Search
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Limehouse Golem in Books
Sep 24, 2020
The blurb gives out all the necessary information about this book, leaving some mystery for the reader to figure out. The star of this novel is Lizzie Cree, an actress and a wife of well-known reporter John Cree. This novel is told from multiple perspectives: Lizzie’s life story, “Limehouse Golem’s” thoughts during the killings, and other character’s views and life stories. The most interesting to me was Lizzie’s life story, I think it was the most intriguing, complex part of this novel. I am really grateful that Peter Ackroyd added the murderer’s thoughts to this book. Even though they were really graphic, I always love to have an insight into what’s happening in a psychopath’s head. There is a wide variety of characters to choose from in this book, and I think that everybody can find their favourite. My pick would be Lizzie, she is such a well composed and intriguing character!
The narrative of this novel was very well written and researched. I did enjoy the story which author was sharing with the reader, however, there were many philosophical parts in this book, which I found boring and unnecessary. It reminded me of all the dull books I had to read while in school, so I just skim read those parts. 😦 I would like to throw in a disclaimer, that there are graphic violent parts in this book, and it is not suitable for sensitive readers. 😉
The writing style of this book is impeccable. Peter Ackroyd is a master of his craft and truly gifted writer. This novel was first published in 1994, but it feels like it was written in the 19th century. I could clearly see the author’s knowledge in this book because it was shining through the pages. The language used in this novel was very sophisticated but not very difficult to read, and the chapters where decent length, so it did not leave me bored. I really enjoyed the ending of this novel, I think it was well deserved and rounded up the story very nicely.
The film actually surprised me, it had a completely different approach to the whole story and told it through Inspector Kildare’s perspective. In the book, the whole police investigation was very vague, so it was a real surprise to see this approach, and I didn’t really mind it. The acting was marvellous and Mr D. Booth (Dan Leno) was absolutely amazing. He had the charisma and the skill to be a star of this movie. The whole movie was not a full representation of the book, they used some parts from the book and amended it to fit their story, but I liked it nevertheless. This movie is not suitable for children under 15, as it has some really gross scenes in there.
So to conclude, this book is very well written and amusing read, with well rounded and charismatic characters, and the narrative is twisty and always changing, keeping the reader interested. I do recommend to experience Lizzie’s journey and to watch the film afterwards. They do compliment each other, offering different perspectives and different interpretations, so give it a try and I hope you will enjoy it 🙂
The narrative of this novel was very well written and researched. I did enjoy the story which author was sharing with the reader, however, there were many philosophical parts in this book, which I found boring and unnecessary. It reminded me of all the dull books I had to read while in school, so I just skim read those parts. 😦 I would like to throw in a disclaimer, that there are graphic violent parts in this book, and it is not suitable for sensitive readers. 😉
The writing style of this book is impeccable. Peter Ackroyd is a master of his craft and truly gifted writer. This novel was first published in 1994, but it feels like it was written in the 19th century. I could clearly see the author’s knowledge in this book because it was shining through the pages. The language used in this novel was very sophisticated but not very difficult to read, and the chapters where decent length, so it did not leave me bored. I really enjoyed the ending of this novel, I think it was well deserved and rounded up the story very nicely.
The film actually surprised me, it had a completely different approach to the whole story and told it through Inspector Kildare’s perspective. In the book, the whole police investigation was very vague, so it was a real surprise to see this approach, and I didn’t really mind it. The acting was marvellous and Mr D. Booth (Dan Leno) was absolutely amazing. He had the charisma and the skill to be a star of this movie. The whole movie was not a full representation of the book, they used some parts from the book and amended it to fit their story, but I liked it nevertheless. This movie is not suitable for children under 15, as it has some really gross scenes in there.
So to conclude, this book is very well written and amusing read, with well rounded and charismatic characters, and the narrative is twisty and always changing, keeping the reader interested. I do recommend to experience Lizzie’s journey and to watch the film afterwards. They do compliment each other, offering different perspectives and different interpretations, so give it a try and I hope you will enjoy it 🙂
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Snowman (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
No, not that one
Nordic noir is big business at the moment, but with the incredible scenery of the locations lending themselves perfectly to film, is there any wonder?
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Hypnotist are just a couple of movies that have fallen into this massively expanding genre.
