Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (1460.1)
    • CommentAuthorNecros
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    Well I don't want to be negative at this point, so I will keep my fingers crossed that it is a good adaptation of the material.
    • CommentAuthorharchangel
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    I saw this earlier today. It seems like an odd choice of director, but i will sit tight on judgement and just pull out my copy of Dune since it's been ages since i've read it.
      CommentAuthorThom B.
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008 edited
    I'm just sad that Jodorowsky isn't directing....
    Still, it may well be good. LOtR gave writers and directors the freedom to think bigger with these things so who knows. I'm a little worried that they'll take the "dwindling natural resources" thing too far and date the film in the same way that Lucas was all "Ooooh Human Genome, Ooooh Mitocondrial DNA, Oooooh Midicloriens Oooooh Oooh Ooooh....ooops, I made a shit movie".
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    There's no indicators that show this will be good or bad, jury's still out. Can't really do worse than Lynch's version (the chopped-up Theatrical version, that is)
  2.  (1460.6)
    Do you think it will top the Lynch version visually? I still think Lynch's Dune (although I doubt he'd call it that) is a nice looking piece of work/production design.

    I've never read the books (yet) but how did Lynch's Dune size up in terms of faithfullness?

    Won't this new version just be a huge lump of CGI thrown at the screen?
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008 edited
    James - the Lynch movie really didn't capture much other than the epic scale of the books - it changed the plot fairly dramatically. It's by no means a bad film, but if you're looking for a visual reincarnation of the books, this ain't quite it.

    I'm probably gonna get called a mainstream putz for this, but I actually really liked the Sci-Fi Channel miniseries, both of them. While they couldn't get all the cool content, they did do a good job of creating what I thought was the right mood and look for the books. They didn't make it too weird, which was what turned me off to the Lynch version, especially because the books themselves are not all that weird. Multilayered, well-structured, intentionally misleading at times, and occasionally downright synapse-shattering, but not really all that weird.

    On the other hand, if you're gonna have fuckin' ornithopters in your movie, have fucking ornithopters, not the mutant bastard children of a V-22 and a grasshopper.

    I'll redeem my art student self by saying that I hope the art department takes a look at the (rightly) stillborn Alejandro Jodorowsky production. The film itself probably would have been a Jodorowskian wankfest, but the concept art I've seen for it is very creepy, very cool, and very nice to look at - a fair amount of it was drawn by Moebius and other talented European comic artists. If they can incorporate (not copy, per se) some of that essence, I think if nothing else we'd have a very nice moving painting with sound attached to it. Maybe, if they can get the right adaptive writer for the script (NOT Kevin J. Anderson, I mean - nice guy, but didn't really write the prequels and sequels all that well, in my opinion), then we might also have a very nice movie.
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    ..what was wrong with Lynch's version?

    anyway I still think they should've made a Hellblazer movie with Sting..or someone not-Keanu...
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    Nothing was WRONG with it, exactly. It was a fine film. It just wasn't DUNE.
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    Dune is one of the only Lynch films I haven't seen yet. I have heard that it is almost incomprehensible unless you have read the book, although I don't think that necessarily means it's faithful.

    I only find this surprising because they've only just done a TV adaptation recently. If it is done well it could make a great film, although I don't know how they would squeeze the whole thing into one film. Perhaps it will be a two-parter or a trilogy, as is the popular thing at the moment.
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    Personally, I LOVE Lynch's Dune. Then again, I can't find all of the mini-series they did for it and never finished the book, so I probably shouldn't talk. I will say that I wished the version I heard that was going to happen before Lynch got in, a series involving multiple directors (including Orsen Welles) with music by Pink Floyd would have been much, MUCH cooler.

    I shall keep a close eye on this, I think.
  3.  (1460.12)
    Loved Lynch's version - it got the spirit of Herbert right.

    The filmmakers consider its theme of finite ecological resources particularly timely.

    If they push this too hard, and it somehow becomes the major theme through rewrites, this movie is going to be epic fail and will be the least Dune-y Dune of them all.

  4.  (1460.13)
    Loved Lynch's version - it got the spirit of Herbert right.


    Herbert used to write whole sections of the books as poetry then construct narrative and description around them. When people complain that Lynch's version is too weird in spots, it's usually where it was being very close to Herbert's book.

    The enviornmental message could totally derail if it becomes "THIS...DESERT...THIS...IS...YOUR...FATE...AMERICA!" screed. The story speaks to that very effectively ...through the story.

    I'm pretty curious to see this adaptation, if for no better reason than to see the design work that will go into it. Because the Dune books are pretty spare on descriptions it leaves a big space for artists and designers to really play around. Guild Navigators, Sandworms, Fremen Still-suits, and the Baron. That diseased fat man floating about. Good times.

    Yes, I'm a complete dork for those books.
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    knife fighting Sting

    Sting so made the original. That mini-series was for shit. I fear it's a down-wide spiral. How can they compete with this?

    glorious Sting
      CommentAuthorThom B.
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008 edited
    Jodorowskian wankfest!?! Rightly silborn! GHAH! I can't believe my ears!
    Well, alright, it would have been a wankfest but that's not to say it should have never been.
    I mean, come on, Salvador Dali doing a scatological portrayal of the Padasha Emperor seated atop a golden dolphin toilet throne!!!
    Who wouldn't want to see that!

    -edited for unnecessary opinion on Dali's art
  5.  (1460.16)
    This thread is already hurting my head. My general prognosis is to leave it alone. David Lynch made a 'DUNE". Sci-fi channel made one that was more faithful to the book in terms of content. It's over. Why can't they wait at least another decade to remake this?

    @m1k3y: The zombie agrees, Sting and all the costumes took the cake. Even though the studio didn't go with Geiger's designs.
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2008
    Third one's a charm?
  6.  (1460.18)
    "I demand...A SHIRT!"

  7.  (1460.19)
    "Third one's a charm?" I hope so. If only Frank Herbert knew how much filmmakers love the spice. I demand a winged thong.
  8.  (1460.20)
    Have never managed to get through more than forty minutes of Lynch's film, not because I wasn't liking it, but because something always came up and forced me to stop. Will do it this time.

    Haven't watched any movies by Peter Berg yet, so I won't comment.