Douglas Adams’ classic books certainly have their following and that was proven in my screening of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy as I quickly realized that one type of moviegoer is going to enjoy this film much more than I did, and that is not saying I didn’t enjoy it, simply to say that I didn’t find things as laugh-out-loud hilarious as those with the insider knowledge did.
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy certainly starts out with a bang as Earth is easily obliterated into nothingness. Fortunately though for Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman) he manages to escape the disaster as his good friend, Ford Prefect (Mos Def), happens to be not of this world and knows of the ensuing destruction and manages to “hitch” a ride on one of the ships doing the destroying.
Prefect’s time on Earth was only to update the actual Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, but this galactic tool is only used sparingly throughout the film, and usually only to offer up silly little stories that the Adams side of the audience find hilarious and others only slightly chuckle at.
Suddenly Dent and Prefect soon find themselves aboard a stolen ship by the galaxy’s President, Zaphod Beeblebrox, played by Sam Rockwell, which happens to be the only thing that kept me remotely interested in this picture whatsoever. Zaphod is a bit off his rocker and that only leads to situations allowing Rockwell to show off his chops in several scenes, all of which he owns.
As for compliments or complaints about this film the special effects are outstanding, and I obviously enjoyed Rockwell’s performance, as I always do regardless of whether or not I liked the picture, but enjoying the performance is one thing, actually getting into the spirit of the picture is another.
All of the characters you are introduced to have their own quirks and qualities, but none of them do you remotely begin to care about or connect with and all you are left with is whether or not you find the humor funny.
The style of humor this movie takes on is undeniably British, but it isn’t over the top British, this isn’t Monty Python, so it is bearable, and yes that means I am not a Python fan. However, I am a huge fan of the hit BBC sitcom “The Office” and Martin Freeman’s involvement certainly helped out, but this isn’t “The Office”.
Whether it is due to the fact that I have not read the books and don’t get all the inside jokes shouldn’t have to be taken into consideration as I don’t think the filmmaker’s aim was to only appeal to a specific audience, considering that would severely limit the number of people that would go see this film, and ultimately enjoy it. I also don’t remember seeing any reading prerequisites on the posters, which means reading the books should not determine whether or not this is a good movie or not.
That said, I do think this is a case of too many circumstances where reading the books would give you more insight into the humor involved, allowing you to enjoy it on a higher level. For those of you, like me, that have not read the books you will soon realize that this film feels like a combination of disjointed scenes with a couple of laughs in-between.
Overall, based on the audience reaction during my screening, if you have read the books you will love this film, but if you haven’t it won’t necessarily be a total waste of time, but you won’t be in on all the jokes, leaving you with a bit of an empty feeling as you leave the theater.
