That 2020 DUNE film

[Scott_650]

There are those who thought the same about Robert Heinlein, what with some of his later works. The Number of the Beast being a case in point.

Heinlein was suffering from a carotid blockage - his successful bypass surgery was one of the first. TNotB was published after the surgery but I don’t know when he wrote it - I find it a much less problematic read than To Sail Beyond the Sunset, The Cat Who Could Walk Through Walls or Job: A Comedy of Errors, which were all written after. Friday I can take or leave - IMO it’s pretty much an adult retread of some of his juvenile books. His “World As Myth” concept was/is an interesting idea and it’s become part of many current authors’ world building. But I don’t think he had it nearly worked out as well he thought he did.

Frank Herbert was a different kind of cat, the first two Dune books are probably the best he did - the later ones were not my cup of tea and the best I could do with the continuation/prequel books was skim them in frustration - YMMV

The Villeneuve film was amazing - I wish they could’ve made the next one back-to-back with the first! The minor changes made for the movie didn’t have any real impact to the story or feel of the source material (unlike some of Peter Jackson’s butchery of big swaths of Lord of the Rings - still a good adaptation but sad that it wasn’t as good as it could have been). I see some Oscars being handed out for Dune Part One…

 

[boatgeek]

unlike some of Peter Jackson’s butchery of big swaths of Lord of the Rings - still a good adaptation but sad that it wasn’t as good as it could have been.

Which was still not as bad as PJ's absolute mangling of The Hobbit.

 

[Sooner Boomer]

Just finnished watching the new release. Also just completed reading the first three books in the Dune series.

The movie: Probably the best of the three treatments so far. A friend and I scanned through the first movie (1984). It had some good points, but I fear too much got left on the cutting room floor. It had to be trimmed to no more than 2 hours, and I'm not sure this is suffecient time. I don't have a copy of the mini-series to compare (either movie) to. One thing I consider a glaring error is the look of the Baron in the new movie. From IMDb; "According to the prequel book, House Atreides, Baron Harkonnen's obesity and sickly condition is actually a Bene Gesserit punishment. When approached by the Bene Gesserit to father a daughter (Jessica), the Baron (a homosexual) was furious, and actually raped the Bene Gesserit mother. In retaliation, she infected him with a debilitating disease. ". The casting of Dave Bautista as Raban was a good fit. The ornothopters were pretty much as I had seen them in the "movie on the inside of the eyelids" as I read the books. Still thinking about how they did the "spice eyes" in this movie. It was poorly done previously (probably due to lack of technology). Speaking of technology, the fight scene early in the first movie was the first use of CGI in a major motion picture.

Speaking of Heinlein; I'm surprised more movies have not been done from his writings. The two previous doin's weren't especially well done, however. I think "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" could make a great movie.

 

[Scott_650]

Which was still not as bad as PJ's absolute mangling of The Hobbit.

I actually don’t have near the negative feeling toward his monstrously inflated version of The Hobbit as I do the completely unnecessary changes made to LotR - The Hobbit trilogy was driven as much by the studio demanding a three movie epic with a (ludicrous) love story, expanded female character presence and goofy “action” sequences as it was by PJ’s ego (his King Kong being another example of Jackson’s rather high opinion of his own cleverness). Yes, The Hobbit films are bloated and ponderous but the core elements of the story remained intact - the changes made to LotR completely invert everything Tolkien was trying to say. I still enjoy the LotR movies - I just grit my teeth at the silly changes made to make it “cinematic” and provide “dramatic tension” and enjoy the total look and feel of the films.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

I saw it on HBO Max about a week ago and really liked it. It’s visually amazing, and I enjoyed the sound design. The acting was good.

I think all movie adaptations have to diverge to some degree from their source material books, just because of the difference between the two media. Dune is especially hard because of the sheer volume of exposition in the books and how so much of the story involves the characters’ internal thoughts. So this movie is VERY different from the book I think. In some ways, it might depart even more than the Lynch movie did. But it’s still a good movie, and it’s a far better movie than the Lynch film.

