Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Is there anything I will like?

Snappy armour/uniforms? Incredible war machines? An impressive battle?

Any creatures or aliens? One of the reasons I disliked the 1984 version (and there were many) was the lack of biodiversity on screen. Humans, a small dog, a skinny cat and sandworms don't a world make for me. I don't expect Arrakis to be Fenrille, but still...

Edited by Podtastic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Podtastic said:

One of the reasons I disliked the 1984 version (and there were many) was the lack of biodiversity on screen.

Villeneuve's Dune is a lot more restrained than Lynch's vision.  While it shares (and often exceeds) the epic scope of the '84 film, the production design is considerably more muted in its color schemes and architecture.  It's a much more convincing future world, but it's not nearly as striking or memorable as how Lynch envisioned it... particularly given the absence of a monstrous third-stage Navigator.  Think of it less like Star Wars and more like Blade Runner.

Knowing the film was only covering the first half of the book -- and thus had twice as much run time to tell the story -- I was actually shocked at how much material was excised, far beyond the mere absence of characters like Princess Irulan, Feyd, or the Emperor himself.  While I was happy to see a lot of awkward dialogue removed ("mood is a thing for cattle and women," "no woman-child ever withstood that much," "the sleeper must awaken," etc.) I was equally dismayed by how much exposition and backstory was sidelined, if not outright ignored. 

As a sci-fi geek, I know full well about the Butlerian Jihad, but isn't the average viewer likely to wonder why there's no artificial intelligence in Dune?  Or what a Mentat is?  What about the Navigators, or the Spacing Guild?  The art of Kanly?  Suk Imperial Conditioning, and why Dr. Yueh would've been above suspicion?  Hell, they barely even mention the function of the spice, the central concept that drives the plot. :huh:

I'm surprised viewers like @mikeszekely weren't left cold and befuddled by the lack of proper world-building.  :unknw:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, tekering said:

 

As a sci-fi geek, I know full well about the Butlerian Jihad, but isn't the average viewer likely to wonder why there's no artificial intelligence in Dune?  Or what a Mentat is?  What about the Navigators, or the Spacing Guild?  The art of Kanly?  Suk Imperial Conditioning, and why Dr. Yueh would've been above suspicion?  Hell, they barely even mention the function of the spice, the central concept that drives the plot. :huh:

 

Have you seen most popular movies? The average viewer doesn't wonder much. As long as the opening scene has explosions, they like the movie.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tekering said:

Villeneuve's Dune is a lot more restrained than Lynch's vision.  While it shares (and often exceeds) the epic scope of the '84 film, the production design is considerably more muted in its color schemes and architecture.  It's a much more convincing future world, but it's not nearly as striking or memorable as how Lynch envisioned it... particularly given the absence of a monstrous third-stage Navigator.  Think of it less like Star Wars and more like Blade Runner.

Knowing the film was only covering the first half of the book -- and thus had twice as much run time to tell the story -- I was actually shocked at how much material was excised, far beyond the mere absence of characters like Princess Irulan, Feyd, or the Emperor himself.  While I was happy to see a lot of awkward dialogue removed ("mood is a thing for cattle and women," "no woman-child ever withstood that much," "the sleeper must awaken," etc.) I was equally dismayed by how much exposition and backstory was sidelined, if not outright ignored. 

As a sci-fi geek, I know full well about the Butlerian Jihad, but isn't the average viewer likely to wonder why there's no artificial intelligence in Dune?  Or what a Mentat is?  What about the Navigators, or the Spacing Guild?  The art of Kanly?  Suk Imperial Conditioning, and why Dr. Yueh would've been above suspicion?  Hell, they barely even mention the function of the spice, the central concept that drives the plot. :huh:

I'm surprised viewers like @mikeszekely weren't left cold and befuddled by the lack of proper world-building.  :unknw:

While I neither agree or disagree (because I am not versed in the source material), I really enjoyed reading your .02. Just wanted to state my appreciate for how you presented your thoughts on this iteration of Dune.

3 hours ago, sqidd said:

Have you seen most popular movies? The average viewer doesn't wonder much. As long as the opening scene has EXPLOSIONS, they like the movie.;)

You rang? Where do I buy my ticket??? 🤣

-b.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the consensus, worth watching in theatre?  I hear the visuals are incredible, but are they enough to get me off my lazy butt and into a theatre.

I'm familiar with the background story, watched the 84 version numerous times, will it just piss me off when they cut it off and make me wait for part 2?

