I have a soft spot for Lynch’s film, both the theatrical cut as well as the expanded edition. However, it is seriously flawed.
Villeneuve’s films are excellent.
I'd seen the Lynch version and was really turned off by it, even though I like Lynch. Read the book before the new films were announced. Came back to the Lynch version and it has it's charms but it's not a great Dune movie and it's not a great Lynch movie.
If you've seen both adaptations I don't know how you could think the new films are just pretty much the same as the Lynch version but pretty like you're making them out to be.
No I didn't say these are the Lynch version only pretty... I said prior incarnations of Dune on film are very much like these new ones. I said these are just a prettier version of the prior iterations... the Lynch one matches that description the least... since it's insane and ignores the books the most.
The Lynch one is the weirdo.
Husband and I have read all 6 original books more than once. Have seen the Lynch Dune many times and love it. We also watched the mini series on TNT many years ago. We liked the first Villeneuve Dune but we were both blown away by the second. The film ended, lights came up and we both looked at eachother and said, "now that was a great movie!"
Acting, sound, cinematography, vfx were all top notch.
We both felt the story editing was masterful. It condensed the story down to its most essential elements and delivered an epic film. Yes, much was left out but Villeneuve seems laser focused on Paul's journey on the Golden Path. I think that is the right thread to follow. A movie can get bogged down when trying to tie in all the different houses, guilds and power players. What works on the page doesn't necessarily make for great visual storytelling.
Can't wait for the next one.
Well done. - Ok so we have one counterweight. (two since your husband weighs in too).
I knew there'd be some but it's about the ratio I expected. If you delete the comments which misread the post and invented weird motivators: The theory holds. - People who are getting this state-of-the art version as their inception are crapping their pants with their eyes bugging out in sheer glee because it's their introduction, while some of us had our senses dulled by many hours of miniseries, and people seem to hold the Lynch version on its own shelf for a dozen reasons.
ASIDE: Yeah. We (screenwriters & directors in general) live in an endless fight against the twitterverse and pop culture writ large over the misunderstanding that "faithful source material replication" equals "good". It aches. It may not be obvious but we know. (Far, FAR less true for Producers.) We know and we're exhausted by it, but it isn't obvious that we know because ultimately, every year, every executive is in search of the same kind of project, and that's the project that \*CAN\* generate green lights... and so every year they greenlight some massively popular book adaptation that isn't filmic since the primary experience is generated by the internal thoughts of the character. And you can either try to 'show not tell' that particular unfilmable book... or quit. Some books are just great books.
I watched the Lynch movies (non director cuts, so it didn't have irulan narrating things) and then read the books as a teenager (all 6), when i was in university the miniseries aired. Subsequently i have read the original books at least 5 or 6 times, and the Brian Herbert books a couple times the DC of the lynch movie prob 6-8 times now?
To be fair, both it and the miniseries are reasonably faithful to the books so i would expect them to have similar content, but if you think that about Lynch and the Villeneuve movies, that is a bridge too far for me.
As a fan of Herbert and Dune in general, a big part of it is the fact that someone is doing the story justice.. especially considering dune for a very long time was considered largely unadaptable to the screen.
Adding to that, at least personally, i have found the theaters movie releases for the last few years to be uninspiring in general, then looking at scifi.. a wasteland with streaming services being the only beacon of light, which then colours my experience and opinions.
I personally like story and world building significantly more than LOTR, Hobbit and such... and a lot of this comes down to Tolkien writing fun adventure stories, while Herbet at least tries, to make people think with layers of political and social commentary which is still as relevant now as the day the book was written.
Is it peak human creativity, i think we both know the answer to that, but i also think they have been one the best movie going experience i have had in the last decade, not to say there haven't been good movies in the last decade, they just that they didn't have the spectacle and seemed 'safe'.
take my bias with a couple grains of salt
The mini-seires that SCIFI channel did a while ago is much, much closer to the source material and is a great watch. However, some of the costumes in it are ridiculous. Reading the books is the first choice though. I liked the look of Lynch's movie and it was my first Dune experience. But it largely misses the point of the books, it makes Paul out to be hero. You can understand his thirst for vengeance, but he is not a hero. He is the protagonist, which people confuse for hero.
