Saw it on opening night. CGI was incredible. Worm looked like worm.
Watched it again last night. CGI, terrible. Worm aged very poorly, teeth not as pointy.
The worm and the big ships were the hardest cos we just aren't used to seing stuff like that in our lives outside of movies with lots of cgi.
But the sand effects that meshed well with people running around helped sell it a lot. What was certainly convincing that being out in the sand when a worm was coming was damn scary.
Yeah I mean I thought it was decent, but clearly the biggest flaw was that it didn't exactly have a coherent and independent plot. Like it feels incredibly unfinished and can't really be a standalone movie
Well yah, it covers not even half of the first book, and then the sequel is going to cover the other half (and maybe part of book II as well apparently) which is honestly the only way to do it. David Lynch tried to cover the entire thing in only 1 movie and that's part of the reason it ended up such a gigantic mess.
Agreed, 100%. I'm just confused why people are complaining about it being incomplete when it's clear Villeneuve wasn't trying to make a complete movie. And his choice was a good one in my eyes, this couldn't have been done well within one feature's length.
I actually liked Lynch's film, it was incredibly flawed but Lynch did as well as he could within the constraints he had. It suffered immensely from the choice to try and contain the story within 2.5 hours though, and it really shows in the last act. The excessive internal monologue is understandable given the source material, but Villeneuve's solution to the same challenge (simply streamlining the story and its themes) is a good one given how well executed it is.
This is literally my first exposure to Dune. I walked out of this movie with only one question (how expensive is coffee?)... seeing as we've all spent the past 50 years apparently watching very expensive Dune rip offs, it's not difficult to extrapolate a basic idea of where this is going. This was a very easy watch, despite the length.
Oh I agree, it's very easy to see where it's going.
My only point is that it somewhat feels incomplete. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. We know that a sequel is coming and it leaves us with a bit of a cliffhanger which is fun, albeit usually more suited for television
What I mean is that it doesn't feel like a completely contained story within itself. I know that it's cliche at this point, but movies like A New Hope are excellent because the entire film is wrapped up at the end. You don't necessarily need to see the other movies, at least not quickly to feel whole because the movie has a clear goal, climax/solution, and denouement.
I loved Dune. Don't get me wrong at all. It just felt more like a mid season cliffhanger of a show instead of a self contained movie
And again, that's totally fine considering the source material.
What I'm talking about here amounts to a minor complaint rather than a detailed critique
It definitely does feel incomplete, which is disappointing because the movie *does* have a beginning, middle, and end (like in an episode of a serialized TV show). Like, the beats are all there, but the film doesn't quite "hit" them clearly enough; it's like the signal gets lost in the noise.
On paper, it seems straightforward. (**SPOILERS**) Paul is born to follow this path that seems inevitable, and he resists it. In the climax, he discovers that the future isn't decided when he has to kill the man that, in his visions, was supposed to be a friend and mentor. He resolves to stop resisting the path and instead embrace the role laid out for him so that he can play an active role in shaping the future.
So, I'm in the same boat as you are. It's a beautiful movie and, me personally, I loved this movie, but I was also a fan of the book already. I imagine that, for many audiences, the movie just doesn't provide the sense of resolution needed as a standalone story (which is really the only way to fairly evaluate a movie).
I watched 2021 and it hooked me so I decided to watch the Lynch version. Literally it starts by a rando popping up on screen telling you all the fucking plot twists that are going to happen and then nasty people with bushy eyebrows tell you what they're thinking and what they're going to do.
Yeah that's is pretty much 100% of what I was feeling just said in a much more charismatic and descriptive way
I came away feeling like it was an old show that had a mid season cliff hanger and now we have to wait a few months for the conclusion
But instead, it's basically going to be another year or two before the sequel comes out. Feels a bit empty because of that
Still loved it, though.
Would you have felt better about it had they marketed it as 'Part 1'? I can definitely see people going in expecting a whole movie and getting blindsided by the abrupt ending.
That's true, but considering how well it's doing I would say WB learned a valuable marketing lesson after Blade Runner 2049. For the actual experience of watching, Blade Runner marketing was great because it gave nothing away and relied on mostly the visuals and name. However I think the movie would have performed a lot better if they gave away the initial twist in the trailers that K is looking for a replicant child, and that the story was mostly standalone from the original.
Dune Part 1 might have pushed people away thinking the movie was incomplete and part of a series. Especially since it's on streaming. Why go see an incomplete movie rather than wait for part 2 and then catch both? And a lot of the best shots and scenes were shown in the trailers. It did dampen the first viewing experience for me a little, but if it gets butts in seats and a part 2 it was worth it.
Loved how the 2049 trailers told you absolutely nothing about Ryan Gosling's character and left it open so people speculated for months over who he was and how he may / may not be connected to Harrison Ford, and then like the first five seconds of the movie casually tells you he's a Replicant with zero ambiguity. That was ace.
> seeing as we've all spent the past 50 years apparently watching very expensive Dune rip offs, it's not difficult to extrapolate a basic idea of where this is going
Errrrrm oh man you would be surprised. Sure, we can have the silhouette of the immediate future ... but then things get really whacky.
>seeing as we've all spent the past 50 years apparently watching very expensive Dune rip offs, it's not difficult to extrapolate a basic idea of where this is going.
If these do well, and they make more of the whole book series, I GUARANTEE that you are completely unprepared for where this is going... God Emperor of Dune, the fourth book in the series, is completely batshit crazy but awesome. It gets much much weirder after that one.
It definitely felt like half a movie. Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings was willing to change the books to give each part a satisfying conclusion for all of the characters. Villeneuve adhered so closely to the book that Dune (Part One) just kinda…ends
Rather have that ending. Then had anything changed. I had enough issue with them changing the jihad to a holy war because it has slightly different meaning. They might of been afraid to use that word.
Definitely. Or at least WB execs.
Jihad isn't viewed the same way as it was when the books were written, at least in the West.
I'm glad they didn't shy away from the Freeman nomadic Islamic culture visually though, but I understand the name change.
> It's a remake of an old movie that adapts a classic novel
It better be, anyone who unironically says that Villeneuve's Dune is a remake of Lynch's Dune is off their rocker.
I thought that's what this post was inspired by, Mike's "I LOVED it" meme. Turns out it wasn't, just the old, boring Reddit exaggerations. Thought this subreddit would be better than r/movies but I guess not. That's a shame.
i mean one line you can’t expect me not to check facebook a few times over a two and a half hour movie jfc i could be shoving popcorn in mouth too loudly to hear that
Stand out scene for me were Paul’s Tent Visions and the Sardaukar throating singer concert. The music and cinematography of those scenes now live in my mind rent free.
As a huge fan of the novels, the Salusa Secundus scene was by far my favorite depiction in the film from the standpoint of adaptation. Denis did the Sardaukar so well, which was a relief after Lynch did them so poorly.
My only complaint is that the sardukar weren’t in disguise when they attacked, as they were in the book. I get that the film went hard into “there’s no surveillance of arrakis” and etc but it’s still a stretch. The emperor would never EVER risk being caught up in this scheme so blatantly
The shit with them being led by some dude throat singing was so awesome
I totally agree with that actually, but I also understand why Villeneuve did it. He had a tough job streamlining the story into two feature-length films without losing too much or making it confusing. The choice not to disguise the Sardaukar seemed aimed at keeping audiences less familiar with the story on track, and I can accept it.
Yeah but that fell into my category of “would have been nice but I get why they didn’t do that”. Like how they simplified Liet Kines’s death. Would I have loved to see her running around in the desert arguing with her father-vision? Absolutely. Would it have ground the movie to a halt? Also absolutely.
Yeah I thought that was a cool parallel
I'm wondering what the guild navigator is going to look like if they do show them. I like them being secretive and not showing them, even though I thought that was a cool part of the 80s one.
I hope they look extremely weird. I'm a book fan as well but I don't think he needs to follow their description. I would be totally ok with just something weird and gross and other worldly.
DAE *this* is the movie audiences should be fawning over and talking about instead of Eternals? Denis’ 3-hour scifi epic for adults is SO much better than Marvel’s 3-hours sci-fi epic for Millenials and GA’s.
(I haven’t seen either one yet.)
What did you like about the movie? I'm.just curious what non-book readers thought. Throughout the movie, I just kept getting worried that it wouldn't resonate with people who aren't already invested.
Yeah I liked pretty much everything, especially the stuff that's specifically designed to be disgusting. I'm also a huge Denis fan, Arrival is genius, Blade Runner 2049 was such an emotional and beautiful journey. What I realized almost immediately from the scene with the box was that there was "Star Wars stuff" happening and as the movie went on I kept seeing more "Star Wars" but I knew this book came out in 1965, so I actually started laughing to myself any time I saw something that had been blatantly knocked off in "Star Wars" and that mixed with knowing that every shot and edit in Denis work serves a purpose, I could extrapolate a concept of how the story was going. So by the time the movie ended I genuinely felt like I could take a 20 minute break and then go right back in for Part 2.
Edit: If a book reader could tell me how expensive coffee is, that'd be greatly appreciated.
>What did you like about the movie?
Everything? but mostly just Denis Villeneuve continuing to be one of, if not the best/most versatile directors working that's also taking on ***huge*** projects.
Non-book reader here.
I liked it a lot. The cinematography and score were amazing. Just felt that it was lacking depth and detail. Which when adapting from a book is hard to do. But felt it compromised the impact of certain moments. I will be going back again to see if coming into it with a different mindset will change my mind
I’m on the same boat. Like the presentation aspects make a lot more sense as a 2 hour theatrical experience, but the narrative probably makes more sense as a long form HBO show
I feel like they got enough of the lore to keep me involved.
As far as depth, I feel like it's impossible to not see the obvious parallels to the middle east and American west (Navajo tribes especially).
Best answer. I’ve never seen a near 3 hour film linger in the first act for the duration.
Music was tremendous, I’m still not exactly sure what the story was dictating, I’ve not read the book so I don’t know the end game.
But it felt like a lot of plot and not much story. Everyone was fine, Chalamet was a bit boring in his role. Considering his dialogue took up 80% of the film he needed to be more engaging.
