×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Doodle Celebrates Birthday of Douglas Adams

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the bring-a-towel dept.

Google 104

mikejuk writes "Today's Google Doodle celebrates the fact that today would have been Douglas Adam's 61st birthday. For any fans of Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy this isn't to be missed. The interactive doodle takes us aboard the Heart of Gold spaceship where the towel — the essential travel item for any intergalactic voyager sits on the console besides the, also very necessary cup of tea, which is also a reference to a Dirk Gently novel, The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul. There are lots more tributes hidden including Marvin — the real one not the one in the film, a Babel Fish and more. Have fun exploring but make sure you click on the search symbol to find out more about Douglas Adams and his work."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

104 comments

No, he's 49 (2, Insightful)

Looker_Device (2857489) | about a year ago | (#43140813)

He has 49 been since 2001, and will be long after the dolphins leave and the earth is demolished. Once does not age past death, only decompose.

Re:No, he's 49 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43140907)

Well, it does say "would have been" and if he were alive is "would have been" his birthday today. And he would have been 61.

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43140939)

Well, we would have been venerating Lenin for decades now if the Soviets had won the Cold War.

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142223)

Not necessarily. Do the Russians venerate the US?

Re:No, he's 49 (2)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year ago | (#43141007)

Interesting. So young. I'm the age he was, when he passed away. In his photos, you'd swear he was 20-25 years older than I.

I'm sad he died, and I'd have greatly enjoyed more of his work. Yet, the evidence is that his death might not have been so surprising - if visual assessment of Adams' vitality is any real measure.

Re:No, he's 49 (2)

Armakuni (1091299) | about a year ago | (#43141563)

He did live a comfortable life, with lots of restaurant visits, as I understand. But he died at a gym, after he resolved to get in shape, possibly after overdoing a strenuous exercise. I think one of his friends later remarked that it was typical of him to go for something at full speed as soon as he had made up his mind to do it. He just went at it a little too hard that time.

Re:No, he's 49 (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#43140923)

Does anybody have a link to it? I can't see it.

PS: No, it's not here: http://www.google.com/doodles/finder/2013/All%20doodles [google.com]

Re:No, he's 49 (4, Funny)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | about a year ago | (#43140993)

By using Google [google.com] to find it.

Re:No, he's 49 (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#43141133)

That one's not interactive.

(I assume there's an interactive one because it says "many of the iconic sound effects used in our doodle were kindly provided by the creative folks behind this show"...)

Re:No, he's 49 (1)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | about a year ago | (#43141539)

It is interactive, click on the guide to see an animation, or the door to see Marvin.

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141887)

It's a little disappointing that Marvin doesn't say anything.

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142623)

I was kind of hoping the computer would say "Hi there!" when clicked upon.

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141277)

Uh, did you try www.google.com ?

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141197)

49 - sqrt(49) is 42! This must be some cosmic clue...

Re:No, he's 49 (1)

Jeremi (14640) | about a year ago | (#43141755)

He has 49 been since 2001, and will be long after the dolphins leave and the earth is demolished. Once does not age past death, only decompose.

Do the scientists that do carbon-dating know about this? It certainly is going to throw off their results...

Re:No, he's 49 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43144133)

No it isn't. People measure the age of people as time since birth. Scientists doing carbon dating don't measure time since birth. They measure time since death. Think about the case of finding an old bottle of Scotch somewhere. The Scotch was bottled in 1913. A historian/archaeologist, etc type person could say that it's a 100 year old bottle of Scotch. it would be using a recipe that is at least 100 years old, a label, etc. It has historical value from 100 years ago. However, a Scotch connoisseur would still refer to it as an 18 year old Scotch, because 18 years is how long this particular bottle was aged in barrels before bottling. Scotch doesn't age once bottled. Yup, age since death, and age while alive are too different numbers.

Film? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43140835)

I'm glad no one has ever made a HGTTG film. They would have screwed it up.