Now, Jo Nesbø’s chilling The Snowman novel gets the silver screen treatment in a film of the same name. But can this continue the thrilling trend of whodunit novels being turned into fabulous crime dramas?For Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender), the death of a young woman during the first snow of winter feels like anything but a routine homicide. His investigation leads him to “The Snowman Killer,” an elusive sociopath who continuously taunts Hole with ingeniously crafted cat-and-mouse games. As the brutal deaths show no sign of slowing, Harry teams up with a new recruit (Rebecca Ferguson) to try and lure the madman out of the shadows before it’s too late.
With Michael Fassbender at the helm, director Thomas Alfredson (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) manages to blend gorgeous imagery with an intriguing plot and excellent performances in a film that suffers from a couple of issues that stops it from becoming a must-see event.
These R-rated thrillers are ten-a-penny these days with the bar still being set incredibly high by Gone Girl. Last year’s Girl on the Train was a decent stab at dethroning David Fincher’s masterpiece, but it just fell a little short – well the same has happened here.
Michael Fassbender is uniformly excellent as troubled detective, Harry and the actor can do no wrong in his performances, but he’s suffered this year. After Assassin’s Creed failed to ignite the box-office, it looks to be a similar story this time. While The Snowman is technically competent and filmed beautifully, it lacks the sense of originality that breeds success.
It also doesn’t help that he’s surrounded by thinly padded supporting characters like former love interest Rakel (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and new police officer Katrine (Ferguson). Elsewhere, bizarre glorified cameos for Val Kilmer and Toby Jones leave you wondering if these actors expected a little more from their parts.
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. After all, the cast is one of the film’s strongest suits. Add J.K. Simmons to the aforementioned roster and it really does have one of the best line-ups of the year. It’s just a shame the script doesn’t do more with them.
To look at, The Snowman is absolutely gorgeous. Helped obviously by magnificent Norwegian landscapes, Alfredson shoots using steady cam in scenes reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, high praise indeed. In a year populated by CGI-heavy blockbusters, this comes as a real breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, the constant use of flashbacks and a peculiar subplot involving a Winter sporting event ruin the pacing, though at 130 minutes, this isn’t too much of an issue. The ending however, is disappointing and lacks an emotional payoff after the film’s events.
Overall, The Snowman is a gritty adaptation of Jo Nesbø’s successful novel and while some of the plot choices leave a little to be desired, a great anchor performance by Michael Fassbender and stunning cinematography mean it’s definitely worth a watch; just don’t expect too much.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/14/the-snowman-review/
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Hypnotist are just a couple of movies that have fallen into this massively expanding genre.
Now, Jo Nesbø’s chilling The Snowman novel gets the silver screen treatment in a film of the same name. But can this continue the thrilling trend of whodunit novels being turned into fabulous crime dramas?For Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender), the death of a young woman during the first snow of winter feels like anything but a routine homicide. His investigation leads him to “The Snowman Killer,” an elusive sociopath who continuously taunts Hole with ingeniously crafted cat-and-mouse games. As the brutal deaths show no sign of slowing, Harry teams up with a new recruit (Rebecca Ferguson) to try and lure the madman out of the shadows before it’s too late.
With Michael Fassbender at the helm, director Thomas Alfredson (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) manages to blend gorgeous imagery with an intriguing plot and excellent performances in a film that suffers from a couple of issues that stops it from becoming a must-see event.
These R-rated thrillers are ten-a-penny these days with the bar still being set incredibly high by Gone Girl. Last year’s Girl on the Train was a decent stab at dethroning David Fincher’s masterpiece, but it just fell a little short – well the same has happened here.
Michael Fassbender is uniformly excellent as troubled detective, Harry and the actor can do no wrong in his performances, but he’s suffered this year. After Assassin’s Creed failed to ignite the box-office, it looks to be a similar story this time. While The Snowman is technically competent and filmed beautifully, it lacks the sense of originality that breeds success.
It also doesn’t help that he’s surrounded by thinly padded supporting characters like former love interest Rakel (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and new police officer Katrine (Ferguson). Elsewhere, bizarre glorified cameos for Val Kilmer and Toby Jones leave you wondering if these actors expected a little more from their parts.
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. After all, the cast is one of the film’s strongest suits. Add J.K. Simmons to the aforementioned roster and it really does have one of the best line-ups of the year. It’s just a shame the script doesn’t do more with them.
