I saw this when it came out and really didn't like it. I didn't know who Martin Freeman was back then, though!

Watching it now. LOVE IT but I may be biased cause of Martin Freeman. He is amazing in it! completely different to how he is in Sherlock, shows no similar traits whatsoever.

I had never heard of Martin Freeman before (very accidentally) seeing "A Study in Pink" and getting hooked on Sherlock, but since being bowled over by his performance in "The Reichenbach Fall" I've bought several of his other DVDs.

My husband and I had greatly enjoyed the BBC television version of Hitchhiker's Guide, so I suppose we were expecting that the movie would be similar to our memories of that.  It wasn't, and I loathed it on first viewing.  But we had already paid for the DVD, so we thought what the heck, let's listen to the commentary and watch the extra stuff.  (By the way, this is the only time I've heard Martin Freeman participate in an entire commentary.  He made some very interesting points, so I hope he'll do more commentaries in the future -- such as for The Hobbit!)

By the time we had exhausted all the material on the DVD, we had a bit different attitude toward the movie.  For one thing, we had resented the addition of new material after the death of Douglas Adams -- but the commentary, etc., made it very clear that a good many of the new ideas had actually originated with Adams.  (Apparently he always saw Hitchhiker as a work in progress.)  So we decided to watch the movie again, and that time we thought it was pretty good.

Then we decided to watch the "real" (television) version again -- and we were greatly disappointed.  We enjoyed it, but it no longer struck us as fresh and quirky and inventive.  Perhaps the world has caught up with it, which may be one reason we were also somewhat disappointed with the movie.  Watching the movie for what it is, rather than what we imagined it would be, helped considerably, and I expect we'll watch it again eventually.

oliviasolar wrote:

... Martin Freeman ... is amazing in it! completely different to how he is in Sherlock, shows no similar traits whatsoever.

I agree!  After seeing him in a variety of roles, I am amazed that in general, each of his characters has a completely different set of facial expressions and gestures.

Davina wrote:

... he seems to be part of the Red Headed League in it.

Yes, and I do wish they would stop doing that to him!  He seems to look best with dark-blond hair like John Watson's, so I assume that is his natural color.  When they give him red hair, it clashes with his skin and makes him look anemic, poor fellow.  The red hair does go well with that dark-green bathrobe -- but they both clash with Martin Freeman, and he loses!  I think he is probably what author Carole Jackson calls a "summer," so his shade of green would have more blue in it.

Last edited by Carol the Dabbler (July 29, 2012 5:37 pm)

Yes!  That's another reason I ordered the Hitchhiker DVD.

And (speaking of actors who have been in other things with Martin Freeman) I also liked Bill Nighy very much as Slartibartfast.

Last edited by Carol the Dabbler (July 28, 2012 10:55 pm)

ISG, isn't it amazing where fandom leads? SO many movies I never would have seen without beeing Rickmaniac or Cumberbabe... 

Exactly! And hubby loves movies, so he was kinda glad that I started buying all that AR and CB stuff...