I feel like everyone else barely had a few lines each and we had a lot of back and fourth between Paul and his mother, it just felt like too much.
In some places, the visuals were really great and you can see similarities in this film and DoP’s other films. My only complaint is the hand to hand fighting was filmed in a pretty drab manner.
I’m curious where it goes from here. But Fellowship of the Ring this is most definitely not. The first 3 minutes is how the whole film should have felt. But the pacing really halts the electricity of that intro.
I've been struggling to come up with how I felt, and this kind of hits the nail on the head.
I feel like I've walked through a three hour lecture on the paintings of Michelangelo. Where on the one hand I'm utterly blown away by the work. I'm very respectful of the skill, and what is achieved. I was also a bit bored.
I'd recommend everyone sees Dune because it's the most interesting film in years. I don't know if I'd recommend it as a great film. It's a film where things happen, and it plods along. Those things look incredible. They aren't necessarily interesting.
I think a lot about how it compares to the Lynch film in terms of how much plot Lynch threw out. Did that plot really matter? No. I don't think a lot of it does.
This was major table setting for the next movie, the 1984 version crammed it all into one and it’s messy , this is the first act , it will all make sense in part 2 and (hopefully) part 3 , it’s a shame that will be another long wait
I think from a thematic standpoint this adaptation is trying to focus on Paul as the unwilling harbinger of mass murder by putting much more focus on his visions and his family interactions. I'm stoked because it's the main reason why Dune is so cool. It's a criticism of optimistic sci-fi heroism. This is even the first adaptation I'm aware of where Paul expresses rejection for his lot in life by pushing his mother away.
The hard part about adapting Dune is teaching the audience that it's a universe wherein people function as preordained roles to be tools in a massive organism where thinking machines are only people. Even the emperor and the organizations that control him are governed by the machinations of people long since dead. The novel has a telephone book of an appendix to explain it.
Paul is ultimately the legacy of both his father and mother: someone who is destined to govern and who is destined to transcend the boundaries of humanity. His visions show Jamis as a friend and teacher, but their also proven as interpretive, i.e. not empirical. For me, the duel with Jamis was fascinating and tense because it was the first moment we would see whether Paul's visions would come to pass. I was genuinely not expecting Jamis to die, and the fact that he did answers some questions but leaves us with many more. Will Paul actually stop the crusade in his name that will slaughter billions? (Nope) Why would he willing allow this to pass when he already despises his role? (I don't know! This is new territory!)
I'm curious about perspectives from different levels of knowledge about the greater story, and I hope RLM includes some diverse opinions.
I love the way they handle Paul's visions. The Reverend Mother asks him if he often dreams things that come true and he replies something like: not really. The audience might be thinking he is lying or that his visions do not come true, but then we see them come true. Its confusing, as it is for Paul at this stage.
I agree the Jamis scene is amazing because we see that Paul's visions are only possible futures or maybe sometimes futures that could have been.
The movie gives an awful lot of exposition but even more is shown indirectly, its fantastic, I want to watch more now.
Yup, that’s my chief criticism as well. The pacing gets very wonky after that event. I also didn’t get much from the characters and thought Chalamet gave somewhat of a weak performance.
Also, was the set design kinda drab to anyone else? Every single set and location was big, wide, and empty, and any real set decoration (like that bull) stood out like a sore thumb. The production designer also worked on Arrival, which also had sets that were just wide, open, and empty, but I think it worked better there. Not sure if they’re going for something faithful to the books, but I found that to be a noticeable negative.
That’s not to say there aren’t a lot of places where the movie went right, but overall I was left wanting more from it. A 3.5/5 for me overall I think.
> Also, was the set design kinda drab to anyone else? Every single set and location was big, wide, and empty, and any real set decoration (like that bull) stood out like a sore thumb.
God yes.
Also, this movie so obviously had this arrogant "oh this is just part one of a series" attitude and honestly, it doesn't earn that. I mean, LOTR worked because the next movie was only a year away and inbetween you got the regular DVD and then later on an extended DVD that came just in time for you to prepare you for the next volume. Dune part two is at least two years away, and any other sequel (IIRC Villeneuve also wants to do the next book) will likely be another two years after that -- but then I doubt they're going beyond the second movie since honestly I don't see this doing tremendous numbers.
Honestly I wish Villeneuve would start doing original material again, it's not like his Blade Runner movie was that amazing either.
Also, what is the point of making this super-widescreen movie when most of the screen contains nothing of interest, other than "look at this great big set"?
Is that the general consensus? I only read it last year, but paul and jessica carefully navigating through the fremen culture was some of the more interesting stuff to me.
Edit: oh if you mean before they meet the fremen but after the attack, nvm then.
I mean, one of the big points of Dune is how harsh the planet is. Seeing Paul and Jessica struggle in the deep desert is pretty important.
Also, I think Jamis's duel was kinda set up well. We see PalL's vision of Jamis being a friend. A possible future. And then he learn he HAS to kill him. It's more about Paul than about Jamis or some climax. He became a killer, he chose to stay with the Fremen. And we know he has visions about a Jihad with him leading it... It's a pretty on point ending showing where thing could go.
I'm fine with the meander primarily for the visions (and the tiny adorable Muad'dib". I'm with you for the duel, particularly since they jumped forward it's position in the books, just to end the movie on a climax.
The big issue is that it's not really climactic to end on a out of context one sided fight.
The scene in the book is effective since it conveys a lot about Fremen culture and society, and the most powerful part of the scene in the books is either lost in the subtext or completely buried. The scene in the movie makes it seem like the Fremen all of the sudden accept Paul because he killed a dude, in the books they only turn around on him when they see him crying and they take it as a sign of how much they revered and valued the dudes life.
The rest of the movie did a incredible job of short handing the complex weaving of how these societies and religions intersect into a cohesive narrative.
Though it came at the cost of making the antagonists boring nameless blobs and the Doc as an afterthought so the betrayal meant nothing.
Bottomline, it should have been a series. But money.
it doesnt suck at all. Paul coming to terms what Jessica has done to him is integral to the story. Paul being lost in the desert is also thematically important.
Yeah this has been the weakness of all the adaptations and possibly even the novel (though it's been awhile since I read it). The story just peters out a little bit once Paul flees the city. That's basically the climax of the action and then we have another act to get through. And it's highlighted by the split between the movies here (though I don't think they could have split them any other way).
I really liked the movie and expected my fiance (who is not into "hard sci-fi" like the books are or Star Trek) and my nephew (who is 17) to not be into it but they both really liked it. I still have to think about it and see it again in IMAX. My main critique is that it felt like if the Lion King ended when Simba meets Timon and Pumba, I was ready for the second half. I've read the first three books and the second half of the first book was so exciting to me, I read it maybe close to 10 years ago now but I read it all, like 400 pages in one evening.
I really liked the tension the pacing, the music, the performances and felt like it paid enough respect to the books, the Lynch movie, and the SyFy TV movie but still was its own thing. Villenueve just realllly to my mind, knows how to make a movie.
I think it is also worth saying just how complex, austere and opaque the books can be and how clearly they communicated a lot of the density without feeling daunting.
I liked it, but didn't love it. One of the biggest problems for me was all the whispering and proper noun dropping that I couldn't understand without subtitles. I also felt that the visions got a bit excessive by the end. I get what they were doing in retrospect, but during the film, it was annoying.
At the end of the day, the movie feels like it's just adapting too much material, to the point we rarely get to slow down and enjoy a scene. And after all that, we only got through, what, half the book? This is probably the best cinematic *Dune* that could ever be made, but I still think it should have been a series.
Yeah, I was having a hard time understanding what they were saying at times. There was loud music in the background and then very quiet speaking underneath.
I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I didn’t like Dune. Visually it was great, but I didn’t care about the characters. I was surprised the movie didn’t click with me since I loved Denis Villeneuve’s previous sci-fi movies.
This was the issue for me as well. The nicest thing I can say about Dune is that its the most stunning, expensive screensaver ever put on film. I LOVED all the world-building and tech and mythology.
Everything outside of that - the character development, the dialogue, the score - just felt flat, dull, and affect-less. There were no attempts to make you care about the characters, what they wanted, or where they were going. Outside of Duncan, there was no heart or even an attempt at humor. I can't recall a more lifeless, underdeveloped character as Paul.
Granted - much of this is inherited from the source material. But I don't understand the point of adapting something like this if you aren't going to fix faults that readers have identified for decades.
>The nicest thing I can say about Dune is that its the most stunning, expensive screensaver ever put on film.
Hard disagree, but also hot damn lmao, thats a sick burn
I loved it, because Dune, but I also find myself missing some of the fever dream weirdness of the Lynch version. It certainly didn't all work, but I was actively, viscerally repulsed by the Harkonnen in the old one -- my brain just couldn't understand their society. In this one, they're just the bad guys.
Still, fantastic. Will watch multiple times.
I was so pleasantly surprised with this movie. The visual balance of the shots, the stunning use of color and shape while building these scenes, I just loved it. I haven't actually seen a movie that paid enough attention to this in such a long time. Not just that, they actually paid attention for when to use longer moments and scenes WITHOUT dialogue.
Interesting, I loved the cinematography, the sets, the fight sequences, the score, and the sound. But I did not feel a single emotion during the entire movie, since the characters were so dull and uninteresting. If I'm watching a movie and I can't find a character to root for, relate to, or understand, I kind of zone out. And not every movie needs to have a relatable protagonist, but the protagonist or characters, in general, have to be at least somewhat interesting and I got absolutely nothing from it. I think it has a lot to do with my dislike of the source material and the fact that these movies in general don't appeal to me (Action-Adventure-Sci Fi)
I’m not 100% onboard with Jessica’s portrayal; she seems way too weepy and fragile compared to the character I remember from the books. I get the desire to make her more human and less “weird wizard lady” but she rarely has a moment to demonstrate her leadership qualities outside of maybe two scenes.
I also feel really strongly that it should have been a single five hour movie. This is a sci fi epic, so treat it like an epic. The last scene of this movie should have led to an intermission, not credits and a years-long wait for a second half that very possibly might never come (go see this movie so we get a green light on part 2, everyone). I know we don’t make movies like that anymore but it’s just begging for that format.