Re:Film? (4, Insightful)

pezpunk (205653) | about a year ago | (#43141013)

Although uneven, the movie was not bad, with a few brilliant parts. it's not like it's "blasphemous" -- Adams himself wildly changed the story every time it switched mediums. It's got most of the best bits from the book, plus a new ending that does more than just stop (as the book does), and as a bonus it does a great job of capturing Adams' absolute love and fascination with life itself.

not saying it's great beginning to end, but acting like it's any more uneven than a lot of his books is silly.

Re:Film? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141227)

I didn't care for the film on first watch, but warmed up to it after 2 or 3 more viewings. I think the biggest thing they screwed up was "Hollywoodizing" it. It's too American - what I loved about the BBC series and books was their British. Arthur Dent and our window into his world are quintessentially British.

That said, the movie had some nice new bits, such as cutting back to the pub just before the Earth is destroyed to see everyone lying on the floor with bags on their heads!

One thing that bothered me was casting Mos Def as Ford. And not because he's black; he's just wrong for the part. I came out of the movie feeling like Ford wasn't in it.

(captcha: rescind)

Re:Film? (2)

pezpunk (205653) | about a year ago | (#43141407)

yeah ... i liked the casting in theory but then not so much in practice. i know what you mean.

i think my absolute favorite part is the destruction scene: the brutal, stomping musical queues as the camera zooms out from the rubble of arthur's home to outer space, giving a true sense of the mind-breaking scale of the vogon fleet, before it simply ploops the earth into oblivion.

Re:Film? (4, Insightful)

geminidomino (614729) | about a year ago | (#43141617)

I honestly didn't have a problem with Ford, but that may well be because I had no idea there was a Mos Def before I saw the movie. Zaphod, on the other hand, had me grinding out my own fillings.

And the less said about the iMarvin, the better...

Re:Film? (3, Funny)

rilister (316428) | about a year ago | (#43142235)

"Getting a movie made in Hollywood is like trying to grill a steak by having a succession of people coming into the room and breathing on it."
Douglas Adams

Re:Film? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142263)

My mother was a Ford Prefect you insensitive clod!!!

Re:Film? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about a year ago | (#43147231)

I think it's VERY difficult bringing something on screen that draws most of the humor from encyclopedia entries. Or Footnotes (that would be Terry Pratchett. Still waiting for a decent screen adaption.)

Re:Film? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142729)

I still think that the movie was Douglas' final joke to the world. It's a film that is almost, but not entirely unlike the real Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy.

Re:Film? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43145315)

It's Mostly Humorous.

Marvin (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43140837)

"There are lots more tributes hidden including Marvin - the real one not the one in the film"

Huh? What makes the TV Marvin "the real one"?

I always thought the TV Marvin was completely wrong, compared to how he's described in the books.

Re:Marvin (3, Informative)

tom17 (659054) | about a year ago | (#43140957)

Though I agree with your sentiment in principle, when I was a child, the TV series was my first exposure to the story and thusly, for me*, the TV Marvin is the real one (It also had the correct voice which helps the continuity).

I also went on to consume said story in every other form that I could find, and liked them all, bar one. it helped that, for the most part, the radio and TV show had the same voices.

However, I know some people that will have seen the film first and to them, *that* is the real Marvin and that just makes me want to curl up & shudder.

*I have always supposed that for any given story or song, the first version you experienced will always be the greatest in your own mind. Haven't found many exceptions to this rule yet.

Re:Marvin (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141005)

I saw the Hobbit cartoon long before reading the book, but the book is it for me.

Re:Marvin (1)

tom17 (659054) | about a year ago | (#43141073)

I actually read LOTR quickly before watching the films as I didn't want the films to ruin it, so I guess it didn't matter then :). Anyway I think I got bored lol. I'm not a very good reader - the only, errr, trilogy I have ever managed to read is HHGTG lol.

Tell me this though, when you read the book, did you end up imagining the characters based on those from the cartoon, or did you 'start afresh' so to speak?

Re:Marvin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141221)

I remember taping the radio broadcasts and listening to them over and over. I think I had them committed to memory before I could even get the books. They're still my favorite version. The movie was lame.

Re:Marvin (1)

tom17 (659054) | about a year ago | (#43141589)

Actually, I guess I broke my not-well-though-out theory as the Radio is my favourite version. But in my mind, the Marvin in the radio version is the TV Marvin. I think that's what I was (badly) trying to get at lol. This could just be due to the actors being the same though.

