Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...

Watched it this past weekend. I guess my quick review, it was a bit short on expectations. I recognize that movies sometimes have to skimp on plot, but having read the book when it first came out in the Paleolithic era :rolleyes: and then seeing both David Lynch and SyFY channel versions of Dune, I was (unrealistically) expecting more. Nevertheless, a must watch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched it last night. It's a very odd situation to sum up but I'll have a go.

So, there is almost no exposition given. It feels like the film 'expects' you to have read the book and/or seen the Lynch film. (for info, I've done both) I feel you have to know the story from previous experience in order to know the story of this film, if that makes sense. I would imagine someone who didn't know the history might be very confused.

Visually, obviously we can all see it looks great, but it's the world Lynch portrayed on screen, with modern effects to fix the bits that didn't look so good or were over-ambitious in the 1984 film. Again, it's familiar because we've sort of seen it before. I am a fan of the Lynch film, despite it's limitations.

The planet Caladan was perhaps the only thing that felt a bit 'off' for me - I'm so used to the emphasis on it being a rain swept, godforsaken place, it actually looked quite nice tbh! 

My biggest problem with the film, but probably in truth, the plot of the book overall, is that central conceit of the Harkonnens being pushed out of Arrakis, but they're not really, they're just hiding, waiting to try and wipe out House Atriedes. Would an all powerful galactic emperor really hatch such a convoluted plan, when you're talking about the infrastructure that mines the most valuable resource in the known Universe? That part of the plot is the only bit that seems small-scale, in a backdrop of some of the most incredible lore and world building ever committed to text. 

Back to the movie, I wasn't that impressed with the Baron, he looks like an extra from the Addams Family doing an impersonation of Colonel Kurtz from Apocalypse Now. As silly as it looks now, I prefer the perversely grotesque interpretation of the Baron from the Lynch film, he's truly horrible. 

But overall, while I kept finding nagging things to flag the film up on, 2 and half hours of actually watching it went by in what felt like 10 minutes, at no point did I feel it dragging in any way.  I guess I knew what was going to happen, and the way it is portrayed it felt more like visiting an old friend, just dressed in new and modern finery. And it was only half of that first book, I do find myself craving the conclusion.

I keep thinking, though, would Dune be better served as a series? I watched the Children of dune series from the mid-2000's and thought it worked in that format. But this version is an impressive cinematic bit of work. The director has built upon what went before in a sympathetic and modern way. Just wish he'd included a touch more Lynth-esque weirdness and nastiness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, andy5995 said:

Coincidentally, @nanimade a random map named Dune, based on the original movie, if I'm not mistaken.

 

 

screenshot0023.png

No sand worms; no dice.

4 hours ago, mysticjim said:

I would imagine someone who didn't know the history might be very confused.

I don't think anyone would have any trouble following along. It's not that complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, andy5995 said:

Coincidentally, @nanimade a random map named Dune, based on the original movie, if I'm not mistaken.screenshot0023.png

Well, this popped-up in my news feed yesterday. "Scientists Simulate the Climate of Arrakis. It Turns Out Dune is a Pretty Realistic Exoplanet"

https://beforeitsnews.com/space/2021/11/scientists-simulate-the-climate-of-arrakis-it-turns-out-dune-is-a-pretty-realistic-exoplanet-2522128.html

Edited by Thales
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I don't think anyone would have any trouble following along. It's not that complicated.

No, the film is easy to follow at face value because there is no exposition. But the beauty of Dune as a peice of writing is it's depth, it's knowing and understanding how the political, religious and ecological ideals are melded. The film lightly touches these themes, but I'd still maintain, it's all there, but you need to know about it in advance in order to understand what and why they're doing what they're doing, otherwise it's just a lot of stunning eye candy without explanation. What we need on here is the viewpoint of someone who hasn't any previous Dune knowledge, I'd be fascinated to know what they made of it and what they perceived it to be about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, mysticjim said:

No, the film is easy to follow at face value because there is no exposition. But the beauty of Dune as a peice of writing is it's depth, it's knowing and understanding how the political, religious and ecological ideals are melded. The film lightly touches these themes, but I'd still maintain, it's all there, but you need to know about it in advance in order to understand what and why they're doing what they're doing, otherwise it's just a lot of stunning eye candy without explanation. What we need on here is the viewpoint of someone who hasn't any previous Dune knowledge, I'd be fascinated to know what they made of it and what they perceived it to be about. 

 

3 hours ago, davidsrsb said:

Anyone who did not know the book would be puzzled by the shields and why guns and especially lasers could not be used.

The lack of computers was also not explained.

I don't know. This guy never read the books or watched the original and he followed along just fine:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/11/2021 at 6:28 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

 

I don't know. This guy never read the books or watched the original and he followed along just fine:

 

Interesting. I'm really tempted to actually watch it in movie theatre now to get the full audio/visual experience. And maybe engagement is the key thing that people are taking from the film when they haven't been previously invested in the books or the Lynch film? As I said, I was not bored for one second watching it, if it has that ability to keep people with it all the way through regardless, then it's nothing short of an incredible achievement. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/11/2021 at 10:42 PM, davidsrsb said:

Anyone who did not know the book would be puzzled by the shields and why guns and especially lasers could not be used.

It's been years since I read the book. Nevertheless, I remained puzzled. It is explained incidentally in the movie that slow objects penetrate the shields, but I didn't perceive that clue while watching the movie.

On 03/11/2021 at 10:42 PM, davidsrsb said:

The lack of computers was also not explained.

This is actually a correction from what I had previously written. I was thinking about it. I finally remembered that the lack of computers is actually explained in the extended 1984 version of Dune directed by David Lynch. Also on the internet; one place, the fandom.com wiki history of Mentats.

Edited by Thales
Added thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...