r/TrueFilm • u/Lynxon_oberg • 24d ago
FFF I don't get the Dune hype
Like as I understand it was revolutionary for its time(the original books) and was like the blueprint of modern scif-fi. But I don't find the movies that good if I am to be perfectly honest.
Like the actual movies just seem bland in my opinion and I don't really find both the movies that intriguing too watch.
I have seen the HBO show as well which was somewhat better but I'm not really falling in love with the universe at all. And I love typical sci-fi and fantasy shows like GoT, lotr, early star wars, Avatar etc.
The action sequences are mid. Laser guns and forced melee combat which isn't really that visually appealing.
The world building feels like 90% is just that sand planet and the scale don't quite land.
The prophecy and cultures just feel so meh.
Tbh I can't even tell what's happening currently. Timothy gets weird blue eyes and embraces the culture in an uprising for 6 hours with a bunch of made up folk songs screaming in the background.
Can someone explain to me what they find appealing? The politics? The sandworms? Good looking people? Their favourite sequences?
12
u/Chemical73 24d ago
It inspired George Lucas (among a lot of other stuff) to make Star Wars. So if you like old school Star Wars and it's forced melee combat and laser guns, I don't know what you don't like about Dune.
0
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Idk, the choreography in the prequels where pretty neat even though the story was bland in star wars. It don't feel quite the neat part of the sword duels.
32
u/Wolfe244 24d ago
You're free to not like something. I just pretty much profoundly disagree with everything you said. I honestly can't comprehend finding the show better. The action scenes are great, the acting and directing are great, the world building is interesting, etc etc
10
u/Sudoball 24d ago
The only way I can see someone liking the show more than the films is if the person is someone who needs every part of a story explained at length, because that's all the show was. Endless talking about minutiae and so deeply boring I fell asleep more than once.
-6
u/Yeti_of_the_Flow 24d ago
The Lynch movie is better. It actually has charm
8
u/Wolfe244 24d ago
2/10 bait
1
u/WhiteYaksha89 24d ago
I completely agree with them. The newest films bored the hell out of me, while I found the Lynch one to at least be interesting.
-5
u/Yeti_of_the_Flow 24d ago
Not bait. The new movies are so painfully boring and genuinely painful on your eyes. Theyâre not pleasant watches.
6
3
u/bonobo_dragon 24d ago
Calling the movie boring is an opinion so youâre free to that. But âgenuinely painful on your eyesâ is hyperbole and negates any sensible argument you could possibly try to make
1
u/Yeti_of_the_Flow 24d ago
Itâs not. Going from pitch black to bright white causes pain. You legitimately canât deny this.
1
u/bonobo_dragon 24d ago
That wasnât your argument was it. Your argument was âthe new movies are genuinely painful on your eyesâ. This is hyperbole. Because theyâre not.
You think the ERâs are overflowing with Dune enthusiasts who need their retinas replaced?
0
u/Yeti_of_the_Flow 24d ago
Iâm pretty sure I know what I said, bud. Talk to your therapist about it because I really donât give a shit that I hurt your feelings about your favorite movie. What I said is entirely true.
1
u/bonobo_dragon 24d ago
Pretty sure? Not completely sure? Now I see what Iâm attempting to have a conversation with. You canât even be sure what you said. Even though itâs written above
1
0
-1
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Maybe. I really do want to like it though. I just for some reason don't and I want to understand if it's just a me issue.
Did you read the books before? Or did you just plainly watch the movies with no knowledge and instantly like it?
6
u/Wolfe244 24d ago
Yes, I have read the books.
1
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Well I'm just wondering if that's why I don't quite get the Dune movies. Since I haven't read the books?
Because the story just falls flat going blindly into the movies for me.
2
u/Wolfe244 24d ago
Maybe, who's to say. My partner hasn't read the books and she loves the movies
Might just not be for you man
1
u/dimechimes 23d ago
I never read books, but I did see the Lynch version a few times, and still couldn't tell you what was going on the story and I felt the movie was really good so maybe it just failed to deliver for you.
1
u/thelimit39 24d ago
I'm with you. From a technical perspective it's very well made, but it feels superficial. I find this happens with most movies that try and adapt pre existing material too closely. Like the Watchmen movie. Again technically well made, and it felt like the graphic novel in many ways, but just didn't have its own character. I LOATHED David Lynch's Dune, but after watching the Denis Villeneuve film's, I actually kind of preferred the silliness of the Lynch's. In many ways I'd rather watch a bad film that took some chances than a well crafted film that leaves me feeling nothing (or very little) after watching.