Thinking about just skipping it in theatres and watching them both back to back when part 2 is available to stream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should absolutely watch this in a cinema. The bigger the screen the better. A good sound system will be beneficial too.

This movie was made for cinemas. The imagery and the sound design will be lessened by watching it at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, peter said:

What's the consensus, worth watching in theatre?  I hear the visuals are incredible, but are they enough to get me off my lazy butt and into a theatre.

I'm familiar with the background story, watched the 84 version numerous times, will it just piss me off when they cut it off and make me wait for part 2?

Thinking about just skipping it in theatres and watching them both back to back when part 2 is available to stream.

ABSOLUTELY!!  Especially if you can in IMAX.  It's not a perfect adaptation, but in my opinion it's by far the best one yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, peter said:

What's the consensus, worth watching in theatre?  I hear the visuals are incredible, but are they enough to get me off my lazy butt and into a theatre.

I'm familiar with the background story, watched the 84 version numerous times, will it just piss me off when they cut it off and make me wait for part 2?

Thinking about just skipping it in theatres and watching them both back to back when part 2 is available to stream.

My recommendation is to absolutely watch this in theatres, the ending truly will give you Fellowship of the Ring vibes, at least it did for me. And when I saw it Dune Part 2 had not been officially greenlit yet.

The ending is not painfully abrupt and it ends about a good a time as any. 

12 minutes ago, Scyla said:

You should absolutely watch this in a cinema. The bigger the screen the better. A good sound system will be beneficial too.

This movie was made for cinemas. The imagery and the sound design will be lessened by watching it at home.

^This

6 minutes ago, levzloi said:

ABSOLUTELY!!  Especially if you can in IMAX.  It's not a perfect adaptation, but in my opinion it's by far the best one yet.

^Also this, but I didn't watch any of the made for TV stuff, just this and the different versions of the '84 movie, which I also enjoyed.

-b.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Kanedas Bike said:

^Also this, but I didn't watch any of the made for TV stuff, just this and the different versions of the '84 movie, which I also enjoyed.

-b.

The mini series was good, much deeper into the story than Lynch's version, or Villeneuve's Dune.  It did have generally very good performances from the leads, but  very much leaned into camp with the production design, and it simple didn't have the budget to really show the world of Dune.  That is perhaps Villeneuve's Dune strongest aspect, it shows the world magnificently, and also does a very good job of showing rather than telling (which was the most glaring problem with Lynch's telling rather than showing).  However, I agree that it could use a bit more telling.  It's greatest weakness is that it simply ends halfway through the second act.  It's not as bad as just abruptly fading to credits at a random scene, but I still don't feel it's as natural or as solid an ending as The Fellowship of the Rings.  Of course FOTR  was already cut out of LOTR as the first of three books, not just one book, so it's not a completely fair comparison. 

Edited by levzloi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, tekering said:

As a sci-fi geek, I know full well about the Butlerian Jihad, but isn't the average viewer likely to wonder why there's no artificial intelligence in Dune?  Or what a Mentat is?  What about the Navigators, or the Spacing Guild?  The art of Kanly?  Suk Imperial Conditioning, and why Dr. Yueh would've been above suspicion?  Hell, they barely even mention the function of the spice, the central concept that drives the plot. :huh:

I'm surprised viewers like @mikeszekely weren't left cold and befuddled by the lack of proper world-building. 

I'm not convinced that Dune is really accessible to the average viewer anyway, no matter how much is explained. By this I mean the ability to relate to the characters, and the broader than human scale scope, not the ability to understand what is going on.

Not explaining everything can work depending on how its done. If its a good movie, with some intriguing unanswered questions, then sci-fi fans (those not already familiar with it) might be inspired to delve into the lore to learn more. OTH the foundation must still be laid sufficiently to take the audience along, otherwise they become so confused that they no longer CARE what is going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Podtastic said:

I'm not convinced that Dune is really accessible to the average viewer anyway, no matter how much is explained.

Regrettably so. :unsure:

7 hours ago, sqidd said:

Have you seen most popular movies? The average viewer doesn't wonder much.

Even more regrettably so. :(

2 minutes ago, Podtastic said:

If its a good movie, with some intriguing unanswered questions, then sci-fi fans (those not already familiar with it) might be inspired to delve into the lore to learn more.

Like, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey. :good:

3 minutes ago, Podtastic said:

OTH the foundation must still be laid sufficiently to take the audience along, otherwise they become so confused that they no longer CARE what is going on.

