Really, the only thing I was afraid of being disappointed about. They nailed them, although not quite what I expected. Better.

I agree ! The first time ever the ornithopters look right.

A bit off-topic but I was reminded of a sci fi TV series in the late 60s which had two seater ornithopters. I found references once on the Internet but I can't find it now because everything is about Dune. I lost interest after a few episodes but I remember the hero had a weird, lop-sided hairstyle and the heroine was a buxom blonde.

I watched the much=despised David Lynch version afterwards. At least that version explains what's going on and has its moments (like the arrival of the Guild Navigator in that steampunk locomotive-aquarium). This new version has dropped from 4 out of 5 stars to 2 overnight and that's only because the ornithopter adds one star. A lot of talent for sure, but not much heart and a curious visual blandness. I love the way Lynch starts with a sort of Romanov court complete with lapdogs, which makes a contrast when the go to Dune. I found myself wondering (in the new one) "The Emperor is afraid of this guy?" I think we're still waiting for a good Dune movie. Maybe they should have picked up Jodorworsky's famous project.

I liked them both. The visuals in this version are exceptional . 

Really loved what they did with the ornithopters, really enjoyed the scene where Paul & Mom crash land.

Part two should be interesting. Hope we don't have to wait years for it.

1 hour ago, vgbaron said:

I liked them both. The visuals in this version are exceptional . 

Really loved what they did with the ornithopters, really enjoyed the scene where Paul & Mom crash land.

Part two should be interesting. Hope we don't have to wait years for it.

Yep, I see a trilogy as part 1 ended so early and if the part 2 follows the same path, I see peter finding his feet in part 2 and part 3 will be the final war

 

17 hours ago, Tim_Capps said:

I watched the much=despised David Lynch version afterwards. At least that version explains what's going on and has its moments (like the arrival of the Guild Navigator in that steampunk locomotive-aquarium). This new version has dropped from 4 out of 5 stars to 2 overnight and that's only because the ornithopter adds one star. A lot of talent for sure, but not much heart and a curious visual blandness. I love the way Lynch starts with a sort of Romanov court complete with lapdogs, which makes a contrast when the go to Dune. I found myself wondering (in the new one) "The Emperor is afraid of this guy?" I think we're still waiting for a good Dune movie. Maybe they should have picked up Jodorworsky's famous project.

I have some difficulties understanding how Lynch's and Villeneuve's versions could even be comparable. Visuals, cinematography, storytelling, cast, CGI, I found nearly everything vastly superior is the latest. May I ask if you saw it on the big screen?

Are you all talking about the one coming in Nov?

3 hours ago, briansommers said:

Are you all talking about the one coming in Nov?

No, the one that came out just now, which is almost certainly the same one you're wondering about.

5 hours ago, Pascal_LSGC said:

I have some difficulties understanding how Lynch's and Villeneuve's versions could even be comparable. Visuals, cinematography, storytelling, cast, CGI, I found nearly everything vastly superior is the latest. May I ask if you saw it on the big screen?

I didn't see it in the theater.

I agree that the two versions could hardly be more different. I like both directors, who could hardly be more different. And no doubt the two Dune versions reflect that difference. Lynch has disowned his own Dune, and even claimed it was deliberately sabotaged. There are glaring problems with the Lynch version that the new one avoids. Lynch was not the right director for Dune, but remember, his last movie had been The Elephant Man, which had been a critical success and garnered an Oscar nomination for Lynch. So, Dune was before Lynch was Lynch--who knew?

I agree that, as a whole, the new version is indeed vastly superior, although that's a pretty low bar. But they can still be compared, and I do think Villeneuve might have gone in without looking into the mirror every day saying "NO ONE will EVER accuse me of doing ANYTHING like David Lynch!"