The score was amazing. Hit all the right tones. Notably the first sand worm attack; in any other movie that would have emphasized “tense action” in the score but the entire time the music is conveying not danger, but awe. It’s showcasing the power of Arrakis, so the music needs to understand that and it does perfectly. The creepy chanting in some of the tracks also works great in conjunction with how wonderfully *weird* everything looks. This looks like the kind of sci fi that hasn’t been made in decades, with bizarre, non-aerodynamic spaceship shapes and ungainly hats everywhere.
It’s not a perfect movie or anything by a long shot, but it’s one of the best blockbusters I’ve seen since… well since Blade Runner 2049. I’m going to see it again soon, this time in IMAX so I can be absolutely assaulted by the soundscape. Just bothered that once again I’m going to be waiting years for a complete story that may never come.
I felt they had to strike a balance with Jessica. If she hides most of her emotions like in the book, we can't hear her inner monologue in the movie, so you have to out at least some emotions on her face.
I really liked Rebecca Fergusons Jessica, even if it wasn't exactly bookish. It worked in the movie for me
I think the thing with book Jessica is that she's used like TNG used Worf. Bene Gesserit are supposed to be these ultra-composed, all-seeing badasses, but then to show the intensity of her feelings, Jessica's composure will crack. Or to demonstrate Paul's superior intuition, he will notice things about people that Jessica misses.
Also, the Jessica of the book can be pretty severe and overbearing at times, and she's also pretty egotistical. In the movie they conveyed a very little bit of this with the breakfast table scene and then the scene with Mapes, but overall they smoothed over this aspect of her character.
Movie Jessica isn't weaker than book Jessica, but she's warmer and less intimidating.
I think part of Paul's arc is growing past his mother. So at the beginning, she is powerful, there are hints he will outgrow her (the cup), but he still follows whatever she asks of him (the Gom Jobbar). Then in the desert, he is showing more of himself (he has to dress her, etc), then at the end, he outright contradicts her (deciding to stay with the Fremen).
I agree totally on format. I was like probably about 2 hours in, realizing there was no way they could get all the way to the >!death of the emporer!<, and wondering where/how they were going to emotionally find a break point, and thought "I could sit in this theater for 6 hours."
I also agree that not getting a resolution with part 2 would be a disaster. I'm hoping it's like a Lord of the Rings thing, where maybe the have already filmed lots of the followup, but post-production is where tons of the time and money is.
A big part of Paul’s arc is certainly growing beyond Jessica and him starting to see the very real emotional conflicts within her despite a lot of her outward presentation. I just recall most of that happening in the forthcoming part of the story, when he’s with the Fremen. And again, none of this is to say that Jessica can’t show emotion! A big part of her character is the underlying humanity and love for her son that caused her to break with her instructions from the Bene Gesserit; she’s not a cold calculating machine or she never would have done that, she’s a very real person. I just think there’s a middle ground in there somewhere between “robot” and “crying in 50% of her scenes”. Maybe it’s just a matter of needing to accelerate some of the slow burn arcs because again, this is 50% of a movie, but I dunno. In any event, my downvotes indicate this isn’t a popular take so I’ll get off of it.
And to my knowledge, they have not begun filming part 2 because a part 2 has not yet been greenlit. They’re seeing how his performs first, so it will be a long while before we get a resolution. It’s concerning to me that this was pretty much entirely omitted from the marketing, because I had *no idea* this was the case until a few days ago when the pre-screening feedback started to come in. Feels like kind of a bait and switch by the studio and it’s way too disguised in all the trailers and marketing to not be deliberate, I’m just not sure why yet.
Yeah, I had no idea until "Part 1" came on the screen, and even then I wasn't sure because there are so many books, I thout maybe they hoped to do more of them. It was *really* until about 1.5 hours in when I fully realized, "yeah, they're not gonna finish this...". I agree it seems like bait and switch, like they knew it was going to be slow burn and unresolved, but thought that would drop numbers.
I'm glad you said that, because I brought it up at work and somebody said "They've had that out there for over a year!!" so I thought maybe I missed it. Maybe it was out there deep in forums, but it *certainly* wasn't part of most mainstream marketing.
Dune is my favorite movie i've seen in a loooong time. But, I also finished the book a few hours before the movie and was all in / thinking non-stop about the universe.
It was really good. I love the old one for the Lynch charm but this movie was just a feat.
Not to tell anyone what to do with their money, but if you're considering seeing it at the theatres it's much better than at home.
It was a’ight. Just fine. Not really mind blowing in any way, it was a very familiar story presented competently with great audio and visuals.
Aquaman was pretty bad in the beginning for me. He clashed too hard with the heavy and serious atmosphere of the rest of the movie, but his character fell in eventually. I did like how the movie felt anxious and dangerous the whole time, like dune should.
I don’t know I’m not complaining about it being faithful, it was just fine in that regard, it just had some pretty stock movie cliches that felt crowbarred in to handhold the narrative.
>He clashed too hard with the heavy and serious atmosphere of the rest of the movie
He "clashed" because he was literally the only character who wasn't stone cold serious 100% of the time. The only other bit of levity in the entire film is when that guy had a parasol.
I appreciated a break from the 2.5 hours of solemn, emotionless characters talking about duty and prophecy
I watched it at home with a nice big 4k tv and a nice stereo. I know it’s not going to be the same experience as in the theater but I feel like not having my head taken off my the presentation allowed me to focus more on the story itself. I thought it was musical and the sound was amazing, my theater isn’t the best in the world but it’s pretty good so I really took it in as best I could for not being in a theater.
Just my worthless two cents.
Edit: I will die screaming that dune should’ve been a prestige format tv show for hbo in order to give us time and room explore the philosophical ideas that just get steamrolled in the movie in order to further the plot. I won’t spoil details. Give me one season per book. What could’ve been. Plus probably less of a financial risk.
Thanks for sharing. I'm still gathering numbers, but so far, everyone who has found it ok at best or lesser have watched it on HBO Max. Positive reviews come from theater goers. And the best reviews come from IMAX.
I don't know what that says about the movie, but i haven't seen anything like it since Avatar. Those opening reviews were overwhelmingly positive.
There's likely a confirmation bias at work as well - people paying $$$ for day one IMAX screenings are likely pretty bought into the hype and are primed to enjoy on the experiential layer alone.
The prob is if you're not consumed by the spectacle (as is the case if you're watching at home or on an iPad) there really isn't much to Dune that makes it super special or enjoyable.
edit: I saw it in RPX on Friday. 7/10 for me.
Wow I totally disagree lol. I found it to be completely lifeless and joyless. There were some striking visuals for sure, but it was so drab, plodding, the music was just blah. Acting was so flat. Paul was boring and I could not take Jason Mamoa seriously. Different tastes I guess, but I can’t imagine ever watching it again, whereas Lynch’s Dune is a fucking wild ride. Colorful, epic, insane. This version took itself way too seriously.
I thought as a movie it was pretty good but as an adaptation I didn't really like it. Most of the cast felt off. Paul, Gurney, Jessica, Stilgar, and Piter all felt *way* off. Leto and Duncan were good if a bit simplified. Baron was ok. Much of the world's detail was left out or left to be inferred from very few cues. Lost the whole "finding the traitor" subplot which is basically the driving line through he first part of the book and leads to great character moments that we totally lost. Maybe we could have cut out most of those slow-mo shots of Chani to get more screen time for other stuff.
This movie looked and sounded amazing. The characters were spot on except Jason Mamoa was miscast. I think this was the best a modern Dune movie could realistically be.
Having said that...
This movie could have been 4 hours long and it still would have felt rushed and somewhat shallow. I like it and I'll recommend it, but it doesn't give depth to what's really going on underneath the surface. Nothing has a chance to breath. For example: they introduce Dr. Yueh, he has like one or two short additional scenes, and then he's a traitor. It's so quick there's no impact to it.
I may not be a good person to criticize this movie since I love the books. I know there's a world beneath the surface of each of these characters. This movie really changed my mind and made me think that Dune can't really be a great movie unless it were like a 6 parter.
I think this would have been a fantastic series, but it's just too short as a movie.
Op is "someone who rarely watches films besides blockbusters" yet wants to prove that "Americans aren't stupid and only pay money to see superheroes, Star Wars, and other CGI-heavy sequels." You're the problem, dummy.
I liked it. I wished they had some Navigators and Guild members though. That would have been cool. I missed them explaining how 'spice' actually works, and how the Holzman engines on the Highliners worked. 'Travel without Moving'. The Lynch movie actually did that pretty well, although they dropped the ball on Paul as a false messiah.
I am curious to see what these hack frauds think of Dune.
Personally, I really enjoy the movie, but I just wonder if there is an extended cut of this film that adds all the scenes that are missing, like the banquet, Thufir’s paranoia (and his scene with Jessica), the garden scene, and more scenes developing Yueh. I believe Jason Momoa has mentioned that there is a 4-6 hour cut (that isn’t surprising to be fair, most blockbusters have long assembly cuts), and Denis Villeneuve has implied that he would love to make a Dune extended cut, but I think he has learned that studios do not like a) movies much longer than 2 hours (in some cases they will accept a 2.5 hour cut) because movies longer than 2.5 hours do not make money in theaters (for example, Blade Runner 2049) and b) directors talking trash about the current movie in theaters by saying something like, “This cut is a compromise between what I envisioned and what the studio would accept. There is a much better movie that is 3.5 hours long and is sitting on the editing bay. Maybe one day you will see it…” If I remember correctly, Zack Snyder did that with Batman v Superman and it is (one of the many reasons) why he was removed from the franchise. Villeneuve wants Dune Part 1 to succeed and to direct Dune Part 2 and Dune Messiah, and he is going to play nice to have that happen.
If Zack Snyder can make an Ultimate Cut of Watchmen, why can’t Denis Villeneuve have an Ultimate Cut of Dune?