To look at, The Snowman is absolutely gorgeous. Helped obviously by magnificent Norwegian landscapes, Alfredson shoots using steady cam in scenes reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, high praise indeed. In a year populated by CGI-heavy blockbusters, this comes as a real breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, the constant use of flashbacks and a peculiar subplot involving a Winter sporting event ruin the pacing, though at 130 minutes, this isn’t too much of an issue. The ending however, is disappointing and lacks an emotional payoff after the film’s events.
Overall, The Snowman is a gritty adaptation of Jo Nesbø’s successful novel and while some of the plot choices leave a little to be desired, a great anchor performance by Michael Fassbender and stunning cinematography mean it’s definitely worth a watch; just don’t expect too much.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/14/the-snowman-review/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Alpha (2018) in Movies
Apr 7, 2020
My Unpopular Opinion
Set in prehistoric times, a young man has to survive on his own after getting injured during a hunt. In the process of trying to stay alive, he ends up befriending a lone wolf. I was hoping to like this movie a lot more, but it seemed to drag in too many spots for me.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 3
Keda (Kodi Smit-McPhee) wasn’t really cutting it for me as far as characters go. When you’re talking about one person to carry a movie, I was hoping for someone with a bit more charisma. The wolf was a cute addition, but the combo wasn’t quite enough to make me care more about the story.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 4
There wasn’t a whole lot of action going on, at least not enough to keep me entertained. Yes, it’s a story around survival and that concept itself should be riveting enough, but, sadly, it wasn’t. There was too much of nothing happening for too long of stretches. I kept waiting for things to develop and, by the time I started to feel fireworks, it ended being a small fizzle.
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 3
Pace: 3
Pretty slow as far as survival movies go. I kept waiting for it to pick up and, while it had a few shining moments here and there, it was pretty tame for the most part. Y’all, I tried, I really did. Just wasn’t working for me.
Plot: 6
Resolution: 8
Overall: 63
Don’t take my opinion as God when it comes to Alpha. There are plenty out there that adore this movie. Unfortunately, I wasn’t one of them. It’s way too slow and uninteresting for me to recommend.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 3
Keda (Kodi Smit-McPhee) wasn’t really cutting it for me as far as characters go. When you’re talking about one person to carry a movie, I was hoping for someone with a bit more charisma. The wolf was a cute addition, but the combo wasn’t quite enough to make me care more about the story.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 4
There wasn’t a whole lot of action going on, at least not enough to keep me entertained. Yes, it’s a story around survival and that concept itself should be riveting enough, but, sadly, it wasn’t. There was too much of nothing happening for too long of stretches. I kept waiting for things to develop and, by the time I started to feel fireworks, it ended being a small fizzle.
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 3
Pace: 3
Pretty slow as far as survival movies go. I kept waiting for it to pick up and, while it had a few shining moments here and there, it was pretty tame for the most part. Y’all, I tried, I really did. Just wasn’t working for me.
Plot: 6
Resolution: 8
Overall: 63
Don’t take my opinion as God when it comes to Alpha. There are plenty out there that adore this movie. Unfortunately, I wasn’t one of them. It’s way too slow and uninteresting for me to recommend.
You Makeup - Free Beauty Camera & Photo Editor
Beauty, Entertainment and Photo & Video
4.5
Rate It
App
You Makeup, the #1 makeup photo editor, is a powerful makeup photo editor with many amazing makeup...
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Fungoid in Books
May 16, 2018
Actual rating: 4.5 Stars
Post-apocalyptic stories are, by far, among my favorites to read, perhaps because it's a hypothetical possibility that could still occur in our future. From zombies to biological warfare, many stories offer a new perspective on the end of the world and William Meikle's Fungoid is no different.
Fungoid takes place in Canada and encompasses a wide range of characters and their interactions with one another and other individuals after the apocalypse falls upon the world in the form of a fungal outbreak, only in this case, the fungal epidemic appears to have a mind of its own as it voraciously consumes humanity. Those who manage to survive are left to fend for themselves as they search for a way to overcome their fates when all odds are against them.