The TV version is actually pretty dire in so much as most low budget TV from those days was. I still love it though :)

Re:Marvin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43147071)

So many of my friends got their first tastes of HHGTTG through copies of recordings from the radio series. It put the high speed dubbing feature of a friend's boombox to good use.

Re:Marvin (1)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | about a year ago | (#43140969)

He was the first one we actually saw a representation of, and the movie was terrible.

Re:Marvin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43143025)

The BBC video series was also terrible.

Of course, I watched it and loved it at the time, but it was really pretty poorly made.

In mitigation (2)

itsdapead (734413) | about a year ago | (#43143891)

The BBC video series was also terrible.

...but the utterly inspired "computer" animated sequences accompanying the narration made up for it.

Re:Marvin (3, Funny)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | about a year ago | (#43143111)

See, the TV and movie Marvin are the same. Marvin keeps getting all his parts replaced, given that he's several times older than the universe itself.

New chassis, new interface, new hydraulics, everything's been replaced several times in different tech levels and different planets...

(except for one bank of painful diodes on the left side. )

Re:Marvin (1)

tom17 (659054) | about a year ago | (#43145409)

If that was the case, who was in the Vogon office lining up in the film?

(hint: The TV Marvin)

Re:Marvin (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | about a year ago | (#43149797)

A few options:
1. Marvin himself, filling out the forms. Since they can time travel, the rest of the crew knew how long it would take to get the release forms sorted out and left him there for 100,000 years.
2. A robot built out of the replacement parts, that, due to a shipping accident, ended up with a new bank of left-side diodes.

I was so upset at the reminder of his death... (4, Funny)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | about a year ago | (#43140973)

that I threw myself at the ground and missed. On the bright side, I now know how to fly.

Re:I was so upset at the reminder of his death... (3, Insightful)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#43141157)

It's funny though, how accurate that idea is. That's exactly what orbiting is - falling, but moving sideways so fast that you miss the ground.

Re:I was so upset at the reminder of his death... (3, Interesting)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | about a year ago | (#43141279)

That was part of the beauty of his writing. He found humour in the simplification to basics.

Douglas Adams Google Doodle Hitchhiker (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141127)

Ingenious, humorous and really well done! Thanks for the "big warm smile" e

Wow... (-1, Flamebait)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#43141373)

Are we going to have a slashdot story for every Google Doogle now?

Re:Wow... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141489)

Are we going to have a slashdot story for every Google Doogle now?

Yes, and you will comment every time about how they are a complete waste of your very valuable time!

Re:Wow... (3, Funny)

Erbo (384) | about a year ago | (#43141501)

No, only the ones that promise excitement and adventure and really wild things.

Re:Wow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141955)

Apparently, you don't understand what Idle is for. Turn it off if you don't like it.

Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (-1, Troll)

rklrkl (554527) | about a year ago | (#43141517)

Google Doodles like this do rub me up the wrong way. For a start, the person concerned is often an obscure one (or at least obscure outside the US - the US-centric doodles end up on Google UK, where they probably don't belong). OK, Adams isn't obscure because of Hitchhikers', but an awful lot of Doodle people are.

Secondly, if they're going to choose to celebrate someone's life, do it on a rounded number of years either since their death or birth. Not "161st birthday of <insert_obscure_Hungarian_physicist_here>". In this case, why wasn't the 60th year since Adams' birth celebrated last year, rather than the 61st this year?

And, finally, I must take massive umbrage with the Google tooltip that says "Douglas Adams' 61st birthday". I'm sorry, but once someone dies, they can no longer have birthdays after their death. It should be "61st anniversary of his birth", but I guess that's too long and not so catchy. I now call them "deathdays" when Google does this :-)

Now get off my lawn!

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (2)

JMonty42 (1961510) | about a year ago | (#43141629)

I'm sorry, but once someone dies, they can no longer have birthdays after their death. It should be "61st anniversary of his birth"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/birthday [merriam-webster.com] A birthday is literally the anniversary of one's birth. A death day would presumably be the anniversary of one's death. My only qualm with this doodle is that it doesn't really appear to say "Google". I haven't been paying attention to all the doodles, but I like the ones that say Google while still relating to what the subject matter is.

