Eric, I have not seen the movie, but I have read the books ... more than once.

The scene you described ("a cowboy-boot wearing president who confronts his defeated-but-obviously-more-intelligent campaign foe, and said opponent remarks that the election results just proves that you need only a good personality to be president") is entirely a reflection of contemporary Hollywood sensibility, and owes nothing to Adams' original work.

I think the idea of Rickman providing the voice for Marvin is outstanding, and that's one reason I'm looking forward to seeing the movie.

The special effects are another reason ... the snippets that I've seen in the trailers - like the planet-manufacturing room inside Magrathea - look great.

Jeff, thanks for clarifying this issue for me; I don't know if I'm relieved or really ticked off now. I'll be very interested in your take on those scenes, to find out if I'm just overly sensitive.

Otherwise, I think you'll enjoy it greatly. Everything's appropriate for your boys to see, as well, although some of the humor might be over their heads (the Point of View gun being a prime example). But there are enough cool or weird alien species and sight gags to keep everyone entertained.

"I'd just like to go on the record to say that this was a terrible liberty to take with an audience who showed up to be entertained by a sci-fi comedy, not a political satire."

Yes, yes it was.

It's political "product placement", nothing less. I question whether the cowboy president's defeated campaign foe ever was obviously-more-intelligent in the first place.

Implying "the election results just proves that you need only a good personality to be president." is a spit in the face to the people who votde for either candidate.

It's an old argument from the left (which is mainly synonymous with Hollywood). When "their" candidate wins, it proves voters clearly understand the issues. When "their" candidate loses, it proves the voters were just so stupid.

The possibility that maybe, just maybe, voters do understand the issues and the majority disagreed with "their" candidate's position on them is unthinkable.

I'm very glad you've saved me some money, Eric. If I want that sort of comedy, Best Buy has "Fahrenheit 9/11" on the bargain rack.

Eric,

I said the same exact thing after the movie was over. I told everyone I was with and the looked at me funny, so I thought I was reading into it too much.

I have read the books and I don't remember that characterization either.

I still really liked the movie.

Christopher, thanks for backing me up, amigo; my wife's giving me fits about this! ;-)

Mr. Freen, don't let me review keep you from seeing the film. It was quite entertaining, even if I seemed to focus more on the apparent political statement.

"me review"

Ha. Is it Talk Like A Pirate Day already? ;-)

I have a little dissent. I read the books, but it was a long long time ago. As I waited for the movie to start, I remembered parts of the books I hadn't thought of in a long time, and parts of the movie were very familiar. That having been said, I'm not sure I could tell the difference between changes made and memory failure.

It never occurred to me that Zaphod was made into a Bush joke. He was as I remembered him (odd head manipulation asside). I saw him more as a representation of what happens when a rock star wants to be President. The only social commentary I took away was that people vote for the guy they like without much regard toward the candidate's fitness for the job.

Kyle, as I commented in a subsequent post, I may be overly sensitive in this specific area. But at least it's generated some good discussion!

Although, Kyle, having just made a quick jump over to your blog, I don't believe you're any more objective where Bush is concerned than me. I'd say our votes canceled each other, both in the election and with regard to the subject of this post.

Actually, Sam Rockwell and Steve Zahn have already done a film together -- "Safe Men," in which they played bumbling buffoons mistaken for safe crackers.

Also, Rockwell was in "Charlie's Angels," which also featured Luke and Andrew Wilson (Owen's bros).

So, if I read you correctly, what you're implying is that we never see Owen Wilson at the same time we see Sam Rockwell and Steve Zahn. Hmmm... Doesn't that strike you as a wee bit curious?

Enquiring minds want to know.

;-)

Nah. I've been following the careers of the three of them, particularly Wilson and Zahn, for several years, so I don't see an overlap of personality as much as others do, I guess.

I could've sworn, too, that Wilson and Zahn were in a movie together, but cross-referencing on imdb.com didn't turn anything up that I recognized.
---

The other day on World's blog some lady was talking about how Don Cheadle must have gone uncredited on "Ocean's 11" because he was an unknown. I didn't do it, but I wanted to point out that Cheadle not only wasn't an "unknown" then (and his lack of credit was probably a "status" thing, actually), but had actually been in a string of high profile movies before "Ocean's 11" and has had a semi-long career. He'd even been in one previous movie from the same director of "Ocean's 11" -- "Out of Sight."
I always find it interesting when people discover actors I've been enjoying for years.

Eric, saw the movie earlier this week. So, what did I think? It was alright. I'm not as gushingly-enthusiastic as the carefully-selected reviews cited by the film's promoters. But neither am I as angry as some people who saw the film as nothing less than the rape of a cultural treasure. For me, the film was, 'mostly harmless.'