CGI in the Lynch version was awful. The blocky shield effects were interesting at the time, but the CGI has not held up, obviously. It was particularly disastrous to try to depict the Guild navigators folding space. Some things are better left to the imagination (as they realized in the new one). Lyncyh's Guild navigators in CGI sequences compare unfavorably with the monster that pursues the girl through the hall in one of the Hellraiser movies, but at least they were part of the story. There was really no attempt to portray ornithopters. What Lynch does do is establish in the first scene is that even the Emperor is scared of this Guild navigator (who makes a stupendous entrance). We know the Guild is a major player and spice is essential to interstellar travel. If that was brought out in the new movie, I don't remember.

Lynch is heavy on drop-in exposition, right from the first scene, and lets the audience hear what characters are thinking. I don't like drop-in exposition in either writing or movies, but Dune has such a massive and unique world, I think you have to make a choice, so I forgive Lynch on that count.

Lynch plunges into high camp with Baron Harknonnen, and those scenes are just painful to watch. You don't know if you've accidentally flipped over to the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Although, to be fair, Herbert wrote that mob so over-the-top if I did a Dune film, I'd probably use some artistic license and not have a fat man floating around. I cringed a bit even in the new one. But in general, the new version benefits from a more understated approach. Sting. Hmm... Memorable at least!

Kyle MacLachlan is no surprise in a Lynch movie (I'm amazed Lauren Dern wasn't worked in) and wasn't bad, but the new Paul (along with all the actors) was excellent and well-cast. I do hope he gets his hair out of his eyes before his next knife fight, though. Rebecca Ferguson (highly memorable from Villeneuve's great Blade Runner 2049) was amazing as Lady Jessica. She portrayed the conflicts of her character so subtly and effectively she stole every scene she was in, but like a pickpocket steals things. She was the standout of the movie. Lynch's Duncan Idaho (with just a few minutes on screen) was NOT the legendary warrior we got in the new one. You could be forgiven for thinking Lynch's harmless little clerk was Duke Leto's secretary. Was the new Duncan Idaho a bit over-the-top? I think reasonable minds may differ. Brad Dorurif was a much more memorable Thufir Hawat (not that he would have been right for the new movie) but here's a complaint. If you had not read the book or seen the Lynch movie, would you have any idea who this guy was supposed to be? I don't remember any explanation of what a mentat was.

I didn't like the art direction in the new one, and didn't particularly like the cinematography, although it was good. It seemed like a lot of it was shot in dim light--maybe a Villeneuve thing--and maybe that's just a personal thing with me. Maybe it looked better on the big screen. For a sun-baked desert planet, there wasn't much sun, although I suppose you could say that's because people avoid the sun on sun-baked desert planets. Even so... But I don't think the cinematography was bad.The spaceships were noting special (although the orrnithopter was perfect). But, again, we wouldn't expect anything too cool from the guy who gave us Arrival (another favorite) where the minimalist approach worked perfectly.

And this is where I think the Lynch version, for all its faults, does get one thing right.. Duke Leto is the richest, most powerful noble in the Imperium, living on a Planet Posh. This drives the entire plot. It's all about Game of Thrones style treachery where Duke Leto is so feared even by the Emperor, he's sent off to a hostile planet where he can be destroyed. This is just another box to be ticked in the new one. I LOVE the Romanov imperial court vibe Lynch gives us at the beginning. These folks may be powerful, but they're taking LAPDOGS to Dune. What a great, telling touch. Frankly, in the new one, I missed the "fish out of water" (if I can be forgiven that) feeling of the new version. As far as I can remember, in the new one, Lady Jessica's wardrobe was pretty much the same on Caladan as on Dune. Why? Because the art director was throttled in search of a muted visual style. So, instead of the wonderfully ornate floating light source of Lynch, which looks it belongs in Duke Leto's court, we get a floating puck light from Ikea.

And I hate Ikea. I once went to an Ikea store and felt like a steer making my way through a long, long chute designed by Temple Grandin to make me be HAPPY to finally reach the end, no matter what fate awaited me.