Like, say, Jupiter Ascending. <_<

My expectations were probably too high going into this (despite my lukewarm reaction to Blade Runner 2049) because of my familiarity with the source material, the marketing hype, and all the praise heaped on the film.  I agree the cast is uniformly strong -- unquestionably the film's greatest strength -- but Jason Momoa felt a little out of place, bringing too much 21st century sensibility to the 102nd century setting the other characters seemed to inhabit.  Of course, we knew that from the trailers (and presumably, his Duncan Idaho was deliberately written that way).

In fact, virtually everything fresh and different about this version -- casting, production design, even the new bits of dialogue -- was present in the pre-release advertising, leaving very little novelty to the experience of actually watching the movie.  For a film over two and-a-half hours long, I was expecting more content than what the trailers presented... and there really wasn't.

It's a footlong sandwich with delicious bread, but surprisingly little meat. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tekering said:

Regrettably so. :unsure:

Even more regrettably so. :(

Like, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey. :good:

Like, say, Jupiter Ascending. <_<

My expectations were probably too high going into this (despite my lukewarm reaction to Blade Runner 2049) because of my familiarity with the source material, the marketing hype, and all the praise heaped on the film.  I agree the cast is uniformly strong -- unquestionably the film's greatest strength -- but Jason Momoa felt a little out of place, bringing too much 21st century sensibility to the 102nd century setting the other characters seemed to inhabit.  Of course, we knew that from the trailers (and presumably, his Duncan Idaho was deliberately written that way).

In fact, virtually everything fresh and different about this version -- casting, production design, even the new bits of dialogue -- was present in the pre-release advertising, leaving very little novelty to the experience of actually watching the movie.  For a film over two and-a-half hours long, I was expecting more content than what the trailers presented... and there really wasn't.

It's a footlong sandwich with delicious bread, but surprisingly little meat. :huh:

I think the real problem with Momoa was that he was being, himself. The guy has a ton of charisma, and most of the things he acts in plays to that, The problem is he doesn't really act. He plays slightly different versions of himself. It makes it hard for him to fit into a movie like this.  He's kind of like The Rock in this way. Fun to watch when he's doing "Rock Stuff". But he isn't going to fit into something "cerebral".

I don't want to take anything away from either of them. I've met The Rock (through a friend who worked on the Fast And Furious cars) and the guy absolutely oozes charisma and it super fun to be around. From what I hear Momoa is the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, sqidd said:

I think the real problem with Momoa was that he was being, himself. The guy has a ton of charisma, and most of the things he acts in plays to that, The problem is he doesn't really act. He plays slightly different versions of himself. It makes it hard for him to fit into a movie like this.  He's kind of like The Rock in this way. Fun to watch when he's doing "Rock Stuff". But he isn't going to fit into something "cerebral".

I don't want to take anything away from either of them. I've met The Rock (through a friend who worked on the Fast And Furious cars) and the guy absolutely oozes charisma and it super fun to be around. From what I hear Momoa is the same way.

I think it would be very interesting to see him play the other iterations of Duncan, such as the Mentat from Dune Messiah and Children of Dune.  Maybe he has the chops for it, maybe not, it would be interesting to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, levzloi said:

I think it would be very interesting to see him play the other iterations of Duncan, such as the Mentat from Dune Messiah and Children of Dune.  Maybe he has the chops for it, maybe not, it would be interesting to see.

IDK. Did you see him trying to act like Conan? Not exactly the toughest role, but boy oh buy, he did NOT pull that off.:p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got back from the theatre.  Decades have passed since I read the novel (I've only read Dune), and years since I've seen the Lynch film, whose over-the-top quality sticks with you, both in the visuals and the telling (all that inner dialog, the flying fatman, Sting's Feyd, etc.). All through the film, all I kept hearing in the back of my mind was Alia pronouncing, "He is the Kwisatz Haderach!"  😄 hopefully i didn't just ruin the experience for those of you who haven't seen the Villeneuve film.

So Villeneuve's film definitely uses the talent to its advantage, but it's greatly toned down compared to the Lynch film. It nearly perches on the precipice of boring, but there's enough going on between action scenes and quieter scenes to keep you vested. The visuals were outstanding, though, and I want to tip my hat to the conceptual artists who created all the various ship designs, especially that glorious Ornithopter, which was a bit of a star itself.  From the very beginning, and with the intro of every new ship, all I kept thinking is this is what the last three Star Wars films were missing.  Well, they were lacking a lot more than that😄, but SW has always been a visual funfest under Lucas, and the last three films were flatlining in that department, IMHO. I digress; I think Villeneuve hit all the salient points so far as a decent Dune film goes; the story flows pretty well, and ends at a good point- the end of one existence for Paul Atreides, and the beginning of another in the sequel. I don't recall the much from the book, TBH, as it's the Lynch film that still rings in my memory. To that end, perhaps the over the top nature of that film was its strength, as so much of it has stayed with me all these years, and I doubt I'll say the same about this film in twenty or thirty years. 