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141867)

You're not paying close enough attention then.

Hint: Look at the colors of the standard Google logo and the colors in the doodle.

The roll of tape plus the blue cylinder make 'G', the red radio and yellow teacup make 'oo,' the blue Guide plus the leather bag make a rough 'g', the green towel is 'l' and the red window is 'e.'

It's always in there, just have to look.

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (1)

scottrocket (1065416) | about a year ago | (#43144421)

The roll of tape plus the blue cylinder make 'G', the red radio and yellow teacup make 'oo,' the blue Guide plus the leather bag make a rough 'g', the green towel is 'l' and the red window is 'e.'

Whoosh on me - thanks for the fishing! Unfortunately, while tabbing back and forth between your description and Google, the doodle went black, and I panicked. :)

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (1)

Jeremi (14640) | about a year ago | (#43141743)

So the little bit of extra entertainment you got as a gift from the extremely useful service that you get to use for free didn't live up to your expectations?

Wah. See if you can get your money back.

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141797)

Perhaps something more important was going on and usurped the 60th birthday doodle?

Re: Undeserved Doodle Recognition (1)

SpaceManFlip (2720507) | about a year ago | (#43141843)

Allow me to retort... (try thinking of that line spoken a couple of different ways, one in a British uppity accent, another in the Sam Jackson / Pulp Fiction character's line) Douglas Adams is deserving of any praise any company or individual chooses to give him. For one, those types of choices are not a world-democracy ballot option or anything, i.e., it's not up to anybody but the praise-deliverer. For another, he was a technological visionary who provided the world with a great gift of lovable entertainment. He also invented the concept that Wikipedia is based upon, essentially. Anyone ever visit H2G2.com back in the old-Internet days? I was a contributing member there before any lay person had heard of Wiki-anything. Maybe he wasn't an Asimov or Heinlein - level space visionary, but he certainly earned his keep well enough in my book. Wait, I haven't written any books. Have you? Has anyone? Kudos to Google for their cool distraction and Happy Birth Anniversary DNA

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (1)

degeneratemonkey (1405019) | about a year ago | (#43142249)

Here's what I imagine happens.

1. Look at $date.
2. Anything noteworthy happen? If no, skip to #5.
3. Do we think it's interesting? If no, skip to #5.
4. Make Google Doodle of it. Yay, interesting knowledge for people to stumble upon.
5. Increment $date by 1 day and go back to #1.

There's nothing special about multiples of 10. In fact, prime numbers are certainly much more special by many standards. 61 is a prime number.

If Google hired so many pedants they would probably have never gotten off the ground. They'd still be arguing over the fact that "luck" doesn't really have anything to do with the operation of the "I'm feeling lucky" button.

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (2)

rilister (316428) | about a year ago | (#43142281)

"Google Doodles like this do rub me up the wrong way. For a start, the person concerned is often an obscure one (or at least obscure outside the US - the US-centric doodles end up on Google UK, where they probably don't belong)."
I'm confused: you object because you learn something? Maybe I misunderstood.
Personally, I prefer the ones I don't know... (sorry if this seems snotty - I'm perfectly sincere.)

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142357)

In this case, why wasn't the 60th year since Adams' birth celebrated last year, rather than the 61st this year?

Because they missed it last year and didn't want to wait another 9 years for the 70th to roll 'round? Frankly, Google is only ~15 years old itself, and depending on how capricious the internet is feeling, it might not be around in another 9 years. So waiting around for the 200th birthday of [insert_obscure_Hungarian_physicist_here] or even the 175th is probably not a wise idea.

P.S. There's no guarantee that *you*'re still going to be here 9 years out, so if you're putting off something you might enjoy just because it doesn't match up with the historical accident that we have ten fingers (or whatever arbitrary limitation you're imposing on yourself), you may be sorely disappointed.

