Movies

As a fan of the book and the David Lynch version of the movie, I thought this one was fine.


David Lynch version pluses:
Sting in a diaper. (I might have a problem)
Amazing Toto soundtrack
A better adherence to the source material
Character development of periphery characters

This Dune decided to take a Daniel Defoe, Last Temptation of Christ sort of take to early massiah-hood. Instead of the rather aloof manner Paul comes across in the book, this movie showed him struggle with the savior onus. Only embracing it at the end of the movie when killing Jamis. In this new movie, much of his certainty is stripped away, I guess so he doesn’t come off as a total narcissist which is what he can come across as in both the book and Lynch’s telling. I get that this director probably wanted Paul to be a bit more relatable. This director also got around some of the weird, awkward scenes Lynch immersed us in by changing the telepathic conversations Paul and Jessica had to sign language, but you do lose something here. You also loose a lot with the lack of internal dialogue as this is essential to the book. Again, I think this was an artistic choice to avoid some of the melodramatic scenes that were sprinkled through Lynch’s movie.

I think Lynch did a great job highlighting the politics of each setting. You felt the gravitas of the Reverend Mother and you felt that you understand the tension between the houses and the Emperor. I think that Lynch did a better job highlighting how upset the Reverend Mother was a Jessica for having Paul and I think he did a better job with character development. I think that in the new movie, we lose a lot of the character of the Baron for visuals. And I think that is my biggest gripe with this movie—it sacrifices character development and story telling for visuals of the world. They do a better job showing me the world than they did immersing me in the world of high stakes planetary posturing, interstellar economics, and genetic manipulation to produce an Ultimate Being. This director was too busy showing me shots of sand dunes and visions of the future, with an incomplete picture of the politicking—what makes the book so interesting.

It was a pretty movie but the cinematography was expected. For better or for worse when you’re watching a Lynch, you know you’re watching a Lynch film. Pair that with what some call a Flash Gordon-esque soundtrack and you get an experience. This movie is a nice sepia toned…movie. There is no real character development for any character but Paul. Amazing characters like Doctor Huey become competition with the wall paper. The tooth scene is rushed as is everything during the siege. I really hope that in the next installment there is more character development and a better outlining of the politics happening “behind the scenes “. I hope the next movie isn’t all fighting and worm riding.
 
folsom_lives said:
Once again @nolalady nails it. 100% agree.
Click to expand...
The tl;dr of my post is : I think the director focuses on the most boring parts of the book while throwing away the political intrigue and inter-galactic economics which is really what makes Herbert’s world epic. Stunning visual shots were substituted for actual world building. Hopefully, installment two will see more of the entire world instead of just a troubled Messiah story.

ETA I did think it was cool to see the throppters. That was cool.
 
nolalady said:
The tl;dr of my post is : I think the director focuses on the most boring parts of the book while throwing away the political intrigue and inter-galactic economics which is really what makes Herbert’s world epic. Stunning visual shots were substituted for actual world building. Hopefully, installment two will see more of the entire world instead of just a troubled Messiah story.
Click to expand...
In today's political environment I'm sure there are things they had to tip toe over in plot/script.

Anyone think the worms are scarier in the original movie ?

Not really sure Zimmer's score works either.
 
JohnnyCashFan said:
In today's political environment I'm sure there are things they had to tip toe over in plot/script.

Anyone think the worms are scarier in the original movie ?

Not really sure Zimmer's score works either.
Click to expand...
The score seemed expected. Not bad but it really wasn’t differentiating, unlike Lynch’s movie. Toto tip-toed towards Flash Gordon, but it created a vibe for the film.
 
Agreed that he left the world-building on the cutting room floor largely, but I think this was a logical result of trying to avoid Lynch's error (quoting DF Wallace here,) "trying to provide plot exposition by having characters' thoughts audibilized on the soundtrack while the camera zooms in on the character making a thinking face", so a lot of the world-building has to be insinuated instead of explicitly stated. In the books this is usually either 3rd person omniscient exposition or character's inner dialogue or in this long expository dialogue that wouldn't really work well in a movie -- e.g. the banning of 'thinking machines' -- AI specifically and computers generally, thus the need for guild navigators and mentats and lack of over the top technological fancy gizmotronics with very minimal exceptions (Paul's video education reels, largely mechanical technology like the ornithopters. All this is handled in the background -- the duke asks 'how much did it cost' and Thufir Hawat's eyes go white as he does the math in his head; Reverend Mother meets Paul in a dusty library, only paper and wood visible in the scene. The other options are people talking at each other for like, minutes at a time, as in the book, or the closeup on thinking faces while they talk (again, for m i n u t e s) or lastly like, onscreen titlecards. "It's 10000 years in the future, the Butlerian Jihad was a war in which thinking machines were banned and replaced by the mentat order..."

