You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.77 AVERAGE
3.77 AVERAGE
honestly, I don't know what was all the fuss with Trillian and deciding to get a kid when she knows she's so busy with her career. Now she emotionally neglected her own kid with Arthur as the sperm donor.
But other than that, this was a better book compared to Book 3 but not was great as Book 4. I'm disappointed with myself that I lost the excitement to read these books that I had from Book 1. Yet I will try my best to get into the original radio drama, as I feel like especially with the jokes, they're delivered better in the radio drama than on the written text.
But other than that, this was a better book compared to Book 3 but not was great as Book 4. I'm disappointed with myself that I lost the excitement to read these books that I had from Book 1. Yet I will try my best to get into the original radio drama, as I feel like especially with the jokes, they're delivered better in the radio drama than on the written text.
Well I would be remiss if I did not mention the ending before anything else. First of all this isn't technically the ending of the series, Douglas Adams just died before he wrote anymore Hitchhiker books, that being said this makes this the series ending for all intents and purposes. So with that in mind this is the worst ending of a series that could have ever possibly been conceived. In truth this shouldn't have been the ending of a book. If you are the kind of person that is all about the ending. Then this book will infuriate you.
But the book is better than So Long and Thanks for All the Fish. Adams deals with the problems of that book from the outset, and they are all gone maybe not so cleanly.
There are two things wrong here, first anytime you add children to a book, movie, or tv show things are going bad. And the kid is not going to correct it. Usually what happens is what happens here the kid is an annoying distraction that drives off the few hardcore fans that have stuck around. Luckily the kid doesn't stick around for the whole story, but Random, the kid's name, is just as annoying as Fenchurch, Arthur's love interest from So Long.
Second, this goes to the heart of the series. I think the problem is Douglas Adams lost his vision for clever and witty social commentary. It was just not in the last two books of the series. The stories were okay, but lacked that cutting wit that makes you laugh at the world.
I will always have fond memories of this series, but they would have been fonder if I had stopped after Life, The Universe, and Everything. And that is what I am recommending to everyone.
But the book is better than So Long and Thanks for All the Fish. Adams deals with the problems of that book from the outset, and they are all gone maybe not so cleanly.
There are two things wrong here, first anytime you add children to a book, movie, or tv show things are going bad. And the kid is not going to correct it. Usually what happens is what happens here the kid is an annoying distraction that drives off the few hardcore fans that have stuck around. Luckily the kid doesn't stick around for the whole story, but Random, the kid's name, is just as annoying as Fenchurch, Arthur's love interest from So Long.
Second, this goes to the heart of the series. I think the problem is Douglas Adams lost his vision for clever and witty social commentary. It was just not in the last two books of the series. The stories were okay, but lacked that cutting wit that makes you laugh at the world.
I will always have fond memories of this series, but they would have been fonder if I had stopped after Life, The Universe, and Everything. And that is what I am recommending to everyone.
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
fast-paced
adventurous
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I must admit, I have forgotten the absolute genius of Adams. Each one of 5 books in his theology is unique and wonderfully creative story. Each one brings new, and amazing ideas. Each is filled with British humour.
It's quite remarkable how he is not merely repeating the recipe that worked before, but instead truly exploring new territories, characters, and adding completely new concepts, and it's also remarkable how well it works! I've read all 6 books of the trilogy twice now, and I've enjoyed my 2nd time as much as I did the first.
Tl;dr: Every second spent on any of the first 5 books of the trilogy was pure joy.
It's quite remarkable how he is not merely repeating the recipe that worked before, but instead truly exploring new territories, characters, and adding completely new concepts, and it's also remarkable how well it works! I've read all 6 books of the trilogy twice now, and I've enjoyed my 2nd time as much as I did the first.
Tl;dr: Every second spent on any of the first 5 books of the trilogy was pure joy.
On par with the first in the series, if not the best. Though it was a mistake not to include Marvin or Zaphod.
Marvin had so many fake our deaths in the series. Book 4 could have been another fake out death and he could have died with everyone else here. He could have been like "finally" while Arthur was finding peace
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
sad
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I came back to this series after many decades of not re-reading it, and it's still a fun series. I don't think anyone has mastered the metaphor and simile like Douglas Adams. I had stopped at the book before this one, so this was (I think) my first time reading it. The ending is a bit of a let-down, if only because it felt like it was building up toward something else and then it sort of just... fizzles. Yes it does sort of make a symmetrical sort of poetry but not in a satisfying way (at least not for me).
funny
lighthearted
funny
lighthearted