I’m totally befuddled — like some hapless twit who doesn’t know where his towel is.
I’ve been hesitating to go see "Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy" because I’ve waited so long for it, and I don’t want to be bitterly disappointed. I’ve read such contradictory reviews. The one we ran in The State made it sound awful, and it seemed to be written by someone who knew his way around Douglas Adams’ universe. Then The New York Times made it sound delightful. This made me hopeful. That’s a pretty good paper, right? And has Martin Freeman ever been in anything bad? (Then again, the Times had kind things to say about the awful American ripoff of "The Office." And the original version of that is the only thing I’ve ever seen Martin Freeman in.)
There are reports that true believers are split on the matter.
Help me out, froods. If you’re a true fan of Arthur, Ford, Zaphod and the rest — and you have to have read all five volumes in the Hitchhiker Trilogy, and read the first two repeatedly, to qualify — and you’ve seen the film, let me know.
Which is it? Should I avoid it like the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal? Would it cause me to walk out in the middle, gratuitousy muttering "Belgium" under my breath? It so, tell me now. But if it’s really hoopy, just say, "Don’t Panic!"
This idea has also sorts of potential. Users are free to do what they want on the host OS, including installing their own applications and data.