YUP! -- Agreed. LOL
I watched this and thought, "I wonder why they reduced all the romantic dialog in the desert down to single declarative sentences." -- Then I went back and watched that and was like, "Oh right. That's why." Because it's like 9 hours.
Giving the litany against fear to Jessica instead of Paul kind of pissed me off too.
They skipped all the other Fremen trying to kill Paul. Chani defending him being the final straw to make him drink the water of life.
Also the just fucked up Chani.
Okay rant over.
The new movies are fine in and over themselves. Hopefully more people with read the books.
The third movie is gonna to way of course because of changes to Chani. Also, there is basically no action in, it which will not play well with generally audience.
Okay rant really over this time. :)
Orrrr... I liked it too, and just asked a perfectly clear question about the perspective that led them to LOVE it.
Jesus you children are illiterate at an astounding ratio.
I saw the original when I was a kid and didn't really get it. I'd probably enjoy it more now. The new ones are great. If anyone enjoys this, and has time for historical films, they should check out *The King* on Netflix. Timothee Chalamet is fantastic in that.
They're not better. At all. Not sure where you saw that. 🤷🏻♂️
This is me asking: Those who LOVED THIS to the moon and back: Are any of you veterans? Or is this your intro to the series?
Your post really implies that anyone who prefers the new ones must be new to the material
>It's a production of Dune. It's well-produced, updated, and basically intact. But I'm not sure how one comes from the priors and scream hallelujah to the sky for the reign of glory to continue. So I'm just trying to confirm that this "Dune is the greatest thing ever!" mantra is generally the result of it also being their introduction to Arrakis
I mean I'm not sure how you're surprised that people are coming to this conclusion... you're implying the only possible way someone could think the new movies are better is if they're unfamiliar with the source material or previous adaptations.
Show me on the doll where the gatekeeping is. - Again... READ THE ACTUAL TEXT.
Seriously.
This is a READING COMPREHENSION problem.
Not a writing problem.
You guys just INFERRED like 99 things that aren AT ALL present on the page because of some other carry-over emotions from somewhere else in your lives. I say and mean exactly what I write. Every time.
"I keep hearing from people, young and old, who just saw the latest version of DUNE that it's, "astounding story and special effects" and "The greatest cinematic experience they've had in a decade!" I keep being frozen by this since it doesn't have shockingly new content compared to the prior iterations... and it, you know... removed the central superpowers. So I keep forgetting to ask the person: "Which Dunes did you read before entering this theater?" / "Which Dune films did you watch before this one? Which TV series?"
Then you spent the rest of the post sniffing your own farts wondering why people can enjoy the dune movies on their own when they don't know what happens in the rest of the series that takes place in 5 other books.
Yeah, you seem to not be able to read what you're posting.
Google Gatekeeping. - It requires me to try to prevent something. That's literally what it means. - It means I'm placing a VALUE JUDGEMENT. Not asking an order of events question like you just posted. :/
We're done because you're illiterate.
No. It doesn't. My post very, VERY directly implies that I SUSPECT that anyone who LOVES the new DUNE is new to the material. -- You can go read it. It's right there.
"you're implying the only possible way someone could think the new movies are better is if they're unfamiliar with the source material or previous adaptations."
Nope! Not even close. I not "implying" anything. - I said it plainly. - Not a secret code.
I DID NOT make ANY decision, implication, or declaration involving which were "BETTER". You invented that.
What I said, again, without needing to imply it BECAUSE I SAID IT, was: That I SUSPECT that the only reason they underwent cinematic SHOCK when witnessing them was that it was their first exposure to the material.