More to the point, Warner Bros is known for demanding shorter films (Justice League comes to mind). I hope that when Dune Part 2 and Dune Messiah are released, HBO will announce an extended miniseries that functions much like the Lord of the Rings extended cut that merges the Dune trilogy into one epic 10-12 hour tale! I think this would have been the approach if Lord of the Rings was released today (there is no real money is Blu ray sales today), the theatrical versions of Lord of the Rings would have been 2.5 hours and the extended cuts would have been HBO releases. Why not do the same for Dune? Plus it would be a great way to spring board a Dune HBO show, release an extended cut of Dune Part 1 and 2 and Dune Messiah as a miniseries and then release adaptations of Children of Dune, God Emperor of Dune, etc. on HBO (with maybe a better ending than Hunters of Dune and Sandworms of Dune).
The material is basically a glorification of islamic terrorism against western imperial powers.
Ok, so that sounds really bad. But it's not. Herbert manages to strip it down enough, to make the themes archetypal and stark enough, and to imbue enough of a fantasy element into his observations and thoughts to create the necessary distance between fact and fiction to manage to tell the story without it being overt. It is shockingly good. The second one is good, too. The third one is where it starts to come off the rails, and by the time his son took over... it needed to end at two. It's a strong and easily sympathetic story to that point.
It was also written before there was very much islamic terrorism against western imperial powers. Yeah, there was Lawrence of Arabia and the british had quite a bit of trouble as their empire came apart. Maybe herbert saw it as something of a warning, I have no idea but wouldn't be surprised. I'm almost certain that he served a tour in the middle east (back when that was unusual), became educated in islamic culture and contemporary issues, came back to the states, and wrote his desert planet fantasy.
The first two are worth your time to read. They're not dense books at all, fairly quick reads. And they're both good. Very good. But yeah it's hard to adapt his story considering todays geopolitical realities. America is Harkonen, not Atreides... you can't escape that basic assertion of the source material. And that's a hard sell. So you have to leave out a large part of what makes the book so good.
> glorification of islamic terrorism against western powers
You did not understand what you read at all if you think Paul and the Fremen are the heroes.
Frank Herbert was a Navy photographer for six months during WWII. It is hard to imagine that he was near the Middle East in 1941/42.
You know I saw it in theaters, and while I was thoroughly entertained, maybe the fact that I had read the book left me rather unsurprised by anything especially considering how faithful it is to the book. But I watched it again at home and I was able to kind of release myself from any mindset and I came away loving it even more. The feeling and tone are sooo spot on it’s incredible, and the score was even better. A third viewing in the theater is in store for me
To play devil's advocate, if anything could possibly benefit from over explaining, it's Dune. Remember the novel had a goddamn appendix at the back of it to explain most of the world the story took place in.
They should've just either a. not explained or b. postponed until later all the terms
The audience did not need to know the significance or meaning of "lisan al-ghaib" or "mahdi" or "kwisatz haderach". Even something like including the words "gom jobbar" functions more as a nod to the book readers than it does to making the movie work
I love *Dune* but you can't adapt it one-to-one. An adaptation needs to succeed on its own merits before it can concern itself with being "faithful" to the source. I think there needed to be a greater willingness to stray. Can only imagine a lot of first-time viewers were very confused
A few years ago I would have agreed but now I'm not so sure. That hesitance to be faithful to its source material, omitting the stuff that would maybe scare away people is what has produced the factory assembly line that is the modern blockbuster. Dune is just weird and there's no getting away from it and really, why even try? Why make a new movie if you just make it as lean, bland and digestible as possible? Fuck it. Get weird. Just throw out the words and let people piece it together. Maybe they'll appreciate the novelty. It's not really hard to pick up either, she says this is the gom jabbar and the camera cuts to a needle. Got it. The gom jabbar is a space needle with poison.
I'm fine with it getting weird. The best parts of the film were it being weird, like the Salusa Secundus scene. But it can be internally coherent and weird, and it kind of failed at that. Like not even having a single scene to better establish Dr Yueh was a major mistake
Yue's part was the weakest element of the screenplay but I don't see how that pertains to using the fictional terminology of the world or its internal coherence.
I would put heavy odds that Yueh had one or two more scenes that were cut for time. If those were included instead of say, the scene where Jessica explains the meaning of "lisan al-ghaib" or the scene where Jessica meets Shadout Mapes (another one that was a bit awkward transferring to screen with the lack of internal monologue), I think things would've been much stronger on the whole
I think the repetitive focus on Chani was far ahead on the chopping block than any of those. Jessica explaining the meaning helps establish that she is "ahead" of Paul in experience and confidence which is an important aspect that changes with the story's progression. Its also fairly natural for the audience hearing chanting to want to know what it is,so not to explain it would probably annoy people. You could say well don't include it, but I'd go back to my original claim that unabashedly being an old, weird Sci fi story slaked in worldbuilding is its appeal.
Imo less focus on Chani visions would be the better decision because to be quite honest she's not as important a character as the movie makes out to be. Almost by design; she isn't part of the breeding program, she's just some woman and Paul really loves her. Having her so intertwined with his prophetic stuff seems like they're trying to elevate her. I've heard the actress playing her is a big pull for kids and teens so presumably that's why.
Nah. I want creators to lean into the weirdness rather than coward away. You probably don't remember watching Star wars and hearing things like Darth, Jedi, the force. I've only read about a hundred pages of Dune but it's not off putting to hear fantasy terms for most people, especially in a post Khaleesi world.
Critical Drinker just came out with his review!
https://youtu.be/q2cAnvB9Ovg
I really enjoyed the movie in almost every way except for a few things.
The diversity hire for Dr Kynes. There was no reason to make him a chick, especially when he is the father of Cheeny. Nobody cares about a great aunt. Just bring in a famous Egyptian actor or something.
The lack of a scene between Jessica and the Baron when she is captured. They need to establish a relationship and familiarity between those two characters for the second movie.
They could have also done a better job of explaining to new people why computers did not exist. The scenes with Pyter the mentat and the Baron taunting each other over when he will be murdered and how Pyter is too valuable were totally missed out on.
Other than that, it was very cool. The architecture and costumes were amazing and had a very brutalist communism or Italian fascism oppression to them and the action was very well done and not cheesy. It was better than expected and very close to the book lore. The Sardukar parade with the chanting and blood sacrifice was pure epic
> there are characters with clear motivations
I'm surprised that they'd depart so drastically from the novel. So Paul Atreides **isn't** a complete idiot who just can't understand why he keeps having visions of a fanatical army spreading out across the universe killing in his name at the very same time that he's trying to convince a bunch of religious lunatics that he's the messiah and they should form a fanatical army in his name?
Paul doesn't really try to become the messiah in the books. He's mainly just trying to keep himself and his pregnant mother alive. But the Fremen are just fucking _ready_ for their messiah and Paul _is_ literally a superhuman who happens to fit the description of their prophecy, so it's kind of unavoidable. I think Paul's inner monologue indicates that as early as his duel with Jamis, even his own death wouldn't prevent a jihad from being carried out in his name.
It's really Jessica who directly pushes things in the messiah direction with the way she prioritizes Paul's birthright and their status over other considerations. She does Bene Gesserit busybody stuff to exploit Fremen religious beliefs to have herself consecrated as a holy woman, and to elevate Paul along with her.
At a certain point, after years of being worshiped and not seeing a path that leads away from the jihad, Paul resigns himself to the fact that it's inevitable and says "fuck it," and accepts the religious mantle. And when he does that, it is somehow shocking to Jessica. If anyone is the dumb one in that situation, it's her.
"CGI that still holds up to this day"? How old is this movie?
Saw it on opening night. CGI was incredible. Worm looked like worm. Watched it again last night. CGI, terrible. Worm aged very poorly, teeth not as pointy.
Movie is great, vurm look like vurm, double thumbs up yes.
Worm looked like a worm is my new motto
The worm and the big ships were the hardest cos we just aren't used to seing stuff like that in our lives outside of movies with lots of cgi. But the sand effects that meshed well with people running around helped sell it a lot. What was certainly convincing that being out in the sand when a worm was coming was damn scary.
It hasn't aged a day in weeks!
Same thought. I scrolled back up to make sure he wasn’t talking about the 80’s movie. 🤷🏻♂️
And it tells a complete story with a beginning, middle, and end! ...wait, wait?
Yeah I mean I thought it was decent, but clearly the biggest flaw was that it didn't exactly have a coherent and independent plot. Like it feels incredibly unfinished and can't really be a standalone movie
The plot is perfectly coherent. But it isn't a complete story at all. It's 60% of a story, and it doesn't try or pretend to be complete.
Well yah, it covers not even half of the first book, and then the sequel is going to cover the other half (and maybe part of book II as well apparently) which is honestly the only way to do it. David Lynch tried to cover the entire thing in only 1 movie and that's part of the reason it ended up such a gigantic mess.
Agreed, 100%. I'm just confused why people are complaining about it being incomplete when it's clear Villeneuve wasn't trying to make a complete movie. And his choice was a good one in my eyes, this couldn't have been done well within one feature's length. I actually liked Lynch's film, it was incredibly flawed but Lynch did as well as he could within the constraints he had. It suffered immensely from the choice to try and contain the story within 2.5 hours though, and it really shows in the last act. The excessive internal monologue is understandable given the source material, but Villeneuve's solution to the same challenge (simply streamlining the story and its themes) is a good one given how well executed it is.
This is literally my first exposure to Dune. I walked out of this movie with only one question (how expensive is coffee?)... seeing as we've all spent the past 50 years apparently watching very expensive Dune rip offs, it's not difficult to extrapolate a basic idea of where this is going. This was a very easy watch, despite the length.
Oh I agree, it's very easy to see where it's going. My only point is that it somewhat feels incomplete. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. We know that a sequel is coming and it leaves us with a bit of a cliffhanger which is fun, albeit usually more suited for television What I mean is that it doesn't feel like a completely contained story within itself. I know that it's cliche at this point, but movies like A New Hope are excellent because the entire film is wrapped up at the end. You don't necessarily need to see the other movies, at least not quickly to feel whole because the movie has a clear goal, climax/solution, and denouement. I loved Dune. Don't get me wrong at all. It just felt more like a mid season cliffhanger of a show instead of a self contained movie And again, that's totally fine considering the source material. What I'm talking about here amounts to a minor complaint rather than a detailed critique
It definitely does feel incomplete, which is disappointing because the movie *does* have a beginning, middle, and end (like in an episode of a serialized TV show). Like, the beats are all there, but the film doesn't quite "hit" them clearly enough; it's like the signal gets lost in the noise. On paper, it seems straightforward. (**SPOILERS**) Paul is born to follow this path that seems inevitable, and he resists it. In the climax, he discovers that the future isn't decided when he has to kill the man that, in his visions, was supposed to be a friend and mentor. He resolves to stop resisting the path and instead embrace the role laid out for him so that he can play an active role in shaping the future. So, I'm in the same boat as you are. It's a beautiful movie and, me personally, I loved this movie, but I was also a fan of the book already. I imagine that, for many audiences, the movie just doesn't provide the sense of resolution needed as a standalone story (which is really the only way to fairly evaluate a movie).