Sometimes, a wide range of characters works. Other times, it doesn't. In this case, it does, when says a lot for Meikle's talent as a writer: his characters are well-developed and each possess their own distinct personalities. None of these characters are perfect: they have their own flaws and faults, and, in the true nature of horror, they aren't all good. The portrayal of a villainous character's decline from normality to the ultimate evil is often skipped over in favor of shining the spotlight on the heroes of a story. Meikle's unfortunate villain is spared no detail, and as a reader I was glad to find myself not only bewildered and frustrated by this character, but also found myself feeling sadness and sympathy for them.
The story is extremely fast paced, leaving little room for breathing as you flip through the pages. Given that the book is actually fairly short, it serves as a perfect read for a rainy afternoon inside. There's no shortage of action which is a necessity in a world where many people simply do not have the time to divulge to reading a thick, slower paced book. Meikle's writing is filled with twists and turns, where his characters are given a plausible route of escape or survival, only to find themselves forced to overcome obstacles that threaten to end their very lives.
Fungoid is a definite, must-read for fans of the horror genre, especially if you're looking for a new way of approaching the end of the world.
I would like to thank DarkFuse, William Meikle, and NetGalley for providing me with an advanced reader's copy in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.
Post-apocalyptic stories are, by far, among my favorites to read, perhaps because it's a hypothetical possibility that could still occur in our future. From zombies to biological warfare, many stories offer a new perspective on the end of the world and William Meikle's Fungoid is no different.
Fungoid takes place in Canada and encompasses a wide range of characters and their interactions with one another and other individuals after the apocalypse falls upon the world in the form of a fungal outbreak, only in this case, the fungal epidemic appears to have a mind of its own as it voraciously consumes humanity. Those who manage to survive are left to fend for themselves as they search for a way to overcome their fates when all odds are against them.
Sometimes, a wide range of characters works. Other times, it doesn't. In this case, it does, when says a lot for Meikle's talent as a writer: his characters are well-developed and each possess their own distinct personalities. None of these characters are perfect: they have their own flaws and faults, and, in the true nature of horror, they aren't all good. The portrayal of a villainous character's decline from normality to the ultimate evil is often skipped over in favor of shining the spotlight on the heroes of a story. Meikle's unfortunate villain is spared no detail, and as a reader I was glad to find myself not only bewildered and frustrated by this character, but also found myself feeling sadness and sympathy for them.
The story is extremely fast paced, leaving little room for breathing as you flip through the pages. Given that the book is actually fairly short, it serves as a perfect read for a rainy afternoon inside. There's no shortage of action which is a necessity in a world where many people simply do not have the time to divulge to reading a thick, slower paced book. Meikle's writing is filled with twists and turns, where his characters are given a plausible route of escape or survival, only to find themselves forced to overcome obstacles that threaten to end their very lives.
Fungoid is a definite, must-read for fans of the horror genre, especially if you're looking for a new way of approaching the end of the world.
I would like to thank DarkFuse, William Meikle, and NetGalley for providing me with an advanced reader's copy in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated War for the Planet of the Apes (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
The Great Ape-scape
Six years ago, I didn’t think I’d be telling you that a remake of the classic Planet of the Apes and its sequel would go on to be one of the finest double acts since The Two Ronnies, but that’s exactly what has happened.
Now, the final part of this incredible trilogy, War for the Planet of the Apes is out and ready to conclude an incredible half decade of cinema. But is it as good as its predecessors?
Caesar (Andy Serkis) and his band of loyal apes are forced into a deadly war with an army of humans led by a ruthless colonel (Woody Harrelson). After Caesar’s band of apes suffers unimaginable losses, he wrestles with his darker instincts and begins his own quest of revenge. As the journey finally brings the two rivals face-to-face, Caesar and the colonel are pitted against each other in an epic battle that will determine the fate of both of their species.
I have to say, I was a little concerned the finished product would be as tongue twisting as its frankly ridiculous title (a problem that has blighted the entire series), but it ends up being a stunning and heart-warming finale to a franchise filled to the brim with memorable moments.
The motion capture used on Andy Serkis to create Caesar has to be seen to be believed. If you thought predecessor Dawn was good, you haven’t seen anything yet. His hair moves with subtle believability and his movements are so fluid, it’s easy to forget you’re watching a film and not a documentary.
But this incredible technology isn’t used solely on our main protagonist. Fan favourite orangutan Maurice returns and newcomer “Bad Ape” captured by Steve Zahn provides the flick with a much-needed eccentric, shining a little light in one of the bleakest feature films of the last half decade.