As to Momoa,  he's basically himself in every role, take it or leave it.  I thought he was fine for the role of Duncan, though. Zendaya's a lovely girl, and Villeneuve wants you to know it with all the glamour shots;  we're painfully aware that she and Paul are gonna hook up at some point, but I thought her character warmed to Paul a little too quickly. Too, I get the old trope of ritual combat, but I felt they accepted Paul and his mother a little too easily as well.  He followed the rules and killed his opponent, but that doesn't mean instant trust and acceptance come with that victory; he just killed one of your own, a difficult thing to forgive.  Anyway, I'm nitpicking. Overall, I thought it was a sedate but good film with absolutely beautiful visuals- a must to see on the big screen if only for that experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I watched this last night at home. Yeh, I know, I know, should have seen it in a theater, whatever. Work's crazy and wife was gone last night so I went in. 1080P 65" TV with a good surround system. Holy crap!  Turn the sub WAAAY down for this one..good grief!  Now I'm 46 and a sci-fi nerd, but somehow missed the original movie and the mini-series back in the day, so I went in cold.  The thing that stood out to me the most here...was Hans Zimmer's MUSIC! Wow! that made the movie IMHO. As someone said above, I think it nearly perches on the precipice of boredom at times, but going in I knew that there was going to be lots of world/universe building and it was the first of more movies. Hell the Title even says Dune Part One when the movie opens.  I enjoyed it for the most part, I want to see more. The visuals were stunning, can only imagine it in 4K!   Momoa did seem out of place, but I like the guy so whatever and Bautista didn't have much to do like at all!  The other characters and plot lines were good enough to hold my attention for 2.5 hours.   In the mean time, I am going to go back and watch the original at some point soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, derex3592 said:

Well, I watched this last night at home. Yeh, I know, I know, should have seen it in a theater, whatever. Work's crazy and wife was gone last night so I went in. 1080P 65" TV with a good surround system. Holy crap!  Turn the sub WAAAY down for this one..good grief!  Now I'm 46 and a sci-fi nerd, but somehow missed the original movie and the mini-series back in the day, so I went in cold.  The thing that stood out to me the most here...was Hans Zimmer's MUSIC! Wow! that made the movie IMHO. As someone said above, I think it nearly perches on the precipice of boredom at times, but going in I knew that there was going to be lots of world/universe building and it was the first of more movies. Hell the Title even says Dune Part One when the movie opens.  I enjoyed it for the most part, I want to see more. The visuals were stunning, can only imagine it in 4K!   Momoa did seem out of place, but I like the guy so whatever and Bautista didn't have much to do like at all!  The other characters and plot lines were good enough to hold my attention for 2.5 hours.   In the mean time, I am going to go back and watch the original at some point soon. 

Hans Zimmer is  a master of his craft and a boon to whatever project he's attached; if nothing else, you know the music is going to be good, and set the mood. TBH, though, I didn't notice it nearly as much in this film as others that he's scored. I'm sure I'll see this again, though, so upon my next watching (probably before Part 2 releases), I'll be more diligent to notice the music. Again, I tip my hat to the conceptual artists who filled this film with ships and backgrounds that are otherworldly, unique, and beautiful. I kinda wish LEGO had done sets from this; I would have been down for a couple Ornithopters at the very least. 

After watching this, Lynch's take is going to be a slap in the face followed by a splash of cold water.😄 Big difference in interpretation, but honestly, it's the Lynch film that will likely stay with you over the long term.  I was reciting things in my mind from Lynch's film even as I was watching Villeneuve's. And Sting!:p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, M'Kyuun said:

Zendaya's a lovely girl, and Villeneuve wants you to know it with all the glamour shots;  we're painfully aware that she and Paul are gonna hook up at some point, but I thought her character warmed to Paul a little too quickly. Too, I get the old trope of ritual combat, but I felt they accepted Paul and his mother a little too easily as well.  He followed the rules and killed his opponent, but that doesn't mean instant trust and acceptance come with that victory; he just killed one of your own, a difficult thing to forgive.