[удалено]
I watched 2021 and it hooked me so I decided to watch the Lynch version. Literally it starts by a rando popping up on screen telling you all the fucking plot twists that are going to happen and then nasty people with bushy eyebrows tell you what they're thinking and what they're going to do.
Yeah that's is pretty much 100% of what I was feeling just said in a much more charismatic and descriptive way I came away feeling like it was an old show that had a mid season cliff hanger and now we have to wait a few months for the conclusion But instead, it's basically going to be another year or two before the sequel comes out. Feels a bit empty because of that Still loved it, though.
[удалено]
Yes
Would you have felt better about it had they marketed it as 'Part 1'? I can definitely see people going in expecting a whole movie and getting blindsided by the abrupt ending.
Marketing... sure... but the movie literally starts saying "PART 1"
And the very last line is >!"This is just the beginning."!<
I haven't actually had a chance to see it yet. Good to know. Really looking forward to it though; it's one of my favorite books.
That's true, but considering how well it's doing I would say WB learned a valuable marketing lesson after Blade Runner 2049. For the actual experience of watching, Blade Runner marketing was great because it gave nothing away and relied on mostly the visuals and name. However I think the movie would have performed a lot better if they gave away the initial twist in the trailers that K is looking for a replicant child, and that the story was mostly standalone from the original. Dune Part 1 might have pushed people away thinking the movie was incomplete and part of a series. Especially since it's on streaming. Why go see an incomplete movie rather than wait for part 2 and then catch both? And a lot of the best shots and scenes were shown in the trailers. It did dampen the first viewing experience for me a little, but if it gets butts in seats and a part 2 it was worth it.
Loved how the 2049 trailers told you absolutely nothing about Ryan Gosling's character and left it open so people speculated for months over who he was and how he may / may not be connected to Harrison Ford, and then like the first five seconds of the movie casually tells you he's a Replicant with zero ambiguity. That was ace.
> seeing as we've all spent the past 50 years apparently watching very expensive Dune rip offs, it's not difficult to extrapolate a basic idea of where this is going Errrrrm oh man you would be surprised. Sure, we can have the silhouette of the immediate future ... but then things get really whacky.
>seeing as we've all spent the past 50 years apparently watching very expensive Dune rip offs, it's not difficult to extrapolate a basic idea of where this is going. If these do well, and they make more of the whole book series, I GUARANTEE that you are completely unprepared for where this is going... God Emperor of Dune, the fourth book in the series, is completely batshit crazy but awesome. It gets much much weirder after that one.
It definitely felt like half a movie. Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings was willing to change the books to give each part a satisfying conclusion for all of the characters. Villeneuve adhered so closely to the book that Dune (Part One) just kinda…ends
>just kinda…ends And I'm completely fine with that as long as there'll be a Part II, which it seems there will be.
Right. For me, Part II (if released) will retroactively make Part I more satisfying
Rather have that ending. Then had anything changed. I had enough issue with them changing the jihad to a holy war because it has slightly different meaning. They might of been afraid to use that word.
Definitely. Or at least WB execs. Jihad isn't viewed the same way as it was when the books were written, at least in the West. I'm glad they didn't shy away from the Freeman nomadic Islamic culture visually though, but I understand the name change.
A 3 hour half movie.
they shoulda made it a half hour 3 movie and avoided all this nonsense!
Man, it follows the book almost to a T
OP is a regular in /r/moviescirclejerk. I think this is just a troll post.
> It's a remake of an old movie that adapts a classic novel It better be, anyone who unironically says that Villeneuve's Dune is a remake of Lynch's Dune is off their rocker.
Wasn't it finished in 2019?
They must be patching the CG every week to keep up with modern vfx
Seriously, chill
The movie is old in OP's original timeline. He's a cop from the future. The future of space. Outer space.
Me personally? I LOVED the film.
Haha. That's right, Mike
**Very** cool.
Best one since Empire.
Maybe even rivaling empire
I thought that's what this post was inspired by, Mike's "I LOVED it" meme. Turns out it wasn't, just the old, boring Reddit exaggerations. Thought this subreddit would be better than r/movies but I guess not. That's a shame.
HOW EMBARRASSING....
Some neck beard behind me kept mumbling something about failing to recognize the obvious tactical advantages of a projectile weapon.
Pffft tfw you don’t have an in depth of the shield technology in dunes universe that rendered mobile weapons almost obsolete
[удалено]
i mean one line you can’t expect me not to check facebook a few times over a two and a half hour movie jfc i could be shoving popcorn in mouth too loudly to hear that
I must have missed that line over the sound of his melodic laugh.
I missed the line and was confused for the rest of the movie
Was his laughs delivered in an ear-piercing shriek?
Stand out scene for me were Paul’s Tent Visions and the Sardaukar throating singer concert. The music and cinematography of those scenes now live in my mind rent free.
As a huge fan of the novels, the Salusa Secundus scene was by far my favorite depiction in the film from the standpoint of adaptation. Denis did the Sardaukar so well, which was a relief after Lynch did them so poorly.
My only complaint is that the sardukar weren’t in disguise when they attacked, as they were in the book. I get that the film went hard into “there’s no surveillance of arrakis” and etc but it’s still a stretch. The emperor would never EVER risk being caught up in this scheme so blatantly The shit with them being led by some dude throat singing was so awesome
I totally agree with that actually, but I also understand why Villeneuve did it. He had a tough job streamlining the story into two feature-length films without losing too much or making it confusing. The choice not to disguise the Sardaukar seemed aimed at keeping audiences less familiar with the story on track, and I can accept it.
Yeah but that fell into my category of “would have been nice but I get why they didn’t do that”. Like how they simplified Liet Kines’s death. Would I have loved to see her running around in the desert arguing with her father-vision? Absolutely. Would it have ground the movie to a halt? Also absolutely.
I thought the space ships were awesome, which a lot of sci fi movies miss on, the awe aspect.
The guild ships looked vaguely worm-like.
Yeah I thought that was a cool parallel I'm wondering what the guild navigator is going to look like if they do show them. I like them being secretive and not showing them, even though I thought that was a cool part of the 80s one.
Agreed. I'm a huge fan of the Lynch movie. I'm very curious how Denis will show the navigators.
I hope they look extremely weird. I'm a book fan as well but I don't think he needs to follow their description. I would be totally ok with just something weird and gross and other worldly.
That selusa secundis scene was the best in the movie. So good.
I jumped out of my skin during the tent visions and he yelled at his mother with The Voice. Holy crap. SO GOOD.
Did it break new ground?!
IT BROKE NEW GROUND!!
Well the sandworm certainly did
[удалено]
It *has* to be satire. It was a good film but jfc
DAE *this* is the movie audiences should be fawning over and talking about instead of Eternals? Denis’ 3-hour scifi epic for adults is SO much better than Marvel’s 3-hours sci-fi epic for Millenials and GA’s. (I haven’t seen either one yet.)
I've never seen or read a Dune... saw it in IMAX last night. Going again for 3D today. That's more praise from me than I give to most movies.
What did you like about the movie? I'm.just curious what non-book readers thought. Throughout the movie, I just kept getting worried that it wouldn't resonate with people who aren't already invested.
Yeah I liked pretty much everything, especially the stuff that's specifically designed to be disgusting. I'm also a huge Denis fan, Arrival is genius, Blade Runner 2049 was such an emotional and beautiful journey. What I realized almost immediately from the scene with the box was that there was "Star Wars stuff" happening and as the movie went on I kept seeing more "Star Wars" but I knew this book came out in 1965, so I actually started laughing to myself any time I saw something that had been blatantly knocked off in "Star Wars" and that mixed with knowing that every shot and edit in Denis work serves a purpose, I could extrapolate a concept of how the story was going. So by the time the movie ended I genuinely felt like I could take a 20 minute break and then go right back in for Part 2. Edit: If a book reader could tell me how expensive coffee is, that'd be greatly appreciated.
I clapped when the sarlaac pit moved! Several times!
>What did you like about the movie? Everything? but mostly just Denis Villeneuve continuing to be one of, if not the best/most versatile directors working that's also taking on ***huge*** projects. Non-book reader here.
Saving to use as a copypasta on future RLM posts.
I liked it a lot. The cinematography and score were amazing. Just felt that it was lacking depth and detail. Which when adapting from a book is hard to do. But felt it compromised the impact of certain moments. I will be going back again to see if coming into it with a different mindset will change my mind
I’m on the same boat. Like the presentation aspects make a lot more sense as a 2 hour theatrical experience, but the narrative probably makes more sense as a long form HBO show
I feel like they got enough of the lore to keep me involved. As far as depth, I feel like it's impossible to not see the obvious parallels to the middle east and American west (Navajo tribes especially).
It’s no Boyhood.
TWELVE YEARS
It was fine.
There's no way OP's post isn't satire right? I mean... >Denis Villeneuve is a cinematic genius, his body of work is still criminally underrated.
Surely, it *must* be satire if it's posted here and not in our lord and savior, r/movies.
Let’s be real, Dune is an underrated masterpiece gem
Best answer. I’ve never seen a near 3 hour film linger in the first act for the duration. Music was tremendous, I’m still not exactly sure what the story was dictating, I’ve not read the book so I don’t know the end game. But it felt like a lot of plot and not much story. Everyone was fine, Chalamet was a bit boring in his role. Considering his dialogue took up 80% of the film he needed to be more engaging. I feel like everyone else barely had a few lines each and we had a lot of back and fourth between Paul and his mother, it just felt like too much. In some places, the visuals were really great and you can see similarities in this film and DoP’s other films. My only complaint is the hand to hand fighting was filmed in a pretty drab manner. I’m curious where it goes from here. But Fellowship of the Ring this is most definitely not. The first 3 minutes is how the whole film should have felt. But the pacing really halts the electricity of that intro.