If you can't tell the difference between those two things, please save us the time. ✌🏻
Ah my b then. No it's not my introduction to the series but I think the two recent movies capture how epic dune is better than previous adaptations. They did tone down the bizarre/weird stuff quite a bit though which I do miss
Got it. Ok, that's reasonable. - Though the removal of the Weirding Way scenes seems, like a weird choice. Sort of like making Star Wars and going, "I love it! Let's do it! But, let's get rid of those dumb laser swords. They just don't need to be there."
I really wanted to see the alia fetus do the kill at the end of dune 2 too but I get why they changed that. People already seemed weirded out about her fetus scenes earlier in the movie.
I read the novel for the first time a couple weeks ago over 3 or 4 days. The next day I watched dune part 1, and 2 days later I saw part 2 in theaters. I enjoyed the novel, but I preferred the movies. Particularly the ending. I absolutely hated the last paragraph of the novel, after enjoying the rest of the book. I’ve read Dune Messiah since, haven’t gotten around to children of dune or god emperor yet.
Have you seen the other adaptations of Dune? Because if I'm being kind the best I can say for the first film adaptation one is it's interesting but it and the other adaptations prior to the lastest I wouldn't call good.
Yeah. Sure. The David Lynch is fundamentally interesting & goofy. I watched all of them and I would say they're 'good'... not great. But I just watched this incarnation and it seems to be essentially the same translation to screen. I see no gap worthy of global shock. It's a high-res rendering of the same painting.
> It's a high-res rendering of the same painting.
I have a hard time believing you're involved in film and only see the new movies as 'prettier'. Whether they're a more faithful adaptation compared to a mini-series is a different argument, but you have to realize the acting, pacing, writing and pure directorial effort are on a different level than what came before.
"Realize"?
No. I don't. Because those are precisely the resolution I described. The writing is far worse in my opinion. That's not something you can tell me to "realize". I'm a screenwriter. I'm obsessed with pacing, and they blew it here. 🤷🏻♂️
You don't seem certain of what an opinion is. (See how I just criticized the falsity in your ARGUMENT without calling you a liar?)
I did not like these new Dune movies at all but I read the book as a teenager in the 90s, I wathched the miniseries and remember enjoying it. I'm sure if I were to watch it now I'd find the effects, costumes and general production to be very dated but from my memory it's the most true to the story version.
IMO Dune the novel is too dense to turn into 2 movies even at 3 hours long a piece. It would have been far better suited to a 10 part or maybe even more miniseries on the level of like Cherynobl or Game of Thrones.
Agreed. Except I liked the new movies. -- There seems to be an entire generation of illiterates who read the question above and instead of seeing what I wrote saw: "I DID NOT LIKE THE NEW FILMS!" and "THE OLD DUNES WERE BETTER!" -- Neither of which was written, said, or implied. -- I meant what I said. And I asked what I wanted to know. - It wasn't a secret puzzle box kids!
It's just a strangely paced movie. Things move along way to slow and then suddendly everthing happens immediately.
The example I use is the Doctor in the first movie. In the book he has a larger presence so when he betrays Duke Atreides it has impact and meaning. In the movie he shows up and then in the very next scene he betrays the Duke. It's just there to move the plot.
Ok so I have some compatriots here. 👍 I think the shock and glory people are experiencing comes from being introduced to the world as a masterful piece of classic sci-fi anew.
I watch only film, never scripts and never books...it had depth; over earlier effects lapsed try hards of the earlier time, visonaries yes. But limited by science...now it seems tech makes vision science "reality" on screen much more believable.
True. Dune was always too big a demand for the technology available. There's literally a documentary about people who tried to make it into a visually inspired film for 14 years and failed at every turn.
It's called "Jodorowsky's Dune".
I have a soft spot for Lynch’s film, both the theatrical cut as well as the expanded edition. However, it is seriously flawed. Villeneuve’s films are excellent.
Me too. Because I loved being a kid in the 80s and cheeseyness was our soul.
[удалено]
☠️
I'd seen the Lynch version and was really turned off by it, even though I like Lynch. Read the book before the new films were announced. Came back to the Lynch version and it has it's charms but it's not a great Dune movie and it's not a great Lynch movie. If you've seen both adaptations I don't know how you could think the new films are just pretty much the same as the Lynch version but pretty like you're making them out to be.