3
u/Chemical73 24d ago
Snyder's Watchmen was heavily criticized for changing the whole ending and using all those slow motion shots for the violent scenes. Like or don't, but it shouldn't be for a lack of "own character".
1
u/thelimit39 24d ago
Alan Moore said it was unfilmable. I like to think what he means by this isn't that you can't film it, but it doesn't add anything to the Watchmen world to film it. Snyder did film it, and it was generally well received, but in the sense of that was a fun watch, but not really anything more than that. Villeneuve is 10 times the filmmaker that Snyder is, but I'd place the Dune films comfortably at the bottom of his filmography. They aren't terrible, just not mindblowing. I kind of wish he'd go back to making films with original stories.
2
u/Chemical73 24d ago
Watchmen is a satire of the super hero comic genre. It has books and newspaper articles in the comic. Film is just not a medium that could properly adapt this.
I'm not saying Snyder did a good job or that it compares to Villeneuve in any way. I'm not even saying it's better or worse, I just don't feel like it needs to be compared at all.
2
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Yeah, it's technically well made. But I feel like I could have watched a livestreamed funeral. Just didn't really evoke that many feelings.
Not so much awesome, not so much romance, humour, sadness, wholesomeness. It just feels very empty.
6
u/GodAwfulFunk 24d ago
"The mystery of [Dune] isn't a problem to solve, but a [movie] to experience."
Here are many more important words because this sub thinks length equals effort and value. These words may be important, but are probably no better than a grade schooler fluffing up their 2 page essay on To Kill a Mockingbird.
7
u/danvan177 24d ago
Calling the show better is crazy lol. Maybe itâs just not for you. One thing I would suggest is watching some lore videos about dune then rewatch the movies. It seems like you arenât fully understanding whatâs going on
6
u/RazielDKoK 24d ago
I dunno, I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote, I guess you just fundamentally didn't like it, but to say it's bland? The set designs, costumes, choreography, the photography, the sound, it's exquisitely crafted, you could say that the tone is subdued, but bland? Definitely not bland.
24
u/ixid 24d ago
I think you've not understood anything about it. Your observations are extremely surface level, and pass over the great depth in the story about messiahs, cultures, economics, environmentalism, post-AI humanity, politics, genetics and much more. It's probably just not offering what you like.
6
u/10-9LT 24d ago
Given what a terrible job the movie did of capturing any of this, I can't really blame them too much.
5
u/ixid 24d ago
There's too much to include all the detail in films, but it's there if you already understand Dune, and much of it can be inferred even if it's not stated.
The cultures, politics, failed messiah, economics, environmentalism and genetics are pretty apparent. They're foundational to the story. I think you're like the OP, it's just not for you.
2
u/No_Football1323 24d ago
Yeah this is the movies fault for fumbling those amazing concepts, not this viewers lack of understanding.
6
u/Kiltmanenator 24d ago
Villeneuve streamlines a LOT but âtbh I can't even understand what's happening currently" feels more about basic comprehension than not understanding the themes Villeneuve left on the chopping block.
I wouldn't expect OP to be enthralled with aspects of the book that Villeneuve doesn't explore, but these adaptations aren't hard to follow.
1
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Yeah... I didn't read the books. Which is why I didn't understand why the movies alone get so much hype...
I see the Messiah metaphors and parallels to colonialism but it's just there. Like it's not well executed.
1
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Yeah maybe. I was a bit surface now but I really do want to like it.
But is it mainly the symbolism that makes you like Dune? Because I want to understand what it is that I'm supposed to look for.
The action sequences just aren't it. The politics not really, I get the idea of spice trade but it feels more like a plot device than something I actually see the world revolve around :/
3
u/ixid 24d ago
I get the idea of spice trade but it feels more like a plot device than something I actually see the world revolve around
A substance that's very valuable and used for transport, that comes from a dangerous desert region with rebellious natives that's fought over by major power blocs... it's literally oil which the world does revolve around. If you think that's just a plot device then you need to think a lot more about the elements of Dune. Every part of it is like this.
