| 
Posted Nov 7, 2002 by Wal
Although the portrayal of The Hitch Hikers Guide To The Galaxy was done well on TV, I have always found the radio version to be far superior.
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Nov 7, 2002 by Teasswill (only if it's green)
Hear, hear.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 7, 2002 by Barney's Bucksaws
Never heard it on radio, being in Canada, but I have it on tape, and its superior to anything that could be done with it on TV. Rented the movie, and thoroughly enjoyed it, but still prefer my tapes. The mental imagery is far better in one's imagination.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 8, 2002 by egon
radio version far better, due tio the iffy effects of the time on TV. And also the second series was good.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 9, 2002 by Barney's Bucksaws
Some of the effects were pretty iffy in the movie. I have this huge imagination, and it plays out well with the right audio hints.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 9, 2002 by CMaster
Never seen the 'movie', but the radio version(or at least the tapes of) are far superior to the TV (and better than the book, too).
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 9, 2002 by CMaster
I suspected that, which is why i put 'movie' in quotes.
They keep talking about making a real movie of the guide.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 10, 2002 by GreyDesk
The TV series was a great disappointment back when it was first shown in the 80s. By about half way through the series I was just wishing it would all come to an end, and the embarrassment would all be over.
The radio series on the other hand, I can still remember 20 years after hearing it, and it still makes me giggle 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 10, 2002 by Lowmankind
I find that the most striking thing about the Hitch-Hiker's radio play is just how effectively they used the medium of sound. It seems rather obvious to say that this is because sound was all they had to work with, but there are so many other people out there who simply do not know how to use the medium properly.
Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy was so good for a lot of reasons, the most obvious of which was the casting. Every voice was perfect for their respective role, and I think that the original Arthur Dent can never be replaced. I shudder to think how some Hollywood 'heart-throb' would stumble around the role of the last human alive, who is also hungover, greatly confused and generally of the view that if you just accept everything that is presented to you and try not to question it too much, then things are generally not too bad. With just their voice, no less.
It is, however, the subtleties of the sound effects that truly set Hitch-Hiker's apart from its contemporaries. The sound effects are unique and varied, as crisp as fresh bed linen in a private hospital, yet vague enough that your imagination is allowed to step in. In fact, your imagination really has the reins when you listen to the old radio play -- what you hear is more or less the road you have to follow.
For example, Vogons aren't explained. You are told that they're ugly, but that's about all. In fact, the most detailed description you are given about Vogons is about their bad temperament, followed by explanations of how bad their poetry is. So, your imagination armed with 'ugly', 'ill-tempered', bad poets', and a strangely-distorted voice, you are able to visualise what a Vogon might look like.
It doesn't end there, either. Space ships make varied 'spacey' noises, blaster-guns blast, and unexplained phenomena, er, sound unexplainable. All this is presented with a dry, frank, every-day-occurrence nature that you can really absorb yourself in this odd world created by our mate Doug.
By contrast, the television series was, well, limited by the technology of the day. It was -- more pertinently -- limited by the fact that television requires no imagination. Everything you are supposed to think is right before your eyes. Even when the Guide is talking, you are given pictoral representations of what it is on about, so as not to have ten minutes of blank screen interspersed throughout each episode.
What we need to wonder now is, what will the forthcoming feature film be like? Technology has advanced to 'Attack of the Clones' level -- we really will not need much imagination this time. More's the pity.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 10, 2002 by Barney's Bucksaws
Absolutely agreed! It always seems a disappointment when you see a movie based on a book you've read. There are some notable exceptions, I think, but Hitchhikers Guide isn't one of them. There is so much imagery that I don't think it can be duplicated even now, with all the advances in technology. I can't feature Arthur Dent without the British accent, or worse still, some Hollywood hero faking it. Its purest form is in its purest form - the book, or on tape. Its simply better that way.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 10, 2002 by Teasswill (only if it's green)
Wasn't the radio version the original anyway?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 12, 2002 by Whoami?
Yes, I believe it was.  
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 12, 2002 by egon
Er, 1978.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 12, 2002 by Whoami?
Er, 1858. 
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