I'm just wondering if Villeneuve was the right director for a movie where world-building is as important as characters (one could argue more important in the book). After wondering why my opinion dropped after thinking about the new movie, it came down to this. It's not that it was bad, but I got the feeling they were trying to keep the fans happy with a long checklist of elements from the book. I realize it is probably impossible to do Dune justice in a move--even a two-parter. But it did feel like a soulless exercise in ticking off boxes, and some of them so perfunctorily maybe that's why I can't even remember if the power of the Guild was emphasized, or the essential role of spice to the Imperium, or if mentats were explained. I'm not going to go so far as to say it was made into a parable about colonialism, but it did seem to me that spice was just something a colonial power found valuable and was taking from oppressed natives for the enrichment of corrupt officials and somehow useful. I do think that's in the book, but in this movie you might substitute it with "oil" or "lithium" or "sugar." (What the new one does get right is the hallucinogenic qualities of the spice, and it's shown like pollen in the air.)

I guess I was expecting the long-awaited science-fiction blockbuster to feel a little less than a competent BBC Shakespeare production. I can imagine someone saying, "Look, this is all very good, but we've got to throw the audience a bone, so let's have a sexy, brawny guy killing a bunch of people, okay?" (And since when did Saudaukar abandon their signature three-back-to-back fighting technique?) Yes, I'm complaining for ticking the boxes, and also not ticking some boxes where there was no reason not to. I'm not saying Lynch made a better Dune movie. Perish the thought. I'm just saying it wasn't forgettable. This Dune is memorable for the fantastic acting of Rebecca Ferguson, a bit of taut, effective exposition, and avoiding everything in the Lynch version--including a few things it should probably have learned from.

Part 2 is not on my list of Big Things to Look Forward To.

You asked 🙂

 

 

I nodded off around the 1/2 way point... fortunately for only about 20 min or so.  Managed to recover, and saw it through to the end.  I remember reading the book, many years ago...  and enjoyed it. 

On 10/25/2021 at 9:09 PM, javelina said:

I remember reading the book, many years ago...  and enjoyed it.

Dune might simply be impossible to film. I was thinking about the drop-in exposition in Lynch's version, and remembered that every chapter had a little prologue by some princess or concubine--don't recall who. Something like Game of Thrones, or Lord of the Rings is easy. GoT is just the War of the Roses with dragons. Everybody gets the world going in because everybody knows something about medieval history, or at least the setting. When you build a unique world with such richness as in Dune, you start from scratch. Everything has to be explained because the setting is not historical, but ecological with an enormous background. And much of it just isn't cinematic. Once you've seen the sandworm, what's left? Learning more fascinating ways to conserve water? I recall a big finale, but... yeah, I don't blame you for your snooze. As a novel, Dune is interesting in how little story there is compared to the world=building. That's actually a thing now: "the end of narrativity." Something writers talk about on the rare occasions they're not talking about publishers or editors.

Having re-watched both the new Dune (or DUNC as we now call it, due to the weird title font) I say Lynch's despised version is less bad. DUNC opens (before you weirdly see the iconic WB water tower) with the Sardaukar priest or whoever (the Tibetan throat-singer guy on Salusa Secundus) intoning (translated for us) "Dreams are messages from the deep." Why is this Jungian wisdom so important--other than Paul has dreams--and why presented in this way? Then it launches into a Fremen-centric prologue and goes downhill from there. Also, DUNC's soundtrack is bad, where Lynch had TOTO and Brian Eno working for him. (I also noticed Lynch had a cameo as the spice harvester radio operator and Lynch favorite Jack Nance was the Baron's henchman.) I had questions about DUNC the first time around, but the second time I watched it I thought it was shockingly bad. Update the 40-year-old hairstyles and special effects and do a shot-for-shot remake and it would have been better.

"Shockingly bad"
Duh...
Did Denis Villeneuve steal your wife, or what?
Good troll anyway...
🙂

 Dune: We simulated the desert planet of Arrakis to see if humans could survive there (phys.org)