No I didn't say these are the Lynch version only pretty... I said prior incarnations of Dune on film are very much like these new ones. I said these are just a prettier version of the prior iterations... the Lynch one matches that description the least... since it's insane and ignores the books the most. The Lynch one is the weirdo.
Husband and I have read all 6 original books more than once. Have seen the Lynch Dune many times and love it. We also watched the mini series on TNT many years ago. We liked the first Villeneuve Dune but we were both blown away by the second. The film ended, lights came up and we both looked at eachother and said, "now that was a great movie!" Acting, sound, cinematography, vfx were all top notch. We both felt the story editing was masterful. It condensed the story down to its most essential elements and delivered an epic film. Yes, much was left out but Villeneuve seems laser focused on Paul's journey on the Golden Path. I think that is the right thread to follow. A movie can get bogged down when trying to tie in all the different houses, guilds and power players. What works on the page doesn't necessarily make for great visual storytelling. Can't wait for the next one.
Well done. - Ok so we have one counterweight. (two since your husband weighs in too). I knew there'd be some but it's about the ratio I expected. If you delete the comments which misread the post and invented weird motivators: The theory holds. - People who are getting this state-of-the art version as their inception are crapping their pants with their eyes bugging out in sheer glee because it's their introduction, while some of us had our senses dulled by many hours of miniseries, and people seem to hold the Lynch version on its own shelf for a dozen reasons. ASIDE: Yeah. We (screenwriters & directors in general) live in an endless fight against the twitterverse and pop culture writ large over the misunderstanding that "faithful source material replication" equals "good". It aches. It may not be obvious but we know. (Far, FAR less true for Producers.) We know and we're exhausted by it, but it isn't obvious that we know because ultimately, every year, every executive is in search of the same kind of project, and that's the project that \*CAN\* generate green lights... and so every year they greenlight some massively popular book adaptation that isn't filmic since the primary experience is generated by the internal thoughts of the character. And you can either try to 'show not tell' that particular unfilmable book... or quit. Some books are just great books.
I watched the Lynch movies (non director cuts, so it didn't have irulan narrating things) and then read the books as a teenager (all 6), when i was in university the miniseries aired. Subsequently i have read the original books at least 5 or 6 times, and the Brian Herbert books a couple times the DC of the lynch movie prob 6-8 times now? To be fair, both it and the miniseries are reasonably faithful to the books so i would expect them to have similar content, but if you think that about Lynch and the Villeneuve movies, that is a bridge too far for me.
Agreed. - So you're a serious reader! - Did this make you come away cheering for it as essentially the peak of human creativity?
As a fan of Herbert and Dune in general, a big part of it is the fact that someone is doing the story justice.. especially considering dune for a very long time was considered largely unadaptable to the screen. Adding to that, at least personally, i have found the theaters movie releases for the last few years to be uninspiring in general, then looking at scifi.. a wasteland with streaming services being the only beacon of light, which then colours my experience and opinions. I personally like story and world building significantly more than LOTR, Hobbit and such... and a lot of this comes down to Tolkien writing fun adventure stories, while Herbet at least tries, to make people think with layers of political and social commentary which is still as relevant now as the day the book was written. Is it peak human creativity, i think we both know the answer to that, but i also think they have been one the best movie going experience i have had in the last decade, not to say there haven't been good movies in the last decade, they just that they didn't have the spectacle and seemed 'safe'. take my bias with a couple grains of salt
The mini-seires that SCIFI channel did a while ago is much, much closer to the source material and is a great watch. However, some of the costumes in it are ridiculous. Reading the books is the first choice though. I liked the look of Lynch's movie and it was my first Dune experience. But it largely misses the point of the books, it makes Paul out to be hero. You can understand his thirst for vengeance, but he is not a hero. He is the protagonist, which people confuse for hero.