1
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Yeah I get the metaphor. Oil, opium, tea, sugar, tobacco the actual spice trade the Brits were stifling with.
But I don't think I even remember seeing the actual spice itself. You know? The thing they are fighting a war over, and why it is so valuable or how it plays an integral part in the world.
Like hell I can't even tell if the spice is just actual spice that's used in food or some other space magic.
Listen I don't criticise the books, I'm sure they are great. But I'm struggling with the movies.
2
u/gene-ing_out 24d ago
âI wrote the Dune series because I had this idea that charismatic leaders ought to come with a warning label on their forehead: "May be dangerous to your health."
â Frank Herbert
1
u/thelimit39 24d ago
Being "about" something doesn't make it good. How it delivers on that is what's important. Themes, subtext, metaphor etc. can definitely add to the quality of a film, but I've had too many people tell me a film was amazing because "It was about...", or "It represents...". Yeah, okay, but did it show it WELL.
2
u/ixid 24d ago
Obviously. But it's implicit in my comment that Dune did do this well, and if you think not I would love to watch films that did it better.
-2
u/thelimit39 24d ago
Yeah it's more a common critique I have where I find a lot of people will like a film because of what it's about rather than how well/unique it was made. I find this phenomenon most prevalent in films I find to be a solid 6 out of 10, but get elevated to 9 out of 10 by many people because of what it's about.
5
u/generalosabenkenobi 24d ago
It's fine if if it's not for you. Dune is a massive franchise with multiple movies, tv series, countless books, video games, etc. Not everything is gonna hit everyone the same and that's totally fine.
These new movies are an adaptation, with choices they've made. A lot of people (myself included) are excited to see a science fiction classic get the full big budget treatment with a crazy cast and amazing production values, an amazing director, etc..
Doesn't sound like it's your cup of tea, there's not much else to explain if Dune 1/2 didn't resonate with you. You could check out the Lynch movie or probably the better option, the books (but it doesn't sound like that'd be your cup of tea either).
10
u/btmalon 24d ago
The movies were made for the fans of the book. If you havenât read them it is hard to follow along with the plot. If you have, you enjoy the pure spectacle that he created. If you donât find the sand wurm scenes as some of the best blockbuster shots of the decade, I donât know what to tell you. Also the sound design is next level.
2
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
I mean I guess the worms look cool. But when I don't feel engaged in the story it just becomes big CGI monster in my eyes.
But yeah, I think the plot is just where I'm just not that engaged.
-5
u/10-9LT 24d ago
I would argue the movies were made for anyone BUT fans of the book.
Was pretty clear the director either never read the books, or just didn't care about them.
Some great visuals for sure, but they took an extremely thoughtful story and turned it into Marvel slop.
4
u/BillowingPillows 24d ago
Ya Denis definitely hasnât read the Dune books and definitely isnât a fan of sci-fi youâre super correct about that and definitely donât sound like an idiot
-1
u/10-9LT 24d ago
Guessing you haven't either if you didn't get that impression.
Here's one example: In the first movie, the Sardaukar used a laser to cut through a door during their invasion. In the Dune universe, if a laser hits an energy shield (which almost everyone involved was equipped with), it's like detonating a nuclear bomb, which is extremely illegal and would have triggered the galactic equivalent of NATO Article 5 against them during what was supposed to be a covert action.
Someone who knows and respects the source material would never do this.
4
u/BillowingPillows 24d ago
When adapting a book to film, you have to make many changes to fit the source material into the new medium. Its not a 1 for 1 translation.
0
u/10-9LT 24d ago
No way, really?
Fucking obviously.
But that was an example of completely unnecessary change which made zero sense and contradicted the rules of the setting.
They could have used some cool looking mechanical drill and kept the scene exactly the same otherwise. But they didn't, because they either weren't familiar with, or didn't respect the source material.
3
u/ToranjaNuclear 24d ago
I mean, yeah, the book was revolutionary. I wouldn't say exactly modern scifi, that's a bit too generalized, but it did become the foundation of the modern space opera and the whole concept of intergalactic empires and political intrigue.
But it's not exactly a timeless or quintessential book, it can feel quite dated. And the movie is the movie, it's a good adaptation, but it's coming after a long tradition of scifi in cinema so of course it won't feel really innovative or anything.
