i.e. completely misses the point of the original
I’ll take the dry two-page Dune Encyclopedia entry on Cevna over the prequel dreck, any day.
Denis Villeneuve’s directorial followup to Dune 2 will be an adaptation of Rendesvous with Rama.
Having seen what he’s done with Dune, he’s definitely the right director for the job - he’ll do a great job capturing the immensity and alien-ness of Rama.
He is apparently aiming to be King of the Nerds. I like it. The guy does good sci fi.
But instead of making two movies, like Dune, RWR will be three movies.
You know why…
I see what you did there.
I get the reference, but… God, I hope not. I’d rather see Villeneuve tackle the Brian Herbert Dune books before he tried to adapt the shit-show the Rama books turned into after the first one.
Don’t. RWR is a great book for ideas, but nothing interesting happens.
I agree…to a point.
So much of nothing happened in RWR that I felt cheated.
But, it would certainly be great eye candy. I’d love to see a travelogue of Rama.
For that matter, I’d love to see a Ringworld film, and I think it has even less plot than RWR
I’m glad to learn I wasn’t the only one underwhelmed by RWR. I’ve never understood all the love for it - among Clarke’s work alone, 2001, 2010, Childhood’s End, A Fall of Moondust and The Fountains of Paradise are all better books IMHO.
I also do not understand how RWR can be a movie. I think it’s a very interesting (if low key) book, but cinema is driven by stakes and action — not pew-pew action necessarily, just things being done in service to some objective. I don’t see that in RWR, at all.
Re Dune, there was no HBO streaming option in my location in Europe, and I haven’t been in a cinema since December 2019, so I had to wait for disc.
I got the 4k a little while ago, and I’ve watched the movie three times in a week. I think it’s utterly magnificent, a master class in focused adaptation of page to film. Villeneuve has clearly chosen his preferred narrative threads, and has ruthlessly carved away everything else. Do I miss the Butlerian Jihad backstory, and the explanation of the Mentats, and the context of Yueh’s choice, and so on? Sure. Are they critical to following this version of the story? No.
I will rewatch this many times and I will be there for Part Two when it opens.
Oh, and Villeneuve has said he wants to make a total of three films: the two-part adaptation of the first book, and then a final film covering Messiah. Seems to me he’s very clear on why he thinks this story is worth telling.
Ah, interesting!
Is this where I say Rendezvous with Rama is one of my favorite books of all time? Not just sci-fi, but all books. I was completely drawn in and mesmerized by the exploration and wonder of discovering a new alien craft. And they keep finding interesting things before they have to go when Rama slingshots back. I actually haven’t read any of the sequels because I was worried they may ruin the first book for me.
Good move. The sequels were written in the main by Gentry Lee, who (a) isn’t nearly as good a writer as Clarke, and (b) completely ruins the mystery of Rama by explaining its origins and purpose in great detail:
God sent it. Seriously. There is a God, and he sent Rama and similar craft to explore the universe he created and report back.
I watched Dune in January, at home. I wanted to let it percolate for a while, but it didn’t, it just washed right off me. It just didn’t do anything for me. There were some scenes that looked like they’d be impressive on the big screen, and I had no issues with the actors. I just don’t like Villeneuve. The films of his that I’ve seen (Arrival, Blade Runner 2049) seem inert, lethargic, needlessly slow.
As for Dune, I never felt like I was getting immersed into the world, the culture. It felt like we were skimming past the scenes without ever being shown WHY things were happening, or what they meant.
For all of the 1980’s Lynch movie’s flaws, I think it did a better job of letting you understand what was going on, understanding the characters and their motivations, and conveying the fundamental weirdness of the book.
Also, I hated that the ornithopters were so overtly modeled on current helicopters. There they are, in the Ten Millionth And A Half Century or whatever, and the ornithopters have essentially the same jet engine sound, look, loading ramp, pilot controls, instrument panel, warning sounds, and behavior as today’s helicopters. They would have been very cool in a movie set on Earth, 20 years in the future. Not on Arrakis in the inconceivably far future.
You get their society is technologically ossified, right? And also that some design features are highly optimized and would work just as well in any similar use case, like ramps or controls. Should they have flown them with reins? Or by interpretive dance moves? And 'thopters are explicitly said to have jets, what sound should they make other than a jet sound?
IMO, they got the 'thopters exactly right, in a way neither the Lynch movie nor the miniseries did.
They used swords and knives, you’re not complaining that their swords and knives are the same as recent swords and knives (crysknives excepted)…
Here is a fancy-looking real kris:
It is made of (space?) iron, though, not space worm teeth.
No love for Lynch’s flying shoe boxes?
Yeah, me neither.
I never visualized damsel flies, but I’m totally cool with that interpretation.
Yeah, the 'thopters were one of my favorite bits of tech from the new movie.
That kris’s grip looks like it came from an umbrella, though, IMHO.
Good for stabbing that way. Gives you a place to push with the palm of your hand, so you can get your whole arm behind it.
“Gurney says there’s no artistry in killing with the tip, that it should be done with the edge.”