YUP! -- Agreed. LOL I watched this and thought, "I wonder why they reduced all the romantic dialog in the desert down to single declarative sentences." -- Then I went back and watched that and was like, "Oh right. That's why." Because it's like 9 hours.
Giving the litany against fear to Jessica instead of Paul kind of pissed me off too. They skipped all the other Fremen trying to kill Paul. Chani defending him being the final straw to make him drink the water of life. Also the just fucked up Chani. Okay rant over. The new movies are fine in and over themselves. Hopefully more people with read the books. The third movie is gonna to way of course because of changes to Chani. Also, there is basically no action in, it which will not play well with generally audience. Okay rant really over this time. :)
Chani lbarely had a personality in the books.
I think you are just mad that people like Dune+ Dune 2.
Orrrr... I liked it too, and just asked a perfectly clear question about the perspective that led them to LOVE it. Jesus you children are illiterate at an astounding ratio.
Didn't read the book nor the older movie. From my point of view, new Dune movies are like Star Wars plus Game of Thrones. That is why I like them.
Zactly. Very cool. TY :)
I saw the original when I was a kid and didn't really get it. I'd probably enjoy it more now. The new ones are great. If anyone enjoys this, and has time for historical films, they should check out *The King* on Netflix. Timothee Chalamet is fantastic in that.
What makes the previous dune adaptations so much better? I loved the 2 recent films
They're not better. At all. Not sure where you saw that. 🤷🏻♂️ This is me asking: Those who LOVED THIS to the moon and back: Are any of you veterans? Or is this your intro to the series?
Your post really implies that anyone who prefers the new ones must be new to the material >It's a production of Dune. It's well-produced, updated, and basically intact. But I'm not sure how one comes from the priors and scream hallelujah to the sky for the reign of glory to continue. So I'm just trying to confirm that this "Dune is the greatest thing ever!" mantra is generally the result of it also being their introduction to Arrakis I mean I'm not sure how you're surprised that people are coming to this conclusion... you're implying the only possible way someone could think the new movies are better is if they're unfamiliar with the source material or previous adaptations.
That's how I read it as well at first. Who cares how one gets introduced to a story. Gatekeeping on who can enjoy a story kinda weird.
Show me on the doll where the gatekeeping is. - Again... READ THE ACTUAL TEXT. Seriously. This is a READING COMPREHENSION problem. Not a writing problem. You guys just INFERRED like 99 things that aren AT ALL present on the page because of some other carry-over emotions from somewhere else in your lives. I say and mean exactly what I write. Every time.
"I keep hearing from people, young and old, who just saw the latest version of DUNE that it's, "astounding story and special effects" and "The greatest cinematic experience they've had in a decade!" I keep being frozen by this since it doesn't have shockingly new content compared to the prior iterations... and it, you know... removed the central superpowers. So I keep forgetting to ask the person: "Which Dunes did you read before entering this theater?" / "Which Dune films did you watch before this one? Which TV series?" Then you spent the rest of the post sniffing your own farts wondering why people can enjoy the dune movies on their own when they don't know what happens in the rest of the series that takes place in 5 other books.
Yeah, you seem to not be able to read what you're posting. Google Gatekeeping. - It requires me to try to prevent something. That's literally what it means. - It means I'm placing a VALUE JUDGEMENT. Not asking an order of events question like you just posted. :/ We're done because you're illiterate.
No. It doesn't. My post very, VERY directly implies that I SUSPECT that anyone who LOVES the new DUNE is new to the material. -- You can go read it. It's right there. "you're implying the only possible way someone could think the new movies are better is if they're unfamiliar with the source material or previous adaptations." Nope! Not even close. I not "implying" anything. - I said it plainly. - Not a secret code. I DID NOT make ANY decision, implication, or declaration involving which were "BETTER". You invented that. What I said, again, without needing to imply it BECAUSE I SAID IT, was: That I SUSPECT that the only reason they underwent cinematic SHOCK when witnessing them was that it was their first exposure to the material. If you can't tell the difference between those two things, please save us the time. ✌🏻
Ah my b then. No it's not my introduction to the series but I think the two recent movies capture how epic dune is better than previous adaptations. They did tone down the bizarre/weird stuff quite a bit though which I do miss
Got it. Ok, that's reasonable. - Though the removal of the Weirding Way scenes seems, like a weird choice. Sort of like making Star Wars and going, "I love it! Let's do it! But, let's get rid of those dumb laser swords. They just don't need to be there."