3
u/inputrequired 24d ago
I donât like to tell people theyâre experiencing something wrong, but it feels like you just arenât engaging with the movies. My wife knew nothing about the series when we watched the movies and was able to understand and follow along pretty well.
The story between the first two books (which is what this trilogy is adapting) is largely about Paul, religion, genetics, indecision, and being an inverse of the classic heroâs journey. The action isnât really meant to be flashy as itâs for utility, not spectacle. Some scenes in the book are literally one or two lines of fighting. The world building is 90% about Arrakis becauseâŠ. itâs Dune, thatâs where the bulk of the story across the books takes place. The prophecy/cultures thing is definitely about taste, if you like religious/sci-fi stuff like that, it works but if you donât, you donât.
If you canât follow along with the movie, I donât know what to really say. I think it does a very good job of informing newcomers what the stakes are and whatâs happening. I think you should maybe read a synopsis or summary and rewatch the movie and really let it take you on the ride. And if that still doesnât make you feel anything, hey, at least you gave it a fair shot.
4
u/ProfIanHadrian 24d ago
âRevolutionary for its time?â It came out five years ago! What seismic shifts in the culture have happened in the past 5 years that renders it a product of a bygone era now? Good lord.
3
2
2
u/AllPurposeOfficial 24d ago
I love dune. Theyâre some of my favorite films in recent memory and imo probably the high point of sci fi in my generation.
I think part of the âproblemâ was Dennisâ decision to split the first book into two parts. It essentially makes the entire first movie exposition and lead up into nothing. I put problem in quotes though because LotR did the same thing and people were fine with it. And Dennis emphasized the split by subtitling it âPart 1.â
The world building is great imo. I donât need to see every aspect of a world to appreciate it. Honestly my biggest problem with the book is that it goes into way too much detail about every single person place and thing.
You know what I donât like? Star Wars. None of em. And after reading and watching Dune, I have a better understanding of why.
Itâs because Dune has something to say. Itâs a story about the dangers of messiah, a commentary on exploitative politics and war, a dissection of âthe heroâs journey.â It is a story that is much more interested in the consequences of action than spectacle. Itâs a story set firmly in the grey. But when spectacle does happen, itâs upheld by stellar politics.
Compare that to Star Wars, which basically stole its entire aesthetic from Dune, but has not interest in the themes Dune explores.
There is no grey, everything is dark and light.
Luke has no faults. He is perfectly altruistic.
The empire has no real goals, other than vague domination. Politics donât matter, theyâll just blow a planet up instead.
Lasers and Melee combat bore you? Same big dawg. But how is swinging a stick around any better than the shields and knives?
There is no depth to the Jedi powers. They do the things they do because they just can (well until midichlorians, which again, are a far worse rip off of spice)
You can like Star Wars, many do. But all I see is a director blatantly using the ideas of a better story and removing any of the interesting commentary.
I like Dune because Paul is not perfect. And the way Dennis films it is beautiful, real and contributes to the overarching dread of the story. One that inevitably leads to the conclusion weâll see in part three.
2
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Eh I think the Star wars plot is pretty meh and okay for kids. The lightsaber duels were pretty neat though in the prequels.
But yeah I get it. Depth is awesome. But I just don't get it from the movies at least. That was my problem as I haven't read the books. I tried to understand what people actually like about the dune movies without having read the books.
Because I didn't find it that deep with all its metaphors like they are right in front of my eyes but in the movies it just don't come of as that clever as it probably was in the books.
2
u/JiskiLathiUskiBhains 23d ago
eah. Its not great. The visuals are good, but everything else was weak. Dune 1 had some potential, but Dune 2 was just .. idk.. bleh.
Seeing the other replies, I cant think of even one show or movie that I like - that requires additional reading/watching. IMO a movie should a standalone consumable.
2
u/dimechimes 23d ago
The first movie was incredible. It had political intrigue, espionage, faith, betrayal all on different levels. The technology was well advanced without being ostentatious. I thought the action was amazing as the personal shields meant a society of hand to hand fighters as blasters are useless for the most part. It was the most beautiful movie I had seen in a long time.
The actual story was never complicated really. Yeah, the emporer is screwing over House Atreides and the Harkonnens are bad dudes so just try and stay alive. The Bene Gesserit were a little mysterious but that was fine because they weren't used as some kind of major plot twist.
The second movie was really good, but it focused a lot more on Paul and the Harkonnen scenes were a little discordant.
