiction of a vacuous president of the galaxy (“I discovered you could only be president if you had half a brain”) who signs an order for the destruction of the Earth when he thinks he’s responding to a request for an autograph, are even more relevant now.

However, as presented int eh film, these points seem a little powerless. They feel less rebellious attempts than harmless squibs. The result is a type of laughing notice to the mess that surrounds us, without any real crime. And satire without crime – or at least anger, is a little beside the point.

Obviously, the submissive attitude was part and plot of writer Douglas Adams’ original blueprint. It’s just that the concept itself now seems almost old-fashioned, and its friendly good humor somehow out of place. That doesn’t make the film bad, it just makes it into a kind of naughty period film – a strange position for a sci-fi film to be in.

For those who may not know, the story is about Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman), who is taken away by his best friend, Ford Perfect (Mos Def), seconds before the Earth is destroyed to make way for a hyperspace bypass. Turns out that Ford is an alien making his way through the universe with the help of “the best-selling book of the great Ursa Major Publishing Company, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” and he’s hitchhiked them out of harm’s way. This is where the adventure starts.

It’s a great foundation, but to where? When looking at the story, it doesn’t go anywhere you haven’t been before. The enjoyment and liking of the film are in the details of that adventure and the universe where it takes place. We may leave earth, but we haven’t left bureaucracy behind. If anything, it’s even rose as practiced by the Vogons. (Everything would appear innovative if it hadn’t been done already on screen, in a little modified way, as showing the afterlife in Tim Burton’s “Beetlejuice.”) Nor have we left any of the irregularities of Earth. They’ve just been turned into beings that make them look rather idiotic – for example, a religion that works on the belief that the universe was sneezed into existence and therefore replaces “Achoo” for “Amen.”

These traits – along with casual irrationalities like a dolphin production number “So Long and Thanks for All the Fish” – keep the film going, even if it never seems completely important. The knowingly cult-movie cast also helps, especially Alan Rickman as the voice of the clinically depressed robot, Marvin, and Bill Nighy as Slartibartast (“I told you my name didn’t matter”). Martin Freeman makes a perfect protagonist for the tone of the story, while Mos Def is an excellent Ford Perfect, and Zooey Deschanel is as good as she always is. Sam Rockwell is maybe a little much as President Zaphot Beeblebrox, but since the character spends most of the movie depending on a “lemon juice-powered brain,” maybe that’s understandable.

Everything adds up to a movie that’s very easy to like, but somehow not so easy to love – regardless of how hard you try.

My brother read the book, so I cannot tell you how closely this film follows the book. However, I still think this is a fun movie for everyone to see. If you haven’t seen it yet, check it out. You will have an enjoyable time watching this. This is an entertaining film that I think people will really like.

Next week, we’ll be ending “Science Fiction Month” with another good movie that I think is misunderstood by Doug Walker.

No comments:

Post a Comment