It almost makes you wonder if they weren't going to greenlight it anyway.
Agree....it looks like to me like an elaborate marketing strategy...plans within plans...
It almost makes you wonder if they weren't going to greenlight it anyway.
I just realized something, I need to rewatch 1984 Dune. While I consider it to be a failure due to being over stylized, in hindsight the characters were more alive than the 21 version, which is a visual spectacle with practically lifeless characters. I can’t say the actors are bad, so despite impressive visuals, I have to plop blame on the director, the pacing and a generally oppressive atmosphere which for myself, diminished the actors performances as I watched it.
I think it is just the mechanism of having internal dialogue. I was hoping they would do that with the new movie.I just realized something, I need to rewatch 1984 Dune. While I consider it to be a failure due to being over stylized, in hindsight the characters were more alive than the 21 version, which is a visual spectacle with practically lifeless characters. I can’t say the actors are bad, so despite impressive visuals, I have to plop blame on the director, the pacing and a generally oppressive atmosphere which for myself, diminished the actors performances as I watched it.
I disagree.Do yourself a favor and stay far, far away from the original Hollywood Dune. Watch the old made-for-tv serial in its place. Not bad and makes sense.
Agree it's rather enjoyable actually if you aren't hardcore.I disagree.
Lynch’s Dune has plenty of faults, and the second half collapses completely. However, it’s still so crazy that it’s worth a watch. Also, the visual imagery is something that not even the new Dune could parallel.
The movie versions have always been inferior to the book version. Come on, Hollywood, Paul's story has been done to death. Move on the Leto II's story.🤓Possibly my dislike is because I read the book when it came out in the 60s, back in SciFi's great days, then saw the movie years later on the day it hit the screens. What we were expecting was not what we got. Until they ran out, the theaters would hand out flyers explaining various things that people were going to see but absolutely would not have a clue about unless they had read the book. When it reached the part where the "super powers" of Paul and his cohorts were replaced by an idiotic sound gun, a couple of my crowd walked out. I stayed but... Actually, I can't remember why I stayed. Probably wished I hadn't, when for some unexplained reason, when Paul is crowned at the end, some magic makes it rain without explaining where the water came from!! Water that would have destroyed the spice entirely. That is only a pair of the ten thousand examples of where it deviated from the book in ridiculous ways.
The movie versions have always been inferior to the book version.
I‘ve read the first 2 Dune books, and liked the first book, back in the day. The first Dune movie was a fail, I really wanted to like this latest version, but something about it made it feel not special. I really hated the droning, foreboding music. It’s one of the stories for me that clicks as a book, but is a hard transition to film.That is a fact. And accurate Dune move would be 10 hours long. But a good movie made from a good book just abridges the tale. The Day of the Jackal being a good example of a good bood and a good movie faithful to the plot. On the other hand, you have something like Dune that just replaces massive portions of the tale with... something. Not the first one to do so - Up Periscope, Ice Station Zebra, Raise the Titanic were gripping books that were absolutely trashed by Hollywood. And so on
IMO, it's because the producers/directors want to add their creative touch to an otherwise great work. What happens is they ruin a classic.😒 Just stick to what made the book great and they movie will be great. HBO's Game of Thrones was great until they didn't have the books to copy from.😑I‘ve read the first 2 Dune books, and liked the first book, back in the day. The first Dune movie was a fail, I really wanted to like this latest version, but something about it made it feel not special. I really hated the droning, foreboding music. It’s one of the stories for me that clicks as a book, but is a hard transition to film.
On a serious note, even the books had major flaws.
Yes, It was the Bene Gesserit that seeded Arrakis with the sand trout that consumed the free water and grew into the Sand Worms. The Bene Gesserit wanted a secure source for The Water of Life. This took over a 1000 years. The big mystery not spelled out is were the sand trout came from originally. Before this Arrakis was a wet planet. It does have a oxygen producing ecosystem but it is not detailed much in the original books. The goal of the Fremen is to change it back.Do we know how could Arrakis, a planet with no trees and no technology have breathable air?
I swear I don’t remember that in any of the books, but I think it’s just my bad memory.Yes, It was the Bene Gesserit that seeded Arrakis with the sand trout that consumed the free water and grew into the Sand Worms. The Bene Gesserit wanted a secure source for The Water of Life. This took over a 1000 years. The big mystery not spelled out is were the sand trout came from originally. Before this Arrakis was a wet planet. It does have an oxygen producing ecosystem but it is not detailed much in the original books. The goal of the Fremen is to change it back.