The Fremen are a very ritualistic, superstitious, and religiously structured people. Remember the Fremen reaction from the Atreides arrival on Arrakis and from Shaodout Mapes(the house keeper with the crysknife) where Jessica all but confirmed she's the mother of the Messiah? That goes a long way in Fremen society and is largely what kept Stilgar from having them both outright killed. 

 

Once Jessica reveals her status as Bene Gesserit she essentially became what a nun would be to hardcore catholics and became untouchable. Though that didn't keep Jamis from challenging her and Paul defending her. Rumors of Paul's status as the *ahem* "one true Fremen saviour" had indeed reached Stilgar's tribe so Paul killing Jamis was basically all but and act of god punishing him for his hubris.

Edited by renegadeleader1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2021 at 5:15 AM, M&#x27;Kyuun said:

The visuals were outstanding, though, and I want to tip my hat to the conceptual artists who created all the various ship designs, especially that glorious Ornithopter, which was a bit of a star itself.  From the very beginning, and with the intro of every new ship

Now that is a useful post. What were the Sardaukar armour/uniforms/weapons like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too went in 'cold' never having read the book, or watched the original 84 film. For some reason Dune just never sparked any interest and I've been flippng past all the Dune articles in the old sci-fi magazines and whatnot for almost 40 years. I heard there giant sandworms and that Sting was in it and it had the twin peaks guy.

Watched the new Dune on HBO Max last night and was very impressed. Story started out confusing (all the family names and whatnot-I easily got lost in the GOT type houses), but once it settled in a bit I was able to follow it. Towrards the end I was wondering how in the heck are they going to wrap up this story, so I paused it with 20m left and noticed the title said 'part 1'.  When it ended I had the same feeling I had when I saw the first Lord of the Rings movie...I definitely wanted to see how it all played out next!
Also, the movie looks incredible (watched at night on a 65 OLED and it was just wow!)

I would definiitely recommend it (new Dune) to the newbies-if I could follow it and enjoy it anyone could (not just prior Dune fans)

After it ended I immedietely felt regret at not having given it  (the original movie) a chance before, so looked and watched the original 84 right after!
It was quite a different experience. I could tell they were trying to fit in so much source material into a very small time window, the movie deserved to be 2x longer at least.
If it was not for just having seen the new Dune, I would have been completely lost in the 84 version...I know that because I was able to follow what was going on in the first half of the 84 movie, but once I was in new territory things started jumping around quickly and I got lost. I saw some great concepts that I hope to be played out SLOWER in the part 2 new version whenever it is released. The 84 version definitely had some strange concepts (the cat/navigators!?) but I appreciated the freshness of it. I was amazed how big of a world they created for such a relatively small budget. I definitely respect what they were trying to do.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Podtastic said:

What were the Sardaukar armour/uniforms/weapons like?

While their introduction scene with the ceremony was great, the uniforms were a bit lacking IMO, as they (again) mainly look like guys in Hazmat suits. I found the Harkonnen soldiers much more intimidating.

TxxgNyP.jpg

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-22/dune-harkonnen-design-denis-villeneuve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rsvictor1976 said:

Villeneuveb did add something out of the book. The spider creature that we see get told to leave the room.

That and Paul's grandfather dying in a bullfight come from the Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson prequel books. Anderson is mentioned as a special consultant in the credits.

Edited by renegadeleader1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, electric indigo said:

While their introduction scene with the ceremony was great, the uniforms were a bit lacking IMO, as they (again) mainly look like guys in Hazmat suits. I found the Harkonnen soldiers much more intimidating.

TxxgNyP.jpg

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-22/dune-harkonnen-design-denis-villeneuve

The manner and numbers of their arrival was more striking to me than the costumes themselves, which, yeah, looked more like white hazmat suits than armor. Some cool wirework used in the film.

The stillsuit design didn't look much different to my eye than the one used in the old Lynch film, but I did like that we see Paul pull one out of a case and unravel it before we see him wearing it. It's a small detail, but being former military, I can appreciate the implication of its compact and portable nature.

Looking forward to Part 2; we caught a glimpse of a Fremen riding a worm, but it was fleeting and with the worm mostly submerged; hopefully Villeneuve will give us a full view of a worm topside for Paul's initial ride.  Too, looking forward to his development of the Voice, and his embracing the role of Kwisatz Haderach, a couple of the cooler aspects of the character from the book and previous film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found it to be a pretty faithful adaptation to the first half of the book.  I had no major issues with it.  It blows the Lynch travesty out of the water.  To be fair, Lynch did get one thing right, the inner monologues that are throughout the book.  IMs are a pain to put on screen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...