I agree with earlier comments about the movie lacking some important backstory related to the world-building that is important for understanding why things are the way they are — laseguns and shields, why people fight with swords, why mentats, etc. Maybe modern movie makers can skip some of that kind of material now and just count on people looking it online if they care. One thing I felt I understood better in this movie than in the previous movie or even the book (which I read when I was really young) was the political move by the emperor to intentionally put House Atreides into conflict with Harkonen and then secretly aid Harkonen in destroying Atreides.

I am looking forward to the second movie. I felt like this one left off at a logical breaking point, but it definitely left me wanting the rest.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

So I'm an "Important" movie producer and I've got a bazillion dollars to spend making a Sci-Fi blockbuster.
Do I; make a movie based on a book that is so involved and convoluted that it would take 150 hours to do it justice and still half the audience wouldn't "Get it". Also, it has already been done twice before.
Or; do I make a movie based on a book that is, at heart, a pretty simple, but amazing, space adventure that hasn't been done before and would appeal to a far larger audience.
I am of course referring to Rendezvous With Rama.

On the other hand, we've had how many adaptations of King Kong?

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

So I'm an "Important" movie producer and I've got a bazillion dollars to spend making a Sci-Fi blockbuster.
Do I; make a movie based on a book that is so involved and convoluted that it would take 150 hours to do it justice and still half the audience wouldn't "Get it". Also, it has already been done twice before.
Or; do I make a movie based on a book that is, at heart, a pretty simple, but amazing, space adventure that hasn't been done before and would appeal to a far larger audience.
I am of course referring to Rendezvous With Rama.

On the other hand, we've had how many adaptations of King Kong?

Or do you just do another Batman?

 

[boomtube-mk2]

Or do you just do another Batman?

Or three, these things always seem to happen in threes.

 

[Huxter]

Oh no, not another Batman! Would love to see a movie based on Rendezvous With Rama!
great books - full of great scifi for my imagination!

 

[user 13]

As usual I'm a bit late to the game.

I just watched the new movie. Over that last year I re read the 1st 2 books and re watched the '84 movie and the mini series.

I was impressed with this film, Overall very well balanced. As expected they had to leave some of the details out for time.

My only real gripe was the Cave of Ridges, at the end of the film. They changed the dynamics of the timeline a bit. Maybe
they were running out of time but, as written in the book its very important for Pauls growth and becoming Muad'dib.

 

[Funkworks]

As usual I'm a bit late to the game.

Tell me about it, I was going to see Dune between X-mas and New Year's but guess what. Spiderman, Spiderman, Spiderman! All the theaters were showing that swinging anthropomorphic arthropod instead.

No worries though. I have other things going on I think are just as entertaining.

 

[user 13]

Oh, and the completely left out the whole dinner party with Irulan and Paul's meeting.
Kind of important to the story.

But these are nitpicks in an otherwise very good film.

 

[Scott_650]

Oh, and the completely left out the whole dinner party with Irulan and Paul's meeting.
Kind of important to the story.

But these are nitpicks in an otherwise very good film.

I’d say they’re leaving the Irulan character and her part of the story for the next movie.

 

[samb]

I’ll check this but I remember the dinner party on Arrakis having Dr. Kynes and some local notables but no royal princess. And I agree with mach7 they needed more of the Tuono Basin stuff where Paul had his first big spice “trip”. He (and the reader) get the outline for the rest of the story. a lot of good dialog with Jessica I would have liked to see visualized.

 

[boatgeek]

On watching the movie, I was embarrassed that I didn't connect "Mua'Dib" with "Mahdi" when I was reading the book. That was good to get cleared up early on.

 

[Funkworks]

It’s in the Oscar run. Here’s a link to see the film.

https://www.etonline.com/how-to-watch-dune-online-before-the-2022-oscars-172354

 

[boatgeek]

Thread resurrection!