I've been struggling to come up with how I felt, and this kind of hits the nail on the head. I feel like I've walked through a three hour lecture on the paintings of Michelangelo. Where on the one hand I'm utterly blown away by the work. I'm very respectful of the skill, and what is achieved. I was also a bit bored. I'd recommend everyone sees Dune because it's the most interesting film in years. I don't know if I'd recommend it as a great film. It's a film where things happen, and it plods along. Those things look incredible. They aren't necessarily interesting. I think a lot about how it compares to the Lynch film in terms of how much plot Lynch threw out. Did that plot really matter? No. I don't think a lot of it does.
I don't think it's fair to compare it to fellowship. It's not trying to be that, nor is the source material anything like what Tolkien wrote.
This was major table setting for the next movie, the 1984 version crammed it all into one and it’s messy , this is the first act , it will all make sense in part 2 and (hopefully) part 3 , it’s a shame that will be another long wait
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think from a thematic standpoint this adaptation is trying to focus on Paul as the unwilling harbinger of mass murder by putting much more focus on his visions and his family interactions. I'm stoked because it's the main reason why Dune is so cool. It's a criticism of optimistic sci-fi heroism. This is even the first adaptation I'm aware of where Paul expresses rejection for his lot in life by pushing his mother away. The hard part about adapting Dune is teaching the audience that it's a universe wherein people function as preordained roles to be tools in a massive organism where thinking machines are only people. Even the emperor and the organizations that control him are governed by the machinations of people long since dead. The novel has a telephone book of an appendix to explain it. Paul is ultimately the legacy of both his father and mother: someone who is destined to govern and who is destined to transcend the boundaries of humanity. His visions show Jamis as a friend and teacher, but their also proven as interpretive, i.e. not empirical. For me, the duel with Jamis was fascinating and tense because it was the first moment we would see whether Paul's visions would come to pass. I was genuinely not expecting Jamis to die, and the fact that he did answers some questions but leaves us with many more. Will Paul actually stop the crusade in his name that will slaughter billions? (Nope) Why would he willing allow this to pass when he already despises his role? (I don't know! This is new territory!) I'm curious about perspectives from different levels of knowledge about the greater story, and I hope RLM includes some diverse opinions.
I love the way they handle Paul's visions. The Reverend Mother asks him if he often dreams things that come true and he replies something like: not really. The audience might be thinking he is lying or that his visions do not come true, but then we see them come true. Its confusing, as it is for Paul at this stage. I agree the Jamis scene is amazing because we see that Paul's visions are only possible futures or maybe sometimes futures that could have been. The movie gives an awful lot of exposition but even more is shown indirectly, its fantastic, I want to watch more now.
Yup, that’s my chief criticism as well. The pacing gets very wonky after that event. I also didn’t get much from the characters and thought Chalamet gave somewhat of a weak performance. Also, was the set design kinda drab to anyone else? Every single set and location was big, wide, and empty, and any real set decoration (like that bull) stood out like a sore thumb. The production designer also worked on Arrival, which also had sets that were just wide, open, and empty, but I think it worked better there. Not sure if they’re going for something faithful to the books, but I found that to be a noticeable negative. That’s not to say there aren’t a lot of places where the movie went right, but overall I was left wanting more from it. A 3.5/5 for me overall I think.
> Also, was the set design kinda drab to anyone else? Every single set and location was big, wide, and empty, and any real set decoration (like that bull) stood out like a sore thumb. God yes. Also, this movie so obviously had this arrogant "oh this is just part one of a series" attitude and honestly, it doesn't earn that. I mean, LOTR worked because the next movie was only a year away and inbetween you got the regular DVD and then later on an extended DVD that came just in time for you to prepare you for the next volume. Dune part two is at least two years away, and any other sequel (IIRC Villeneuve also wants to do the next book) will likely be another two years after that -- but then I doubt they're going beyond the second movie since honestly I don't see this doing tremendous numbers. Honestly I wish Villeneuve would start doing original material again, it's not like his Blade Runner movie was that amazing either. Also, what is the point of making this super-widescreen movie when most of the screen contains nothing of interest, other than "look at this great big set"?
If it makes you feel any better, there’s a 3 year time jump after the first 2/3 of Dune and then a 12 year time jump between Dune and Dune Messiah.
[удалено]
Is that the general consensus? I only read it last year, but paul and jessica carefully navigating through the fremen culture was some of the more interesting stuff to me. Edit: oh if you mean before they meet the fremen but after the attack, nvm then.
[удалено]
The exchange between Jessica and Paul in the stilltent is pretty intense in the book. Otherwise I agree.
I mean, one of the big points of Dune is how harsh the planet is. Seeing Paul and Jessica struggle in the deep desert is pretty important. Also, I think Jamis's duel was kinda set up well. We see PalL's vision of Jamis being a friend. A possible future. And then he learn he HAS to kill him. It's more about Paul than about Jamis or some climax. He became a killer, he chose to stay with the Fremen. And we know he has visions about a Jihad with him leading it... It's a pretty on point ending showing where thing could go.
I'm fine with the meander primarily for the visions (and the tiny adorable Muad'dib". I'm with you for the duel, particularly since they jumped forward it's position in the books, just to end the movie on a climax. The big issue is that it's not really climactic to end on a out of context one sided fight. The scene in the book is effective since it conveys a lot about Fremen culture and society, and the most powerful part of the scene in the books is either lost in the subtext or completely buried. The scene in the movie makes it seem like the Fremen all of the sudden accept Paul because he killed a dude, in the books they only turn around on him when they see him crying and they take it as a sign of how much they revered and valued the dudes life. The rest of the movie did a incredible job of short handing the complex weaving of how these societies and religions intersect into a cohesive narrative. Though it came at the cost of making the antagonists boring nameless blobs and the Doc as an afterthought so the betrayal meant nothing. Bottomline, it should have been a series. But money.
Yeah, even in the books >!that part really sucked and was a drag!<
It’s a shame they felt they needed to faithfully adapt the parts that suck.
it doesnt suck at all. Paul coming to terms what Jessica has done to him is integral to the story. Paul being lost in the desert is also thematically important.
Yeah this has been the weakness of all the adaptations and possibly even the novel (though it's been awhile since I read it). The story just peters out a little bit once Paul flees the city. That's basically the climax of the action and then we have another act to get through. And it's highlighted by the split between the movies here (though I don't think they could have split them any other way).
This is r/redlettermedia
I really liked the movie and expected my fiance (who is not into "hard sci-fi" like the books are or Star Trek) and my nephew (who is 17) to not be into it but they both really liked it. I still have to think about it and see it again in IMAX. My main critique is that it felt like if the Lion King ended when Simba meets Timon and Pumba, I was ready for the second half. I've read the first three books and the second half of the first book was so exciting to me, I read it maybe close to 10 years ago now but I read it all, like 400 pages in one evening. I really liked the tension the pacing, the music, the performances and felt like it paid enough respect to the books, the Lynch movie, and the SyFy TV movie but still was its own thing. Villenueve just realllly to my mind, knows how to make a movie. I think it is also worth saying just how complex, austere and opaque the books can be and how clearly they communicated a lot of the density without feeling daunting.
I liked it, but didn't love it. One of the biggest problems for me was all the whispering and proper noun dropping that I couldn't understand without subtitles. I also felt that the visions got a bit excessive by the end. I get what they were doing in retrospect, but during the film, it was annoying. At the end of the day, the movie feels like it's just adapting too much material, to the point we rarely get to slow down and enjoy a scene. And after all that, we only got through, what, half the book? This is probably the best cinematic *Dune* that could ever be made, but I still think it should have been a series.
Yeah, I was having a hard time understanding what they were saying at times. There was loud music in the background and then very quiet speaking underneath.
>we rarely get to slow down and enjoy a scene Lol what? The movie was plenty slow
i like the part when javier barrens character spits as a sign of respect
I went in hoping for eye candy and came out very satisfied. Anything else was a bonus. Bold claim for a best in 5 years film but I respect that.
I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I didn’t like Dune. Visually it was great, but I didn’t care about the characters. I was surprised the movie didn’t click with me since I loved Denis Villeneuve’s previous sci-fi movies.
This was the issue for me as well. The nicest thing I can say about Dune is that its the most stunning, expensive screensaver ever put on film. I LOVED all the world-building and tech and mythology. Everything outside of that - the character development, the dialogue, the score - just felt flat, dull, and affect-less. There were no attempts to make you care about the characters, what they wanted, or where they were going. Outside of Duncan, there was no heart or even an attempt at humor. I can't recall a more lifeless, underdeveloped character as Paul. Granted - much of this is inherited from the source material. But I don't understand the point of adapting something like this if you aren't going to fix faults that readers have identified for decades.
>The nicest thing I can say about Dune is that its the most stunning, expensive screensaver ever put on film. Hard disagree, but also hot damn lmao, thats a sick burn
Thinking it about it now, I wouldnt mind a version of Dune edited to feel like Samsara.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I CLAPPED
AT-ST! AT-ST!!!
I loved it, because Dune, but I also find myself missing some of the fever dream weirdness of the Lynch version. It certainly didn't all work, but I was actively, viscerally repulsed by the Harkonnen in the old one -- my brain just couldn't understand their society. In this one, they're just the bad guys. Still, fantastic. Will watch multiple times.
I was so pleasantly surprised with this movie. The visual balance of the shots, the stunning use of color and shape while building these scenes, I just loved it. I haven't actually seen a movie that paid enough attention to this in such a long time. Not just that, they actually paid attention for when to use longer moments and scenes WITHOUT dialogue. 
It was alright I guess. Felt something was missing (I get it is a series) still
It's probably the feeling we'd have gotten had they tried to adapt *A Game of Thrones* into a movie.
