Dune (the movie) whine

Mr. Pug went to bed early last night, leaving me in control of the television. I tried to watch Dune, but just like happened years ago, I just couldn’t muck through it. Aaaargh! It’s so frustrating! There were many intriguingly good elements: Kyle MacLachlan as Muad’dib is a hottie, Jessica looked just as she ought, the score was very good, there were pugs in the film, the Fremen were cool . . . and that about sums it up. The film just didn’t work. Why? Just because it was such a large and intricate novel? I’m thinking out loud here. I haven’t picked up the book in a long time, but now that I think of it, a lot of the exposition and plot development took place in the thought processes of the characters, and not as action to be shown. I don’t know. Even given this, I think a different director might have done it justice. I think David Lynch must have just gotten in over his head.

::frustrated::

Did you see the miniseries that was on Showtime a couple years ago? It was pretty bad, too. They’re working on a sequel which combines the next two books into one miniseries.

No, I hadn’t seen that miniseries . . . WTF? William Hurt as Duke Leto? nonononono

You just had to know the Dune book too well to appreciate the nuances and texture of the movie. I did, and found the movie pretty good. But the ones who weren’t really into the book all went “eh”.

The miniseries was on the Sci-Fi channel, not Showtime.

And I liked the David Lynch movie. Mostly because I love movie trailers, and Dune the movie plays like a two-hour trailer. Whenever I watch it, I always end up thinking, “Boy, that movie looks cool! Can’t wait to see it!”

I read the book after watching the movie and so many of the subtlties (sp? why does that look like subtitles…) we just lost in the movie. IMO, it was just too intricate for a 2 hour movie to do it justice.

It must be frustrating to have to try to film a movie where most of the action is justified by internal monologue. Do you try to cover the territory with voiceovers, do you add more scenes to fill in the blanks, or what? Lynch’s Dune demonstrated the problems of the former approach, whereas the Sci-Fi version takes twice the time and doesn’t really work that much better. Sadly, for all its great visuals, Dune may be one of those films that it’s ultimately impossible to capture effectively on screen in its entirety.

For all its flaws, I still have to say that I prefer the original version. (The one with the prologue by Irulan, not the Alan Smithee version with the goofy paintings and the “Dukes of Hazzard” style opening narration, which I just about blew a Milk Dud through my nose laughing at.) I think that the characters were more memorably portrayed and the effects more inspired. Despite twenty years of progress in special effects technology, the new version always manages to look like it was filmed on a forty-foot soundstage. To its credit, the new version does present a much more credibly menacing Baron Harkonnen. The other guy resembled a red-haired John Belushi way too much for my taste. It’s hard to take your villain seriously when he’s drinking the juice of a pressed gerbil.

Of course, it’s

a good idea to proofread you post before sending it. Doofus.

AAAGGGHHH!!! YES! You post should you poof read, and all your base are belong to us. The End.

I am also a big fan of the Linch interpretation of Dune. THose elliments that were not in the book I found were good in giving a reason for the Emperors wish to destroy House Attraidies without needing to go deeply into the politics of the book. Just a shame about a few of the bad lines. eg “Attraidies Patrols wer Doubled” wtf?

I think that Lynch’s “Dune” is a failure, but an honest one. He did his best to bring the material to the screen, and created some first-class moments, but the problem of fitting that epic book to movie length ultimately defeated him.

Maybe he should have filmed three movies simultaneously and spread them out over three years.

I’m rather spilt on my opinon.

I liked the Lynch version for the visuals and the style (except the thropters) while I felt the Mini-series did a better job of sticking to the story.

Now, if there were just some way to combine the two to get the best of both worlds…

I’d ask if Lucas could do it, but he’d like screw it up beyond reconigiton.

pugluvr is right, Lynch’s Dune is akin to Bakshi’s LOTR. Eventually someone will do it justice. Peter Jackson has proven that anything is possible…

pssst btw Anybody addicted to spice had blue eyes, so All the Bene Jesserit including Paul’s mom would’ve had the spice eyes. AND all the fremen.

minor nitpick on a film with great big old picks to nit if so inclined.

But you’ll notice it’s the little things that Jackson got right that makes his “drive a truck over the book plot and get that parking spot for Us” palatable.

my . 02

My dad hates the David Lynch production of Dune, but loved the Sci-Fi Channel miniseries production of Dune.

My main gripe is that in neither of these productions did the Ornithopters actually flap their wings!

“Meesa Jar-Jar Fremen! Yousa saved meesa’s life! Oops!” [trips over a water container, spilling it irrevocably into the desert sand] “Sorry!”

Before I saw the miniseries, all I saw were the flaws in the movie.

After I saw the miniseries, all I saw was what the movie got right.

That tells me something…

After 2 very different and very unsatisfying versions, it makes one wish that Alexjando Jodorosky had gotten his chance to make his version.

Granted, it would have gutted the novel’s storyline and filled the film with quasi-religious-mystical-magical symbolism, but it probably would have been more interesting than what we have gotten so far.

The soundtrack was by Toto, with some tracks by Brian Eno that are quite good.

As opposed to Frank Herbert, who filled the book with … uh … quasi-religious-mystical-magical symbolism.