Let's talk about DUNE.

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Let's talk about DUNE.

    I recently read DUNE, DUNE MESSIAH and CHILDREN OF DUNE. Has anyone read past the initial trilogy? If so, what are your thoughts? Should I keep going? I know the sequels/prequels by Herbert's kids are probably a waste of time, but I'm curious to give volumes 4-6 a whirl.

    I always liked David Lynch's version, even though I considered it a bit of a mess. I never understood why it was so reviled. It's an interesting failure, which is better than a boring failure. Now, having read the books and rewatched the movie, I get the hate to some extent. The movie sacrifices a good deal of story, and makes a few unnecessary changes to important plot points. However, they did get a lot right, and aside from a few shoddy effects, the production design was spot on. Lynch has disowned the movie, and it's basically on record that he gave up on it in post (the running time was the exact cut-off for theatrical releases at that time to maximize screenings in a day, which points to some arbitrary decision-making in the editing room).

    I also watched the SyFy miniseries, which keeps most of the book's story intact, but has the production values that are on par with XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS. I found the filmmaking so terrible that I'm reluctant to try the adaptation of CHILDREN OF DUNE by the same folks.

    Of course there was also the aborted Jodorowsky version, which is one of the great "What If?" stories of cinema. The team that Jodorowsky assembled (including H.R. Giger, Jean "Moebius" Giraud, and Dan O'Bannon among others) were eventually co-opted by Ridley Scott for ALIEN and BLADE RUNNER, which gives you an idea of what could have been. Ultimately I'm not sure Jodorowsky was the right guy for the job... while I like his films I'm not sure if he had the sensibilities to make a faithful adaptation. We probably would have gotten a more expensive version of EL TOPO. There's a documentary coming out soon called JODOROWSKY'S DUNE that deals with this production, I'm looking forward to it.

    There have been attempts to revive the "franchise" in recent years, but the rights have lapsed and the project looks dead for the moment. For a while they had Peter Berg tapped to direct, who is apparently a huge fan of the novel. Pierre Morel also worked on the current script. I don't think either of these guys have shown the facility for this type of thing in their careers thus far, but who knows. Ultimately I think what's required is the Peter Jackson approach: the director needs to be both a huge fan of the books, and a visionary in his/her own right. (Hmmm.. maybe Peter Jackson would be a good choice for this, now that I think about it...)

    There is huge potential for a new set of DUNE movies, in my opinion. Even though dozens of movies have stolen DUNE's thunder since its original publication (STAR WARS and AVATAR most notably), I still think that the right creative team could do something fresh and original with it. The definitive version of DUNE has yet to be made, and with the right team it could be a LOTR-sized success. I mean, I could do it, but I gotta get the whole A-list career thing going first.

    I feel like talking about DUNE so please do chime in with your DUNE-related thoughts.

  • #2
    Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

    Originally posted by Gwai Lo View Post
    Of course there was also the aborted Jodorowsky version, which is one of the great "What If?" stories of cinema. The team that Jodorowsky assembled (including H.R. Giger, Jean "Moebius" Giraud, and Dan O'Bannon among others) were eventually co-opted by Ridley Scott for ALIEN and BLADE RUNNER, which gives you an idea of what could have been. Ultimately I'm not sure Jodorowsky was the right guy for the job... while I like his films I'm not sure if he had the sensibilities to make a faithful adaptation. We probably would have gotten a more expensive version of EL TOPO. There's a documentary coming out soon called JODOROWSKY'S DUNE that deals with this production, I'm looking forward to it.
    You forgot the fact that SALVADOR DALI(!!!) was set to play a major acting role in it and fvcking PINK FLOYD(!!) was doing the sound track on that film. If that had been made it would still be totally unlike any film ever created.

    But you really miss the point of that project; it was never supposed to be a faithful adaptation. He was using what Dune started out with and taking it to new heights. Herbert was supposedly happy with it too.