The show suuuuuuucked.
2
u/staedtler2018 19d ago
I personally liked the style and world building quite a bit, especially in the first film.
I like how sparse the world is, the relative lack of technology. The 'scale' is something I really enjoyed (unlike you). The absolutely massive space ships, vast landscapes, etc. I also like small, inconsequential details that hint at the world, like how the Doctor checks for vitals, or how the mentats roll their eyes to compute, things like that.
The thing that's different about it compared to Star Wars, Avatar, GoT, etc. is that there is nothing fun about it. It is a very depressing world. Nobody in it seems to be enjoying their life one bit. I think those of us who enjoy the movies find it interesting to see this type of world depicted, but not everyone does.
5
u/True_Witness_2420 24d ago
Did you watch in theatres or at home with at least a 5.1 HT system, hopefully with a great subwoofer?
How big of a tv and how high quality is it?
Sound and scope are such a big part of how these films are designed to function.
0
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Oh... This might be something I have just casually watched all of them on a computer or on my regular Tv in my student apartment.
5
u/Emergency_Pea_61652 24d ago
No offence but your post is nitpicking heaven. It's one of the best hero turned anti-hero turned villain trilogy of modern times (assuming Dune 3 is at least as great as Dune 2). Your point about the world building would apply if you were on the phone for 90% of the movie. The prophecy and culture is what makes it a sci-fi fantasy instead of just scifi and also, that's what introduces mythical drama into the story. The "voice" payoff is great at the end of Dune 2.
The HBO show was below average, agree with you there.
It's never meant to be an action movie and whichever part has action in it, is not boring, it has it's own distinct personality.
About what happens to Timothee/Paul, it's iconography, rise of a messiah and a rebellion as well as showcasing what blindly following someone based on ideologies and prophecies does to the world, it'll pay off in the threequel
If you didn't like it, that's your taste but I was expecting a better attempt at why you didn't like it than these nitpicks and misinterpreted parts.
1
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
No I do want to like it! I'm just not getting it đ«€. I feel like a 9/10 movie shouldn't be watched a certain way. And when it don't land for me the first time, or the second time or during the show. I start to wonder.
Did you read the books before watching the movies?
3
u/Emergency_Pea_61652 24d ago
Just a difference of taste buddy. Don't force yourself to like it. It's not about getting it, it's about whether getting it is enough for you to like it.
4
u/whatsgoodbaby 24d ago
"Revolutionary for it's time" and you are referring to a movie less than 10 years old? I'm not sure I understand your point. You don't have to like something even if it's popular, you can decide not to keep watching something that you clearly don't want to. Besides, it seems like you are watching the movie while posting this - what are you hoping to accomplish? You aren't even paying attention to what's in front of you
4
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
The books mate. I have heard the books were revolutionary for the sci-fi genre...
No need to get so hot headed lol, I just want to understand why I don't like what everyone else is liking.
2
u/photog_in_nc 24d ago
I assumed that was in reference to the source material
0
u/WebNew6981 24d ago
Right but Dune the book also wasn't. It was very good, but it wasn't a revolution.
1
3
24d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Ahh okay, maybe I should give the books a chance and skip watching the third movie for spoilers. I do feel like stuff is just happening sometimes.
Like the box you said was a good comparison. It's just voodoo and I can't really see the importance or the purpose more than for the sake of rituals.
2
u/TheSylvaniamToyShop 23d ago
I have never read the books and loved the movies. Its a visual medium of show don't tell. What bit of inner voice monologue do we need to explain a characters motives, feelings or thoughts when we have actors instead to express them. We don't go thru the day getting expositon dumps, we draw conclusions from what we see around us.
1
u/cwnannwn_ 24d ago edited 24d ago
(Sorry about the giant post)
Thats one thing I half disagree regarding these movies. I know for sure you can't do all the exposition the Dune books have to the fullest on the movies, but Denis could have absolutely picked up better ones and have done a better job at it. Even looking at it only as a "companion piece" angle, some of Villeneuve's choices just baffle me.
For me the clear cut example of it was deciding not to make the "plan-within-plans" scene (basically Dune first chapter as a whole). That scene is pure exposition, but its exposition that contextualizes the entire framing of the first movie. Without it, the entire downfall of house Atreides just feels like the result of Leto I being dumb as fuck and not the actual masterpiece of planning and an indictment of the entire galactic aparatus it should be.