OK, it's been a while since I saw the second part. And there's apparently a third part in development, but some time off. Overall, I think it was a pretty decent wrap-up. The only thing that really stuck out to me was how the pitched sword battles make no sense. Part of that is the combat system articulated in the books. But even so, blade-based combat between armies would almost certainly have actually looked much more like a Roman legion than a thousand ninjas in individual combat.

I'm sure it was in the books, but it really doesn't make sense to me that energy weapons work sometimes (eg lasers cutting doors or destroying spice harvesters) but not others. Ah well, it's fiction.

 

[Scott_650]

Thread resurrection!
I'm sure it was in the books, but it really doesn't make sense to me that energy weapons work sometimes (eg lasers cutting doors or destroying spice harvesters) but not others. Ah well, it's fiction.

They barely mention it in the first movie - it’s explained explicitly in the books - but when energy weapons are used against personal shields, or any shield, the result is akin to a full-on nuclear weapons explosion which kills both combatants and anyone close by.

 

[boatgeek]

They barely mention it in the first movie - it’s explained explicitly in the books - but when energy weapons are used against personal shields, or any shield, the result is akin to a full-on nuclear weapons explosion which kills both combatants and anyone close by.

Sure, that makes sense in the world of the books. My issue is really that they then use lasers on people and equipment who could plausibly be shielded, like the door in the first movie as Paul and company are fleeing the Harkonnen invasion and the spice harvester being picked up in the second movie. It feels like they're making a rule and then breaking it.

 

[John Kemker]

The second movie (of the current iteration) bothered me by leaving out the "weirding modules." These were sonic weapons activated by the wielder's voice that the Fremen discovered would work even better when they said "Muad'dib!" While I can understand the desire to leave out something that, on the surface, sounds kinda cheesy, it was part of why the Fremen saw Paul as their Messiah. It was specifically intended to bypass shields, since the shields passed sound.

 

[PhlAsh]

The second movie (of the current iteration) bothered me by leaving out the "weirding modules." These were sonic weapons activated by the wielder's voice that the Fremen discovered would work even better when they said "Muad'dib!" While I can understand the desire to leave out something that, on the surface, sounds kinda cheesy, it was part of why the Fremen saw Paul as their Messiah. It was specifically intended to bypass shields, since the shields passed sound.

Those only existed in the Lynch film. Probably because some exec decided they needed Kill-o-Whatt MegaZapp guns.

 

[kuririn]

Those only existed in the Lynch film. Probably because some exec decided they needed Kill-o-Whatt MegaZapp guns.

It really disappointed me when I saw that in the first film.
A real departure from the book (i.e. made up for special effects).

I like the current film iteration.
The book is so rich in character and plot development, no film(s) can possibly include all of that.
The new one sticks with the main plot and characters instead.
Much better.

 

[John Kemker]

Those only existed in the Lynch film. Probably because some exec decided they needed Kill-o-Whatt MegaZapp guns.

Doh!

I don't know why I seem to remember those in the book.

 

[samb]

So yeah, no weirding modules in the book. I always thought that they were Lynch's idea to weaponize The Voice in a tangible way that would look good on screen. Better than trying to show the tedious hours/days/weeks/months of kung fu, muay thai, Brazilian jiu-jitsu training that Paul and Jessica were going to put the Fremen through.
On a slightly different track I've been geekin' out over the first manifestation of the story serialized in Analog magazine way back in the before times.

 

[John Kemker]

So yeah, no weirding modules in the book. I always thought that they were Lynch's idea to weaponize The Voice in a tangible way that would look good on screen. Better than trying to show the tedious hours/days/weeks/months of kung fu, muay thai, Brazilian jiu-jitsu training that Paul and Jessica were going to put the Fremen through.
On a slightly different track I've been geekin' out over the first manifestation of the story serialized in Analog magazine way back in the before times.

Kewl!

I loved the books. Read them back in the 70s. Also read some of his Jorj X. McKie novels in the sci-fi mags: Whipping Star and Dosadi Experiment.