    I say whatever studio that's holding the rights to this gives the 80 year old Jodorowsky another chance at this. Jodorowsky's bowel movements don't stink as much as Peter Berg's films.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

      Originally posted by nathanq View Post
      You forgot the fact that SALVADOR DALI(!!!) was set to play a major acting role in it and fvcking PINK FLOYD(!!) was doing the sound track on that film. If that had been made it would still be totally unlike any film ever created.

      I say whatever studio that's holding the rights to this gives the 80 year old Jodorowsky another chance at this. Jodorowsky's bowel movements don't stink as much as Peter Berg's films.
      Yeah, I didn't mention them because they didn't end up joining the Ridley Scott team that came afterwards... but they are definitely notable players in the Jodorowsky DUNE project. Jodorowsky himself was going to play Duke Leto, and his son was going to play Paul Atreides. Which was par for course for Alejandro... he quite successfully used his own family in most of his films. SANTA SANGRE, especially.

      Casting DUNE these days, I would personally want to do it with more of an eye for the ethnic design of the original novel. Even though there are tens of thousands of years in between present day and the events of the books, the Fremen are quite clearly descendants of Middle Eastern and Asian cultures, while the Atreides seem Southern European (Greek?) and the Harkonnen/Saudakar seem Northern European.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

        When I read DUNE, I was surprised at feeling that David Lynch's film was a more faithful adaptation than I figured it was. Had the same vibe.

        Non/sorta spoilery:

        My big problem with both the book and movie is that the story builds up to something huge.... but then skips right to the aftermath. Kinda like ENDERS GAME.
        https://twitter.com/DavidCoggeshall
        http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1548597/

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

          Originally posted by ProfessorChomp View Post
          When I read DUNE, I was surprised at feeling that David Lynch's film was a more faithful adaptation than I figured it was. Had the same vibe.
          I think they got the production design about 90% right. And the general tone is pretty close to the mark. It's an acceptable compromise between the styles of Herbert and Lynch. They had the raw materials to put the book on screen, but the troubled nature of the production resulted in a film that just feels truncated and unfinished. It's frustrating because you can see all the right elements, sitting there not working.

          I haven't seen the extended Alan Smithee cut they did for television, I'm thinking I should seek it out. I know Lynch was not involved with it. I don't usually support directors going back and meddling with their work, a la George Lucas, but I think I'd make an exception for DUNE. Lynch would never do it because he hates the thing with all the bile in his guts, but I wonder if all the raw stock is just sitting around somewhere. I would support someone going back to the raw stock and putting together a completely new cut, spruce it up with modern CGI (tasteful of course, think BLADE RUNNER changes not STAR WARS changes)... but that someone would have to, you know, be an excellent editor, with money and a good team.

          Originally posted by ProfessorChomp View Post
          Non/sorta spoilery:

          My big problem with both the book and movie is that the story builds up to something huge.... but then skips right to the aftermath. Kinda like ENDERS GAME.
          I agree somewhat. Whoever does end up retooling DUNE (and I think it's inevitable) is going to have to figure out some Peter Jacksony ways to make some of the scenes in the novel more cinematic and action-packed, while preserving the spirit and dignity of the work. Helm's Deep is like 15 pages in LOTR the book, for example. Speaking of which, the best approach might be to split the first book in two, like THE HOBBIT. DUNE I: PAUL ATREIDES and DUNE II: MUAD'DIB.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

            +1 for the topic

            First: love the book, got some strong man love for the movie too. As you say they got the tone right, a top heavy decadent decaying empire rich in splendor, harsh on its subjects, rife with intrigue.

            I think you're wrong blaming the movie for a truncated feeling, I blame the author, the book feels the same way, as though someone spilt coffee on the 4/5 and hoped no one would notice.