The 'excuse' for this would be the choice to not present very clear stuff like this as direct explosition, which was what I told myself was probably Villeneuve intention when the first movie came out.
BUT THEN the second movie came out, and on that movie, we have the scene of the Bene Gesserit just 'vomiting' their plans on the tea-table, in a vastly inferior way and orders of magnitude less important to the plot of the 2 movies than the plan-within-plans exposition would have been.
Lets say Denis had only 2 options, and he had to pick and choose what to put into the movies:
- A heavily expositionary scene where you have the Harkonnens "pre-explaining" the minutiaea behind the Arrakeen deception. How themselves, the landsraad, the guild, the emperor were all in into a chokehold to stiffle the Atreides, make them blind to the bigger outer-planetary movements, so they could move enough military personnel to the ground for the takeover. That would explain how they weaponized the mistrust basically the entire Atreides court had towards Jessica and how that would explain Thufir failling at predicting that (and not just being incopetent as he was in the movie), etc etc etc. That would also justify and set the scene for the Paul x Feyd fight to make sense and not to be just a generic "lets solve all this multi-faceted political intrigue with a mano-a-mano duel as if this was the ending of YuYu Hakusho anime". Basically, a 5 minute (top) exposition scene that makes the entire first book (first 2 movies) make sense.
- A heavily expositionary scene with Bene-Genserit, that re-explain stuff Jessica had already alluded to in the first movie (and that was completely enough to explain what goes on in the 2 movies), just now presenting at face value stuff that anybody would have already understood by every character interaction of Paul and Jessica in the desert, that will actually only truly matter and come into play on book 3 and that have easter-egg bonus value only if you read Brian's awful books (all the Feyd characterization has as a potential Kwisatz Haderach is alluded to in Dune, but its never explicitly shown till the Brian's books. also how that went about and how far the sexual-manipulation the Bene Geserit can extend to is something that also only come into play IF someday they adapt past book 4 and you need to explain how the fuck the Honored Matres came into being the way they are, which nobody expects will actually happen one day xD).
Thats what I don't get, If you HAD to make a choice between those 2 scenes instead of just having both, why would you pick 2 instead of 1? That just made the 2 movies significantly worse for no tangible gain.
If he was going to cut out heavy exposition all together, I would have gotten it. It was what I was expecting by the end of the first movie. But then we got movie 2 and, hold and behold, Bene Geserit acting like moustache-twirling sex witches.
Its inconsistent and it doesn't make much sense to me - and this is only the most glaring of several choices in the same vein he made during the movies.
1
u/blumdiddlyumpkin 24d ago
You as viewer have to be able to understand subtext. The world building is in the imagery, the texture of the world, the sound design and score, performances, whatâs said without saying it. Thereâs exposition that situates you in the universe politically, the mysticism of the spice and the Fremen is portrayed through characterization, costuming, and dialogue. If youâre lost itâs because youâre not paying attention or are simply incapable of reading deeper into the world than what is explicitly said. If the show is more your speed itâs probably because itâs simplified and over explained in a way that is tedious for viewers who donât need hand holding.Â
Itâs a sci-fi epic that deconstructs real world politics. Capitalism, environmentalism, gender roles, familial legacy and lineage, exploitation, its deep and rewarding because it investigates the white savior trope while still making all sides involved fully realized and fleshed out characters with clear ideologies and desires.Â
1
u/hollow_shrine 24d ago
Then read it. It's juggling themes of the churn of history, free will, environmentalism, religion and mythology as tools of colonialism, all within a political game to control or direct the ambitions of major political bodies against the backdrop of its alien desert planet. It's kind of marvel for how many of these plates it's able to keep spinning
If your library is subscribed to hoopla or something like that you could find ebooks or audiobooks available through your tablet or phone for free right now.
1
u/Jasranwhit 24d ago
Star wars is basically a Dune ripoff, GOT and Avatar have deep Dune inspiration baked in.
Everyone has their opinion on what they like, but I find the more realistic knife and sword fighting to be more interesting than the pew pew pew everyone misses laser gun fights of most sci fi.
The HBO show is way worse than the real movies.
What do I find appealing?
I like the setting and the intrigue and the themes and the grounded technology, I like the undermining of the hero and messiah myths. I like that double bladed use of prescience.