I like Lynch's Dune, but I think this one is better visually -- not just in effects but oh my god yes the effects are so much better. Casting in this one is better (although yes, no Sting. He was better in Baron Munchausen anyway). I enjoyed the Toto soundtrack but I think Zimmer's soundtrack blows it away. The sound design on this one was something I enjoyed so, so much. Pacing on this one is slow but not like 90s-tv-series glacial-slow. My biggest complaint is (much like @Bull Shannon and @nolalady ) lack of character development. Paul is fleshed out....and that's about it. Jessica, like, the tiniest bit? Everyone else is sort of background. Sometimes really intense background, like Javier Bardem's Stilgar, because he just exudes tiredness and holy shit Jamis again with this will you just shut up plskthx, just by like, blinking slowly and exhaling. Everyone else is just sorta there.
 
nolalady said:
The tl;dr of my post is : I think the director focuses on the most boring parts of the book while throwing away the political intrigue and inter-galactic economics which is really what makes Herbert’s world epic. Stunning visual shots were substituted for actual world building. Hopefully, installment two will see more of the entire world instead of just a troubled Messiah story.

ETA I did think it was cool to see the throppters. That was cool.
Click to expand...
Yeah. After the third group of dudes wearing helmets showed up to fight I was just thinking who are you again?
 
folsom_lives said:
Yeah. After the third group of dudes wearing helmets showed up to fight I was just thinking who are you again?
Click to expand...
It’s basically just Harkkonens, Atreides, and Sarduakar, I think. I realize in the novel the Sarduakar were in Harkkonen uniforms to hide the Emperor’s involvement, but the streamlining is understandable.
 
nolalady said:
But it loses the political intrigue.
Click to expand...
It's there, but I agree it's more on the side of lip service. Then again, given the run time I'm not sure how much more justice they could have done it.

If it were to remain a movie, I think ideally Villeneuve should have had closer to 3.5 hours of run time to work with. I'm curious if we'll see a Peter Jackson style Extended Cut at some point, since I know they shot things like the Banquet sequence that didn't make the final film.
 
Not to break of the Dune wankfest too much (who doesn’t enjoy a good wank?) but here’s a nice write up in the NYT on Wes Anderson and his impending French Dispatch.

www.nytimes.com

In the Company of Wes Anderson (Published 2021)

What is it about the director that draws stars like Frances McDormand and Tilda Swinton again and again? There are many reasons, but the nightly feasts don’t hurt.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

Reading stuff like this makes me wish I had become a exquisitely pretentious actor.
 
JohnnyCashFan said:
Nice little vignette about the making of John Carpneter's Halloween
Click to expand...

We recently watched the 2 latest Halloween's.

The 2018 one was decent enough but I found Halloween Kills to be wayyyy over the top. One of those films that are so bad that the horror aspect is removed and it becomes silly rather than scary. It was like they were trying to throw in too many references to the old films.
 
JohnnyCashFan said:
Nice little vignette about the making of John Carpneter's Halloween
Click to expand...

that was awesome, i loved hearing about the whole business side of getting the funding together to get it made.

two old favorites, "american nightmare"


and john darnielle (of the mountain goats) talking about texas chainsaw massacre at length
 
Selaws said:
We recently watched the 2 latest Halloween's.

The 2018 one was decent enough but I found Halloween Kills to be wayyyy over the top. One of those films that are so bad that the horror aspect is removed and it becomes silly rather than scary. It was like they were trying to throw in too many references to the old films.
Click to expand...
We just do I/II tbh
 
Last night I finally did a second watch of Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. For some reason I remembered not liking it much and had it low on my list of Wes Anderson flicks. I loved it this time through and rate it right up there with Rushmore on my list.
I guess timing is everything; when I saw that it was released in 2004 it made sense...that was a rough year that I learned of my then-wife's infidelity followed by a divorce. I probably didn't like much of anything in 2004.
 
ranbalam said:
Last night I finally did a second watch of Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. For some reason I remembered not liking it much and had it low on my list of Wes Anderson flicks. I loved it this time through and rate it right up there with Rushmore on my list.
I guess timing is everything; when I saw that it was released in 2004 it made sense...that was a rough year that I learned of my then-wife's infidelity followed by a divorce. I probably didn't like much of anything in 2004.
Click to expand...
I always thought that movie was kind of under-appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top