Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:32 pm Post subject: Sight and Sound front cover and article
The latest Sight and Sound magazine has Arthur and Marvin on the cover, and a long critique of the movie by Andrew Osmond, along with short interviews with Nick and Garth, and Warwick Davis.
The article is fairly typical of S&S - lots of references to other movies - and I'd characterise it as mixed. There's stuff he liked and stuff he didn't.
Quote:
The resulting film is intermittently funny and/or charming and sometimes genuinely strange.
Quote:
They've turned out a highly reverential movie, keeping intact a large proportion of Adams' gags, speeches and one-liners, Kirkpatrick even stresses that the 'new' scebes, an extremely mixed bag, are derived from drafts Adams wrote before his death in 2001.
Quote:
Sam Rockwell is energetic but one-note as brainless galactic president Zaphod Beeblebrox while his second head seems there mainly for the fans (a whim on the radio, it caused notorious problems on television).
Quote:
All this detail means new audiences get the authentic flavour of Adams' work, but raises qualms about whether this kind of adaptation is any more than recycling for new audiences
Quote:
...Bill Nighy, the best turn in the film...
Quote:
[about the vogsphere scene] The scene is shot for the big screen, but the content is vintage British television, invoking Python more than Star Trek.
Quote:
Freeman and Deschanel [...] make a sweeter couple than the Hugh Grant screen pairings that inspired it.
Quote:
But one can't shake the feeling that, at the end of the world, this sweet-natured romantic tinkering isn't what the rather heartless Hitchhiker's is all about.
He's either very familiar with Hitchhiker's or has done good research - I'd guess the former. The article isn't online and I don't know if it will be - not all their articles appear on their website - and I'm too lazy to transcribe it.
Age: 51 Joined: 10 Oct 2004 Location: Spending a year dead for tax reasons
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:59 pm Post subject:
Funny how different people interpret things. I'm not about to re-type this whole article but my overall impression is that it leans twoards the MJS negative view rather than the positive.
Some other articles in papers today and probably a bunch in the Sundays tomorrow.
Update:
MJ has posted a link to a review by filmfocus which looks to be a good balanced view.
The guy is a fan, he loves the movie but he's not afraid to point out the problems.
Wooo, the exitement grows. _________________ D.
The Thirteenth Triskaidekaphobe
--------------------------------------
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Froodlist
Froodgroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