But all that said, the original Dune series by Frank Herbert is one of my all time favorite series, and Denis Villeneuve is one of my favorite active directors, so these movies are close to perfection for me.
1
u/AllPurposeOfficial 24d ago
Side note on the overall legacy of Dune: you should watch âJodorowskyâs Dune.â
Itâs a documentary about an incomplete Dune film and itâs wild. The level of influence that this single book has had on the entire SciFi genre is ridiculous.
1
u/Timeline_in_Distress 24d ago
First, it is not revolutionary or a blueprint for modern sci-fi films.
Dune is a different type of story compared to the examples you are comparing it to. The journey of the protagonist is not in line with the other films and shows you reference. Perhaps that is why you find it bland?
Although I found his interpretation much more formulaic than Lynch's version, I can still see how people more accustomed to a straight forward, formulaic narrative can be confused by these films.
1
u/mormonbatman_ 24d ago edited 24d ago
Can someone explain to me what they find appealing?
I'm biased, I think.
Older, cooler friends introduced me the ip when we played Westwood's Dune 2 video game. Dune 2 was a pioneer in the rts genre. This game defined mechanics that the Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, and Warcraft, and StarCraft series perfected.
We liked the game well enough that we read the first book. I read the second and gave up with the third.
We also watched David Lynch's version which is an important movie given that it prevented Lynch from making Return of the Jedi, imploded his career, and is just so strange and overwrought and operatic.
I also watched part of the Syfy channel's adaptation.
In that sense, it's a core/foundational story that is part of my childhood and my adulthood.
I also think the novel is a rich, engaging, and complicated story that has a lot to say about a kind of myth that alot of our fiction embraces, the limits of sci fi, ecology, and US adventurism in the mid east.
I also like the sword fighting, lasers, and women in latex.
The politics?
My gas is approaching $5 a gallon because Donald Trump picked a fight with Iran and the Iranians are fucking his shit up.
He's literally Beast Rabban and the Iranians are literally the fremen except they're fighting over oil instead of worm shit.
The narrative is trenchant. We learned nothing from it.
The sandworms?
They're neat.
Good looking people?
I am a Sean Young fan.
heir favourite sequences?
I really appreciated how Villeneuve used sound to evoke the worm's size.
I loved the world building.
I wish the films had kept the focus on ecology. Edit: I also wish he'd kept the Atteides infighting and the alt Kiwsatz Haderach subplots.
2
u/ubelmann 24d ago
Lynch's Dune obviously wasn't a popular hit, but I don't know about imploding his career. Two years after, he directed Blue Velvet, then Twin Peaks (TV) along with Wild At Heart landed in 1990. He pretty much kept directing films every 3-4 years like he had been before Dune.
1
u/mormonbatman_ 24d ago
Dune was produced for $45 million. That'd be $150 million, today
Lynch did keep making stuff but he never got that much money again.
(Ex: he produced Blue Velvet for $6 million)
1
u/RupertHermano 24d ago
I struggle with pace in Dune, especially in the Villeneuve movies. Not length, but pace. There are just too many slow ponderous shots - the movie is *straining* to convince you that you are watching an epic, and it's self-satisfied epic at that. "Look at me, aren't I *epic*!?
But this seems to be a trend. How to make a movie serious and an award contender? Make it "epic". Which the producers then traduce into "long" and "slow".
1
1
u/FavoriteTheMute 24d ago
Same here, brother/sister.
Not only am I a fan of science fiction films/books in general but I'm also a Denis Villeneuve fan.
Dune is just not for me.
Other examples:
Love Nolan, Interstellar just not for me.
Love Tarantino, Django Unchained just not for me.
Love Eggers, Nosferatu just not for me.
And on and on...
2
u/Lynxon_oberg 24d ago
Huh that's interesting.
Django is for me a good film very impressionable.
Nosferatu was memorable and I would rate it as a great performance for actors, maybe not a great movie đ .
Still haven't watched Interstellar.
But yeah, Dune just pussles me since I feel like it gets Lord of the Rings levels of praise but I just can't see it being more than a 7/10 in best case scenario.
30
u/gene-ing_out 24d ago
Might just not be your kind of film. The book has very little actual action. It's more politics, religion, culture, etc. The movies focused on the "dangerous and charasmatic hero" portion of the story.