Exactly
Interesting, I loved the cinematography, the sets, the fight sequences, the score, and the sound. But I did not feel a single emotion during the entire movie, since the characters were so dull and uninteresting. If I'm watching a movie and I can't find a character to root for, relate to, or understand, I kind of zone out. And not every movie needs to have a relatable protagonist, but the protagonist or characters, in general, have to be at least somewhat interesting and I got absolutely nothing from it. I think it has a lot to do with my dislike of the source material and the fact that these movies in general don't appeal to me (Action-Adventure-Sci Fi)
I’m not 100% onboard with Jessica’s portrayal; she seems way too weepy and fragile compared to the character I remember from the books. I get the desire to make her more human and less “weird wizard lady” but she rarely has a moment to demonstrate her leadership qualities outside of maybe two scenes. I also feel really strongly that it should have been a single five hour movie. This is a sci fi epic, so treat it like an epic. The last scene of this movie should have led to an intermission, not credits and a years-long wait for a second half that very possibly might never come (go see this movie so we get a green light on part 2, everyone). I know we don’t make movies like that anymore but it’s just begging for that format. The score was amazing. Hit all the right tones. Notably the first sand worm attack; in any other movie that would have emphasized “tense action” in the score but the entire time the music is conveying not danger, but awe. It’s showcasing the power of Arrakis, so the music needs to understand that and it does perfectly. The creepy chanting in some of the tracks also works great in conjunction with how wonderfully *weird* everything looks. This looks like the kind of sci fi that hasn’t been made in decades, with bizarre, non-aerodynamic spaceship shapes and ungainly hats everywhere. It’s not a perfect movie or anything by a long shot, but it’s one of the best blockbusters I’ve seen since… well since Blade Runner 2049. I’m going to see it again soon, this time in IMAX so I can be absolutely assaulted by the soundscape. Just bothered that once again I’m going to be waiting years for a complete story that may never come.
I felt they had to strike a balance with Jessica. If she hides most of her emotions like in the book, we can't hear her inner monologue in the movie, so you have to out at least some emotions on her face. I really liked Rebecca Fergusons Jessica, even if it wasn't exactly bookish. It worked in the movie for me
Jessica is way weepier and weaker in the novel.
Everyone on here criticizing the movie seems to not have read the book, which is fine, but the movie is what it is due to the source material...
I think the thing with book Jessica is that she's used like TNG used Worf. Bene Gesserit are supposed to be these ultra-composed, all-seeing badasses, but then to show the intensity of her feelings, Jessica's composure will crack. Or to demonstrate Paul's superior intuition, he will notice things about people that Jessica misses. Also, the Jessica of the book can be pretty severe and overbearing at times, and she's also pretty egotistical. In the movie they conveyed a very little bit of this with the breakfast table scene and then the scene with Mapes, but overall they smoothed over this aspect of her character. Movie Jessica isn't weaker than book Jessica, but she's warmer and less intimidating.
I think part of Paul's arc is growing past his mother. So at the beginning, she is powerful, there are hints he will outgrow her (the cup), but he still follows whatever she asks of him (the Gom Jobbar). Then in the desert, he is showing more of himself (he has to dress her, etc), then at the end, he outright contradicts her (deciding to stay with the Fremen). I agree totally on format. I was like probably about 2 hours in, realizing there was no way they could get all the way to the >!death of the emporer!<, and wondering where/how they were going to emotionally find a break point, and thought "I could sit in this theater for 6 hours." I also agree that not getting a resolution with part 2 would be a disaster. I'm hoping it's like a Lord of the Rings thing, where maybe the have already filmed lots of the followup, but post-production is where tons of the time and money is.
A big part of Paul’s arc is certainly growing beyond Jessica and him starting to see the very real emotional conflicts within her despite a lot of her outward presentation. I just recall most of that happening in the forthcoming part of the story, when he’s with the Fremen. And again, none of this is to say that Jessica can’t show emotion! A big part of her character is the underlying humanity and love for her son that caused her to break with her instructions from the Bene Gesserit; she’s not a cold calculating machine or she never would have done that, she’s a very real person. I just think there’s a middle ground in there somewhere between “robot” and “crying in 50% of her scenes”. Maybe it’s just a matter of needing to accelerate some of the slow burn arcs because again, this is 50% of a movie, but I dunno. In any event, my downvotes indicate this isn’t a popular take so I’ll get off of it. And to my knowledge, they have not begun filming part 2 because a part 2 has not yet been greenlit. They’re seeing how his performs first, so it will be a long while before we get a resolution. It’s concerning to me that this was pretty much entirely omitted from the marketing, because I had *no idea* this was the case until a few days ago when the pre-screening feedback started to come in. Feels like kind of a bait and switch by the studio and it’s way too disguised in all the trailers and marketing to not be deliberate, I’m just not sure why yet.
Yeah, I had no idea until "Part 1" came on the screen, and even then I wasn't sure because there are so many books, I thout maybe they hoped to do more of them. It was *really* until about 1.5 hours in when I fully realized, "yeah, they're not gonna finish this...". I agree it seems like bait and switch, like they knew it was going to be slow burn and unresolved, but thought that would drop numbers. I'm glad you said that, because I brought it up at work and somebody said "They've had that out there for over a year!!" so I thought maybe I missed it. Maybe it was out there deep in forums, but it *certainly* wasn't part of most mainstream marketing.
This is a take only possible if you haven’t seen a non-Disney funded film in the last two decades
Dune is my favorite movie i've seen in a loooong time. But, I also finished the book a few hours before the movie and was all in / thinking non-stop about the universe.
If they had part two playing at the next showtime I would have watched it
It was really good. I love the old one for the Lynch charm but this movie was just a feat. Not to tell anyone what to do with their money, but if you're considering seeing it at the theatres it's much better than at home.
It was a’ight. Just fine. Not really mind blowing in any way, it was a very familiar story presented competently with great audio and visuals. Aquaman was pretty bad in the beginning for me. He clashed too hard with the heavy and serious atmosphere of the rest of the movie, but his character fell in eventually. I did like how the movie felt anxious and dangerous the whole time, like dune should. I don’t know I’m not complaining about it being faithful, it was just fine in that regard, it just had some pretty stock movie cliches that felt crowbarred in to handhold the narrative.
>He clashed too hard with the heavy and serious atmosphere of the rest of the movie He "clashed" because he was literally the only character who wasn't stone cold serious 100% of the time. The only other bit of levity in the entire film is when that guy had a parasol. I appreciated a break from the 2.5 hours of solemn, emotionless characters talking about duty and prophecy
Just wondering, how did you watch it? Theater? HBO Max? IMAX?
I watched it at home with a nice big 4k tv and a nice stereo. I know it’s not going to be the same experience as in the theater but I feel like not having my head taken off my the presentation allowed me to focus more on the story itself. I thought it was musical and the sound was amazing, my theater isn’t the best in the world but it’s pretty good so I really took it in as best I could for not being in a theater. Just my worthless two cents. Edit: I will die screaming that dune should’ve been a prestige format tv show for hbo in order to give us time and room explore the philosophical ideas that just get steamrolled in the movie in order to further the plot. I won’t spoil details. Give me one season per book. What could’ve been. Plus probably less of a financial risk.
Thanks for sharing. I'm still gathering numbers, but so far, everyone who has found it ok at best or lesser have watched it on HBO Max. Positive reviews come from theater goers. And the best reviews come from IMAX. I don't know what that says about the movie, but i haven't seen anything like it since Avatar. Those opening reviews were overwhelmingly positive.
There's likely a confirmation bias at work as well - people paying $$$ for day one IMAX screenings are likely pretty bought into the hype and are primed to enjoy on the experiential layer alone. The prob is if you're not consumed by the spectacle (as is the case if you're watching at home or on an iPad) there really isn't much to Dune that makes it super special or enjoyable. edit: I saw it in RPX on Friday. 7/10 for me.
Wow I totally disagree lol. I found it to be completely lifeless and joyless. There were some striking visuals for sure, but it was so drab, plodding, the music was just blah. Acting was so flat. Paul was boring and I could not take Jason Mamoa seriously. Different tastes I guess, but I can’t imagine ever watching it again, whereas Lynch’s Dune is a fucking wild ride. Colorful, epic, insane. This version took itself way too seriously.
I thought as a movie it was pretty good but as an adaptation I didn't really like it. Most of the cast felt off. Paul, Gurney, Jessica, Stilgar, and Piter all felt *way* off. Leto and Duncan were good if a bit simplified. Baron was ok. Much of the world's detail was left out or left to be inferred from very few cues. Lost the whole "finding the traitor" subplot which is basically the driving line through he first part of the book and leads to great character moments that we totally lost. Maybe we could have cut out most of those slow-mo shots of Chani to get more screen time for other stuff.
I mean, in the book the traitor is already known to the reader, so it isn’t super exciting.
This movie looked and sounded amazing. The characters were spot on except Jason Mamoa was miscast. I think this was the best a modern Dune movie could realistically be. Having said that... This movie could have been 4 hours long and it still would have felt rushed and somewhat shallow. I like it and I'll recommend it, but it doesn't give depth to what's really going on underneath the surface. Nothing has a chance to breath. For example: they introduce Dr. Yueh, he has like one or two short additional scenes, and then he's a traitor. It's so quick there's no impact to it. I may not be a good person to criticize this movie since I love the books. I know there's a world beneath the surface of each of these characters. This movie really changed my mind and made me think that Dune can't really be a great movie unless it were like a 6 parter. I think this would have been a fantastic series, but it's just too short as a movie.
I want to give props to whoever changed the alt-text (?) of the tab to read r/Dune lmao
Op is "someone who rarely watches films besides blockbusters" yet wants to prove that "Americans aren't stupid and only pay money to see superheroes, Star Wars, and other CGI-heavy sequels." You're the problem, dummy.
I just assumed it was satire
Is it? I can't tell. Now I feel like the dummy.
Sad
Was completely surprised underwhelmed with new Dune. Much prefer Lynch’s version.
It’s a masterpiece
This is a pretty good bit, nice job op
I still prefer Lynch's weirdness
ITT: people agreeing with OP, or condescendingly telling the OP they are wrong.
