"The Hitchhiker’s Guide

"The Hitchhiker’s Guide

to the Galaxy"

Directed by: Garth Jennings

Starring: Sam Rockwell, Mos Def, Zooey Deschanel, Martin Freeman, (voice of) Alan Rickman

Rated: PG (for mild language)

Running time: 124 minutes

Best suited for: "Hitchhiker" (the book) and Douglas Adams’ fans, British humor fans (i.e., the "Monty Python" crowd)

Least suited for: the sci-fi parody and spoof disinclined

Acorn’s Rating Guide:

For Douglas Adams’ fans

4 acorns

For non-fans

2 acorns

Finally a film that annihilates Earth and still leaves room for a happy ending.

Okay, so I’ll admit I had problems with the book. Like an inexpensive New York zinfandel, I found Douglas Adam’s novel amusing but trite. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.) "The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy" was written in novel form back in 1979 (after appearing as a BBC radio series in ’78), when much of science fiction was still heady and socially conscious. True, "Hitchhiker’s Guide" was a clever idea, but to me it seemed sophomoric in its approach, written with an almost stream-of-thought glibness.

The concept is this: the Galactic Hyperspace Planning Council needs room for an intergalactic bypass, so the Earth—in the way of progress—is demolished. (Even back in ’79, my sliver of left-brain intellect found the concept too preposterous for even whimsy; in the whole realm of empty space, we’re in the way?) Earth may be an annoying galactic speck for so many reasons, but Mr. Adams’ premise never really jelled in my head.

Earth denizen Arthur Dent (played by Martin Freeman) is rescued from our doomed planet by his friend Ford Prefect (Mos Def), who also happens to be an alien. Ford and Arthur manage to hitch a ride on a passing spaceship, where Ford presents Arthur with a copy of an intergalactic, interactive tour book, aptly named "The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy." Thus the adventures begin.

I’ve always considered Douglas Adams to be a poor man’s Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. and "Hitchhiker" to be a distant relative of "The Sirens of Titan" (which delves into the triteness of humanity in a bogglingly original way). Part of me entered the theater itching to measure "Hitchhiker" against director George Roy Hill’s 1972 classic translation of Vonnegut’s "Slaughterhouse Five"—which, a generation later, holds up brilliantly as both comedic satire and philosophical pablum.

Which ends the book review portion of this film critique.

I’m not knocking "Hitchhiker’s Guide," although I sense it could have been a much better film. And there’s a British slapstick element at play here that I suspect many in this country won’t fully appreciate.

So many whimsical space spoofs have come and gone since "Hitchhiker’s" inception that the plot may have lost much of its unique perspective—and even die-hard Douglas Adams’ fans may feel a tad disappointed. For those fans (who probably already hate me), take heart: the film is, in places, extraordinarily true to the book. Entire scenes appear verbatim. (A few, however, have been omitted.) For the most part, director Garth Jennings was incredibly loyal to Adams, who co-wrote the screenplay and died prematurely, at age 49, while the film was in pre-production.

I did sense a kind of grand, cosmic unevenness to the film. Some scenes consist of little more than comically dressed actors standing on inexpensive sets, whimsically purging their lines and stopping just short of winking at the camera. Other scenes, such as the one in which the hapless Arthur threads his way through a "backup" solar system, are exhilarating to the point of breathtaking. Jennings does some nice work in translating the mind’s eye to the big screen. There are also several moments of grand humor. (I wish there had been more.) Peppered throughout the film are animated, well-rendered excerpts of "The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy"—that is, through the tour book—clever, colorful tidbits that I wish had been expanded as well.

In the midst of all the nonsense, the film does try (as did the book) to instill a metaphysical message about the meaning and purpose of life. The message, however, does get lost amid the tongue-and-cheek giddiness. The first answer to the question of life—"42"—doesn’t impress anybody in the galaxy, so they wait another few million years and ask again. What’s the point? might be both the question and the answer in this particular case. Which, if you think about it long enough, is boggling in and of itself.

In a nutshell: This distinctly British film is, at times, both clever and silly. I can’t recommend this one for every taste because if you haven’t read the book, you’ll undoubtedly be lost. However, if you’re a fan of the Douglas Adams’ classic, then you’ll likely find "Hitchhiker’s Guide" suitably whimsical and innocuously far-fetched.