The human characters, naturally don’t fare so well. Woody Harrelson is his usual charismatic self but feels a little caricature like. His colonel just doesn’t feel particularly believable. Likewise, Amiah Miller’s turn as Nova, whom Maurice adopts as his daughter, seems to be merely used as a plot device, though she does partake in some of the sweeter moments.
As with its predecessors, War is a slow burner with the action interweaved into the plot rather than the other way around. In principle it works well, though the pacing towards the middle of this 140-minute behemoth is a little off.
Nevertheless, the action is filmed beautifully. In fact, the whole film is stunning. Beautiful wooded landscapes and open deserts are juxtaposed with the dark concentration camps used in the latter half. One sequence in particular, behind a gorgeously realised waterfall, is one of the best action scenes of the entire year.
Masquerading as a blockbuster, this is a film with a much deeper message about messing with nature. Brutal and emotionally testing, War for the Planet of the Apes is brave in its choices and all the better for it.
Three films in, it would be easy for director Matt Reeves to rest on his laurels and rely on the positive reaction to its predecessors, but thankfully he has climaxed on a high. It’s not perfect, and not an easy watch by any means, but for a threequel, you can’t really get much better.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/12/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-review/
Now, the final part of this incredible trilogy, War for the Planet of the Apes is out and ready to conclude an incredible half decade of cinema. But is it as good as its predecessors?
Caesar (Andy Serkis) and his band of loyal apes are forced into a deadly war with an army of humans led by a ruthless colonel (Woody Harrelson). After Caesar’s band of apes suffers unimaginable losses, he wrestles with his darker instincts and begins his own quest of revenge. As the journey finally brings the two rivals face-to-face, Caesar and the colonel are pitted against each other in an epic battle that will determine the fate of both of their species.
I have to say, I was a little concerned the finished product would be as tongue twisting as its frankly ridiculous title (a problem that has blighted the entire series), but it ends up being a stunning and heart-warming finale to a franchise filled to the brim with memorable moments.
The motion capture used on Andy Serkis to create Caesar has to be seen to be believed. If you thought predecessor Dawn was good, you haven’t seen anything yet. His hair moves with subtle believability and his movements are so fluid, it’s easy to forget you’re watching a film and not a documentary.
But this incredible technology isn’t used solely on our main protagonist. Fan favourite orangutan Maurice returns and newcomer “Bad Ape” captured by Steve Zahn provides the flick with a much-needed eccentric, shining a little light in one of the bleakest feature films of the last half decade.
The human characters, naturally don’t fare so well. Woody Harrelson is his usual charismatic self but feels a little caricature like. His colonel just doesn’t feel particularly believable. Likewise, Amiah Miller’s turn as Nova, whom Maurice adopts as his daughter, seems to be merely used as a plot device, though she does partake in some of the sweeter moments.
As with its predecessors, War is a slow burner with the action interweaved into the plot rather than the other way around. In principle it works well, though the pacing towards the middle of this 140-minute behemoth is a little off.
Nevertheless, the action is filmed beautifully. In fact, the whole film is stunning. Beautiful wooded landscapes and open deserts are juxtaposed with the dark concentration camps used in the latter half. One sequence in particular, behind a gorgeously realised waterfall, is one of the best action scenes of the entire year.
Masquerading as a blockbuster, this is a film with a much deeper message about messing with nature. Brutal and emotionally testing, War for the Planet of the Apes is brave in its choices and all the better for it.
Three films in, it would be easy for director Matt Reeves to rest on his laurels and rely on the positive reaction to its predecessors, but thankfully he has climaxed on a high. It’s not perfect, and not an easy watch by any means, but for a threequel, you can’t really get much better.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/12/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-review/
BA Financial Calculator for iPad
Finance and Business
App
BA Financial Calculator for iPad best emulates FULL VERSION of Texas Instruments BA II Plus...
The Art of Losing by The Anchoress
Album
AWARD-WINNING WELSH MULTI-INSTRUMENTALIST THE ANCHORESS RETURNS WITH HER CRITICALLY ACCLAIMED SECOND...
A School of Daughters
Book
It’s funny how things sneak up on you… Kate Willoughby is a champion for...
Literary Fiction Women's Fiction
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in Books
Nov 14, 2019
What can be said about Douglas Adams' freewheeling science fiction comedy that hasn't been said before? Probably nothing but that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve a review.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.