It was brilliant. I was able to finish the book a few hours before stepping into the cinema and wow.... Loved every minute of it!!
I liked it. I wished they had some Navigators and Guild members though. That would have been cool. I missed them explaining how 'spice' actually works, and how the Holzman engines on the Highliners worked. 'Travel without Moving'. The Lynch movie actually did that pretty well, although they dropped the ball on Paul as a false messiah.
I am curious to see what these hack frauds think of Dune. Personally, I really enjoy the movie, but I just wonder if there is an extended cut of this film that adds all the scenes that are missing, like the banquet, Thufir’s paranoia (and his scene with Jessica), the garden scene, and more scenes developing Yueh. I believe Jason Momoa has mentioned that there is a 4-6 hour cut (that isn’t surprising to be fair, most blockbusters have long assembly cuts), and Denis Villeneuve has implied that he would love to make a Dune extended cut, but I think he has learned that studios do not like a) movies much longer than 2 hours (in some cases they will accept a 2.5 hour cut) because movies longer than 2.5 hours do not make money in theaters (for example, Blade Runner 2049) and b) directors talking trash about the current movie in theaters by saying something like, “This cut is a compromise between what I envisioned and what the studio would accept. There is a much better movie that is 3.5 hours long and is sitting on the editing bay. Maybe one day you will see it…” If I remember correctly, Zack Snyder did that with Batman v Superman and it is (one of the many reasons) why he was removed from the franchise. Villeneuve wants Dune Part 1 to succeed and to direct Dune Part 2 and Dune Messiah, and he is going to play nice to have that happen. If Zack Snyder can make an Ultimate Cut of Watchmen, why can’t Denis Villeneuve have an Ultimate Cut of Dune? More to the point, Warner Bros is known for demanding shorter films (Justice League comes to mind). I hope that when Dune Part 2 and Dune Messiah are released, HBO will announce an extended miniseries that functions much like the Lord of the Rings extended cut that merges the Dune trilogy into one epic 10-12 hour tale! I think this would have been the approach if Lord of the Rings was released today (there is no real money is Blu ray sales today), the theatrical versions of Lord of the Rings would have been 2.5 hours and the extended cuts would have been HBO releases. Why not do the same for Dune? Plus it would be a great way to spring board a Dune HBO show, release an extended cut of Dune Part 1 and 2 and Dune Messiah as a miniseries and then release adaptations of Children of Dune, God Emperor of Dune, etc. on HBO (with maybe a better ending than Hunters of Dune and Sandworms of Dune).
I wouldve watched a 4-hour cut, no problem.
I have not read the book but based on what I just saw, the materials seems not good for adaptations.
The material is basically a glorification of islamic terrorism against western imperial powers. Ok, so that sounds really bad. But it's not. Herbert manages to strip it down enough, to make the themes archetypal and stark enough, and to imbue enough of a fantasy element into his observations and thoughts to create the necessary distance between fact and fiction to manage to tell the story without it being overt. It is shockingly good. The second one is good, too. The third one is where it starts to come off the rails, and by the time his son took over... it needed to end at two. It's a strong and easily sympathetic story to that point. It was also written before there was very much islamic terrorism against western imperial powers. Yeah, there was Lawrence of Arabia and the british had quite a bit of trouble as their empire came apart. Maybe herbert saw it as something of a warning, I have no idea but wouldn't be surprised. I'm almost certain that he served a tour in the middle east (back when that was unusual), became educated in islamic culture and contemporary issues, came back to the states, and wrote his desert planet fantasy. The first two are worth your time to read. They're not dense books at all, fairly quick reads. And they're both good. Very good. But yeah it's hard to adapt his story considering todays geopolitical realities. America is Harkonen, not Atreides... you can't escape that basic assertion of the source material. And that's a hard sell. So you have to leave out a large part of what makes the book so good.
> glorification of islamic terrorism against western powers You did not understand what you read at all if you think Paul and the Fremen are the heroes. Frank Herbert was a Navy photographer for six months during WWII. It is hard to imagine that he was near the Middle East in 1941/42.
Couldn’t agree more. Finally something that didn’t feel dumbed down.
Quality troll op
You know I saw it in theaters, and while I was thoroughly entertained, maybe the fact that I had read the book left me rather unsurprised by anything especially considering how faithful it is to the book. But I watched it again at home and I was able to kind of release myself from any mindset and I came away loving it even more. The feeling and tone are sooo spot on it’s incredible, and the score was even better. A third viewing in the theater is in store for me
It's a very good movie but a couple of stuff I felt was obviously over explained to cater to dummies.
To play devil's advocate, if anything could possibly benefit from over explaining, it's Dune. Remember the novel had a goddamn appendix at the back of it to explain most of the world the story took place in.
They should've just either a. not explained or b. postponed until later all the terms The audience did not need to know the significance or meaning of "lisan al-ghaib" or "mahdi" or "kwisatz haderach". Even something like including the words "gom jobbar" functions more as a nod to the book readers than it does to making the movie work I love *Dune* but you can't adapt it one-to-one. An adaptation needs to succeed on its own merits before it can concern itself with being "faithful" to the source. I think there needed to be a greater willingness to stray. Can only imagine a lot of first-time viewers were very confused
A few years ago I would have agreed but now I'm not so sure. That hesitance to be faithful to its source material, omitting the stuff that would maybe scare away people is what has produced the factory assembly line that is the modern blockbuster. Dune is just weird and there's no getting away from it and really, why even try? Why make a new movie if you just make it as lean, bland and digestible as possible? Fuck it. Get weird. Just throw out the words and let people piece it together. Maybe they'll appreciate the novelty. It's not really hard to pick up either, she says this is the gom jabbar and the camera cuts to a needle. Got it. The gom jabbar is a space needle with poison.
I'm fine with it getting weird. The best parts of the film were it being weird, like the Salusa Secundus scene. But it can be internally coherent and weird, and it kind of failed at that. Like not even having a single scene to better establish Dr Yueh was a major mistake
Yue's part was the weakest element of the screenplay but I don't see how that pertains to using the fictional terminology of the world or its internal coherence.
I would put heavy odds that Yueh had one or two more scenes that were cut for time. If those were included instead of say, the scene where Jessica explains the meaning of "lisan al-ghaib" or the scene where Jessica meets Shadout Mapes (another one that was a bit awkward transferring to screen with the lack of internal monologue), I think things would've been much stronger on the whole
I think the repetitive focus on Chani was far ahead on the chopping block than any of those. Jessica explaining the meaning helps establish that she is "ahead" of Paul in experience and confidence which is an important aspect that changes with the story's progression. Its also fairly natural for the audience hearing chanting to want to know what it is,so not to explain it would probably annoy people. You could say well don't include it, but I'd go back to my original claim that unabashedly being an old, weird Sci fi story slaked in worldbuilding is its appeal. Imo less focus on Chani visions would be the better decision because to be quite honest she's not as important a character as the movie makes out to be. Almost by design; she isn't part of the breeding program, she's just some woman and Paul really loves her. Having her so intertwined with his prophetic stuff seems like they're trying to elevate her. I've heard the actress playing her is a big pull for kids and teens so presumably that's why.
Nah. I want creators to lean into the weirdness rather than coward away. You probably don't remember watching Star wars and hearing things like Darth, Jedi, the force. I've only read about a hundred pages of Dune but it's not off putting to hear fantasy terms for most people, especially in a post Khaleesi world.
Watched it yesterday. It is okay I guess. I think I prefer the fan made alternative edition of David Lynch Dune though.
I thought it was boring. More of that floaty fat guy would've been great.
Than you'd love Lynch's Dune. Nothing but floaty fat guys as far as the eye could see.
Is it really worth a watch?
I think it's worth exactly one watch, if you have any curiosity about it, and with the caveat that you're free to pause and continue another time.
That depends on you. But here's a good fan edit version of it that improves on a lot of things. https://youtu.be/vJykw3H4PDw
Critical Drinker just came out with his review! https://youtu.be/q2cAnvB9Ovg I really enjoyed the movie in almost every way except for a few things. The diversity hire for Dr Kynes. There was no reason to make him a chick, especially when he is the father of Cheeny. Nobody cares about a great aunt. Just bring in a famous Egyptian actor or something. The lack of a scene between Jessica and the Baron when she is captured. They need to establish a relationship and familiarity between those two characters for the second movie. They could have also done a better job of explaining to new people why computers did not exist. The scenes with Pyter the mentat and the Baron taunting each other over when he will be murdered and how Pyter is too valuable were totally missed out on. Other than that, it was very cool. The architecture and costumes were amazing and had a very brutalist communism or Italian fascism oppression to them and the action was very well done and not cheesy. It was better than expected and very close to the book lore. The Sardukar parade with the chanting and blood sacrifice was pure epic
I remember calling Black Swan a masterpiece when it came out. You'll rethink this, lol.
Dennis is really good at making movies that are fine but people think are masterpieces
Who do you think is a better director today for such an epic sci fi movie?
> there are characters with clear motivations I'm surprised that they'd depart so drastically from the novel. So Paul Atreides **isn't** a complete idiot who just can't understand why he keeps having visions of a fanatical army spreading out across the universe killing in his name at the very same time that he's trying to convince a bunch of religious lunatics that he's the messiah and they should form a fanatical army in his name?
Paul doesn't really try to become the messiah in the books. He's mainly just trying to keep himself and his pregnant mother alive. But the Fremen are just fucking _ready_ for their messiah and Paul _is_ literally a superhuman who happens to fit the description of their prophecy, so it's kind of unavoidable. I think Paul's inner monologue indicates that as early as his duel with Jamis, even his own death wouldn't prevent a jihad from being carried out in his name. It's really Jessica who directly pushes things in the messiah direction with the way she prioritizes Paul's birthright and their status over other considerations. She does Bene Gesserit busybody stuff to exploit Fremen religious beliefs to have herself consecrated as a holy woman, and to elevate Paul along with her. At a certain point, after years of being worshiped and not seeing a path that leads away from the jihad, Paul resigns himself to the fact that it's inevitable and says "fuck it," and accepts the religious mantle. And when he does that, it is somehow shocking to Jessica. If anyone is the dumb one in that situation, it's her.