Re:Non-rounded, often obscure and "deathdays"... (1)

Sir or Madman (2818071) | about a year ago | (#43143471)

And, finally, I must take massive umbrage with the Google tooltip that says "Douglas Adams' 61st birthday". I'm sorry, but once someone dies, they can no longer have birthdays after their death. It should be "61st anniversary of his birth", but I guess that's too long and not so catchy. I now call them "deathdays" when Google does this :-)

Say what? Everyone has exactly one birthday unless you were born a night.

Actually, the tea is... (3, Informative)

eegad (588763) | about a year ago | (#43141653)

... a strong Brownian Motion producer, which is essential for the Infinite Improbability Drive which powers Zaphod's stolen spaceship, the Heart of Gold.

So Adams must have mentioned tea in more than one body of work, which isn't too surprising for an Englishman.

BTW, editors, it's Douglas Adams' birthday, not Douglas Adam's birthday. Although, according to infinite improbability, there is probably a Douglas Adam whose birthday it is today as well. Oh dear...

Re:Actually, the tea is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43141925)

BTW, editors, it's Douglas Adams' birthday, not Douglas Adam's birthday.

It's Douglas Adams's birthday, because 'Adams' is not plural. Nitpick out.

Re:Actually, the tea is... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142333)

Dear, Nitpick: Apparently, just an apostrophe can be correct. [englishrules.com]

Re:Actually, the tea is... (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | about a year ago | (#43143173)

That's wrong and you should stop doing that forever. The possessive form of a proper name that ends with s is a singular apostrophe. You got it from the Interweb or from a bad computer program. Stop it. It's wrong.

source: my real name ends with an s and I am a friggin' expert at spelling my own name correctly in all its forms.

Re:Actually, the tea is... (1)

EvanED (569694) | about a year ago | (#43143279)

my real name ends with an s and I am a friggin' expert at spelling my own name correctly in all its forms.

Apparently not.

Less tongue-in-cheek, both forms are acceptable, and the 's form seems moreso.

The MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers states "to form the possessive of any singular proper noun, add an apostrophe and an s" and gives examples including "Dickens's reputation" and "Descartes's philosophy". There is no specific rule for proper names ending in an s.

A Writer's Reference by Diana Hacker says "If the noun is singular and ends in -s, add -`s" and gives the example of "Lois's sister spent last year in India." It follows up by saying "Exception: If pronunciation would be awkward with the added -'s, some writers use only the apostrophe. Either use is acceptable" and gives the example of "Sophocles' plays are among my favorites."

The Chicago Manual of Style says "The possessive of most singular nouns is formed by adding an apostrophe and an s" and gives a examples of "the bass's stripes", "Jesusâ(TM)s adherents", "Kansas's legislature", and "Dickens's novels" among others. It later states "In a return to Chicagoâ(TM)s earlier practice, words and names ending in an unpronounced s form the possessive in the usual way (with the addition of an apostrophe and an s)", and then "In a departure from earlier practice, Chicago no longer recommends the traditional exception for proper classical names of two or more syllables that end in an eez sound. Such names form the possessive in the usual way (though when these forms are spoken, the additional s is generally not pronounced)"; in the latter case, giving examples such as "Euripidesâ(TM)s tragedies". Finally, the section ends by saying "Some writers and publishers prefer the system, formerly more common, of simply omitting the possessive s on all words ending in sâ"hence âoeDylan Thomasâ(TM) poetry,â âoeEtta Jamesâ(TM) singing,â and âoethat businessâ(TM) main concern.â Though easy to apply and economical, such usage disregards pronunciation and is therefore not recommended by Chicago."

Re:Actually, the tea is... (1)

EvanED (569694) | about a year ago | (#43143299)

Mmmm Unicode.

Here's that last quote again fixed: "Some writers and publishers prefer the system, formerly more common, of simply omitting the possessive s on all words ending in s -- hence "Dylan Thomas' poetry," "Etta James' singing," and "that business' main concern." Though easy to apply and economical, such usage disregards pronunciation and is therefore not recommended by Chicago.

Re:Actually, the tea is... (3, Informative)

the_other_chewey (1119125) | about a year ago | (#43142185)

... a strong Brownian Motion producer, which is essential for the Infinite Improbability Drive which powers Zaphod's stolen spaceship, the Heart of Gold.

So Adams must have mentioned tea in more than one body of work, which isn't too surprising for an Englishman.