            Don't watch the Alan Smithee version, it's just a bunch of poorly drawn pictures and a nauseating narration of the back story from memory. If you are "in to" scifi I think you'll get Lynch's movie regardless, if you've read the book its even more pointless.

            i'd like to see a new version using state of the art techology and a decent budget. And I don't think Lynch's version was too far off the mark script-wise... strengthen the section between becoming leader of the fremen, bolster Duncan Idaho's character a tad and ramp up the final battle into something worthy of Bey and you'd have a winner.

            hell I'd even watch the Son's prequels if they were made into a miniseries though I doubt they have the strength to become big screen movies in their own right.
            I heard the starting gun


            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Dune

              I ran across Frank Herbert a few times while he was doing some part-time instruction at the University of Washington, while he was being lauded for his novel.

              I never really understood why it was considered "science fiction"; as, with the STAR WARS franchise, it would be better classified as "space opera" or a fantasy, (ie. LORD OF THE RINGS with space travel).

              A "cult" following has never hurt book sales nor film franchises, but is it really a "science fiction" novel? I'd also point out that I don't consider Orwell's 1984 nor Bradbury's FAHRENHEIT 451 to be "science fiction".
              JEKYLL & CANADA (free .mp4 download @ Vimeo.com)

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

                Yeah but realistically 90% of scifi is space opera and no worse that anything else labeled scifi.

                Take for example that Asimov's positronic brains that cannot kill, hahahahaha, you know that if any thinking robot is ever developed the military will be right there with the visa gold cards extended and a semi hard on for their new 'toys'.

                What offends me is book stores locally are lumping scifi together with the likes of twilight.
                I heard the starting gun


                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

                  I'm pretty lenient with what I will put under the sci-fi umbrella. I know there's a certain school of thought that believes science fiction must essentially have legitimate beakers-and-bunsen-burners scientific content in order to qualify.

                  In general, as long as a science fiction plot device is present, ie. time travel, space travel, aliens, future setting, alternate universe/history, experiment gone awry, utopia/dystopia/post-apocalypse, etc etc... I would probably classify it as science fiction. There are also other disciplines, such as philosophy and history, that can act as a substitute to science. DUNE incorporates philosophy into a science fiction context. I don't think we should fret over the word "science" in the genre title, this tendency is what led to meaningless distinctions like "speculative fiction" and "Syfy". Or whatever.

                  I also think films can be more than one genre. ALIEN is sci-fi horror. ALIENS is sci-fi action. DUNE is sci-fi fantasy. STAR WARS is fantasy sci-fi. Now I'm 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY type of fella here, but if we can't call movies like these science fiction, then the term is broken in its application to cinema. The list of films that qualify as true science fiction would be very short indeed.

                  LORD OF THE RINGS is definitely fantasy though. No science fiction whatsoever.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

                    Dune isn't sci fi? What are you, nuts?
                    Screenwriting is like stripping. You don't just dump your clothes on the floor. You tease as you go. And then you get screwed in a back room for money. - Craig Mazin

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

                      Originally posted by Gwai Lo View Post
                      I also watched the SyFy miniseries, which keeps most of the book's story intact, but has the production values that are on par with XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS.
                      Yeah, but Xena had some fvcking great wire-sword-fu moments and Lucy Lawless was - and still is - SH1T HOT.

                      Yeah, yeah, I like girls between 5'4" and 5'7" with swim suit model bodies too (who doesn't?), but getting my arse kicked during sex by Lucy...
                      DAMN!

                      Um, anyway, my point was that... cough... Xena may have been trash, but it had some tremendous moments.

                      P.S. I'd have tapped Gabriel too. It's the outfit!
                      Cufk, Tish, Sips.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Let's talk about DUNE.

                        One of my all time fav's.

                        I had a version on VHS that I taped from TV without commercials and it had an awesome prelude and it cut out some of the more over the top scenes (like when the Baron spits on Jessica) and added a lot more backstory to the freeman. You could tell which parts weren't in the movie just by looking at the freeman's eyes because they didn't have that "awesome" blue eyes.

                        I thought it was Lynch's version, but I presume that to be incorrect because I don't have the evidence to back it up.
                        The best way out is always through. - Robert Frost

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X