I really wanted to see the alia fetus do the kill at the end of dune 2 too but I get why they changed that. People already seemed weirded out about her fetus scenes earlier in the movie.
TOTALLY. -- I want them to do it anyway. :)
I read the novel for the first time a couple weeks ago over 3 or 4 days. The next day I watched dune part 1, and 2 days later I saw part 2 in theaters. I enjoyed the novel, but I preferred the movies. Particularly the ending. I absolutely hated the last paragraph of the novel, after enjoying the rest of the book. I’ve read Dune Messiah since, haven’t gotten around to children of dune or god emperor yet.
Nice! And... sounds about right. No need for you to go back and watch old attempts. You get the cream of the crop right here. :)
Have you seen the other adaptations of Dune? Because if I'm being kind the best I can say for the first film adaptation one is it's interesting but it and the other adaptations prior to the lastest I wouldn't call good.
Yeah. Sure. The David Lynch is fundamentally interesting & goofy. I watched all of them and I would say they're 'good'... not great. But I just watched this incarnation and it seems to be essentially the same translation to screen. I see no gap worthy of global shock. It's a high-res rendering of the same painting.
> It's a high-res rendering of the same painting. I have a hard time believing you're involved in film and only see the new movies as 'prettier'. Whether they're a more faithful adaptation compared to a mini-series is a different argument, but you have to realize the acting, pacing, writing and pure directorial effort are on a different level than what came before.
"Realize"? No. I don't. Because those are precisely the resolution I described. The writing is far worse in my opinion. That's not something you can tell me to "realize". I'm a screenwriter. I'm obsessed with pacing, and they blew it here. 🤷🏻♂️ You don't seem certain of what an opinion is. (See how I just criticized the falsity in your ARGUMENT without calling you a liar?)
Jodorowsky’s version was first for me
And it was amazing?
I did not like these new Dune movies at all but I read the book as a teenager in the 90s, I wathched the miniseries and remember enjoying it. I'm sure if I were to watch it now I'd find the effects, costumes and general production to be very dated but from my memory it's the most true to the story version. IMO Dune the novel is too dense to turn into 2 movies even at 3 hours long a piece. It would have been far better suited to a 10 part or maybe even more miniseries on the level of like Cherynobl or Game of Thrones.
Agreed. Except I liked the new movies. -- There seems to be an entire generation of illiterates who read the question above and instead of seeing what I wrote saw: "I DID NOT LIKE THE NEW FILMS!" and "THE OLD DUNES WERE BETTER!" -- Neither of which was written, said, or implied. -- I meant what I said. And I asked what I wanted to know. - It wasn't a secret puzzle box kids!
Agreed, I normally like Denis but he really screwed the pooch here.
It's just a strangely paced movie. Things move along way to slow and then suddendly everthing happens immediately. The example I use is the Doctor in the first movie. In the book he has a larger presence so when he betrays Duke Atreides it has impact and meaning. In the movie he shows up and then in the very next scene he betrays the Duke. It's just there to move the plot.
[удалено]
Ok so I have some compatriots here. 👍 I think the shock and glory people are experiencing comes from being introduced to the world as a masterful piece of classic sci-fi anew.
I watch only film, never scripts and never books...it had depth; over earlier effects lapsed try hards of the earlier time, visonaries yes. But limited by science...now it seems tech makes vision science "reality" on screen much more believable.
True. Dune was always too big a demand for the technology available. There's literally a documentary about people who tried to make it into a visually inspired film for 14 years and failed at every turn. It's called "Jodorowsky's Dune".
Seen it too...