Completely useless stats for the record:

Tea is mentioned 31 times in the five volumes of the Hitchhiker Trilogy. That includes
once in the first volume's dedication ("...for tea, sympathy, and a sofa"), and three
uses of the phrase "a liquid that was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea"
(twice in vol. 1, once in vol. 2).

In detail:

  • Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: 5
  • The Restaurant at the End of the Universe: 13
  • Life, the Universe, and Everything: 8
  • So Long, and Thanks For All the Fish: 4
  • Mostly Harmless: 1

Re:Actually, the tea is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43143359)

Are you sure the cup doesn't contain a substance that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea?

Re:Actually, the tea is... (1)

itsdapead (734413) | about a year ago | (#43143989)

... a strong Brownian Motion producer, which is essential for the Infinite Improbability Drive which powers Zaphod's stolen spaceship, the Heart of Gold.

...plus all that fun with Arthur's attempt to get a cup of tea from the Nutrimatic machine.

Oh, and the title of the Dirk Gently book was taken from the third HHGTTG novel, anyway.

DNA Bday (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142225)

Douglas is terribly missed. His brand of humour was unique. But it does live on in others like Neil Gaiman, and in comic novels like THE MYOSHI EFFECT. Happy Bday DNA.

Is this on .com, or .co.uk? (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#43142299)

The summary links to google.com, and there's no doodle - at least, not for me, even after a ctrl-F5. On google.co.uk [google.co.uk], though, it's there in all its glory.

Dirk Gently! Yeah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43142323)

Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency stories are my favorite D.A. books. I really like HHGttG, but, I think DGHDA is great! I don't know why they've never made those into movies. They would be superb.

While I'm on the subject, I'd really like to see some "Stainless Steel Rat" (Harry Harrison) movies as well. Heck, I think a lot of Harry Harrison's stuff would make some great movies too! "West of Eden" anyone? Alternative History of the Civil War/World War 1? Great Stuff.

Re:Dirk Gently! Yeah! (1)

andrewbaldwin (442273) | about a year ago | (#43142993)

There was a version of Dirk Gently made for BBC quite recently - followed up by a series 'inspired by' the books. As stand alone items they were (in my view) pretty good and worth watching, but not at all faithful to the original text. The radio drama series (on BBC Radio 4) was much closer to the originals.

As for Stainless Steel Rat -- totally agree and way overdue !! (Bill the Galactic Hero would be good as well)

Re:Dirk Gently! Yeah! (1)

itsdapead (734413) | about a year ago | (#43144091)

There was a version of Dirk Gently made for BBC quite recently - followed up by a series 'inspired by' the books. As stand alone items they were (in my view) pretty good and worth watching, but not at all faithful to the original text.

Agree - I much preferred the bits of the series where they weren't using bits and pieces from the books. The great fun of the books is the way all the ridiculous plot elements and red herrings all get pulled together logically (for an imaginary value of 'logic') in the end.

However, I don't think they had anything like the budget needed to create electric monks, ghosts, giant invisible spaceships, primordial Earths or pop in on Coleridge so they were probably right to keep it simple and not make a Zaphod's head of it. And I expect that Valhalla was all booked up by the Harry Potter crew when they were shooting it :-)

Localised Googles (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43143181)

I tried a bunch of localised Googles (google.ru, .is, .nl, .fr, .de, .ie, ...) and now I know how to say DON'T PANIC in 26 languages. Now that's pretty thorough.

HHGTTG-Inspired Novel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43143631)

Tribute to Douglas Adams:
http://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Me-Perfection-Labs-ebook/dp/B006FXE1OC/

Last Chance to See (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43145047)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Chance_to_See

Google Plus keeps me doodle-less (1)

Mozai (3547) | about a year ago | (#43147999)

Now that I'm using Google Plus, I don't get the Google Doodles anymore; I'm always shunted to a vanilla search page, with a small sign that cajoles me into using Google's Chrome browser instead of whatever else I'm using at the time. Attempts to view the front page or the Canadian *.ca search page senses that I'm a Google Plus user, and shunts me back to the "you would be happier if you used Chrome" doodle-less page.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...