Where there’s a whip, there’s a way!
The Sci-Fi miniseries was much worse than the Lynch movie in every way except faithfulness to the book. I don’t consider that a strong value in the first place.
For all its faults, the Lynch Dune achieved an aesthetic. It felt like they were in a different place and time. I remember the stillsuits, and the worms, and the spice harvesters, and the guild navigators, and all that. From the miniseries I remember the stupid butterfly hat.
I’ll take aesthetics and successful worldbuilding over blind adherence to a book any day. And that’s from someone that really liked the books.
If he does, boy he’ll have some Tales to tell.
Aiyeeeeeeeeeee!
The Sardaukar had some remarkably silly hats in the miniseries, too: Sardaukar/XD | Dune Wiki | Fandom
They didn’t need to terrorize the Emperor’s foes - they just had to put on their big floppy berets to incapacitate 'em with laughter.
Doesn’t look much sillier than the dress uniforms of the Swiss Guard, which might’ve been the point.
I am pretty sure Blade Runner 2049 was an original script, not an adaptation.
I think it’s kind of interesting that the conversation seems to be as much about David Lynch’s version as it is about the new film. Dune (1984) had an otherworldliness about it that I don’t see here.
What Lynch did (and still does) is make films.
Dune (1984) came at a time when the Star Wars franchise was, for better or worse, remaking the landscape of cinema. Now, there were to be action figures, tie-ins, trading cards, board games. There was even a coloring book of Lynch’s Dune!
And, of course, the movie versions that came out of 1984 were disowned by Lynch. We’re actually discussing honest-to-God Alan Smithee productions here! (Including the TV edit with with the dumb narration)
I’ve been a Dune fan for a long time and I AM looking forward to seeing the Villeneuve version. If, for nothing else, to geek out on Spice and to see if, at long last, Dune really is an utterly unfilmable story.
Postscript: I’ve noticed the parallels between Lynch’s Dune and Lawrence of Arabia and wondered if anyone else noticed that Jack Nance is listed in the credits as “Nefud”, aka the desert which Lawrence must cross to attack the fortification from the rear?
This.
The visuals were exceptional. As someone put it in this video retrospective, “The film is a mess, but it is a beautiful mess.”
I far prefer Lynch’s visuals to the new movie. I don’t like the modern fashion for dark, gloomy, dingy, colourless visuals. Lynch’s version is spectacular and original. The whole movie has a dreamlike feel to it.
Not dull as dishwater, generic and uncreative, like this:
Agreed as to the cool, otherworldly design aesthetic of Lynch’s film. That was and is the best thing about it, I’d say.
You’ll appreciate this thread (although there are too many dead links now): The silliest military hat.
Correct.
I certainly hope he is called Maud’dib. It’s one of those things that just seems essential.
Did anyone here really like the Scifi Channel miniseries of both Dune and its first two sequels. Leto II was the first time I’d ever seen James McAvoy and for many years, my wife and I would say “Leto II!” when we’d see him show up in a movie or something.
They did not have a big budget, but they were well done. Children of Dune’s soundtrack is used a lot in trailers.
I liked them.
You make a good point. But I suspect that’s down the two directors establishing different styles for the movies. I obviously haven’t seen the Villeneuve version yet, but from the trailer it looks like he’s aiming for a more naturalistic tone. Whereas Lynch’s version was theatric, even operatic. This ties in as well to @Uniqueorn and @TroutMan’s comments above on Timothee Chalamet’s more realisitic “young-teenager” diction, verses Kyle MacLachlan’s declamatory utterances.
(Seems like both directors feel like Paul needs to have good hair, and lots of it, though. 
)
Yep. I actually did know that and was perhaps using the word “adaptation” incorrectly (as in “an adaptation of the first movie”). Which doesn’t really make sense, since it’s really a sequel.
I’m a little torn on the trailer. I hope there is more to the movie than what I was seeing. I think I might get “orange desert” fatigue if that’s mostly the tone. Those of us who live in California, Oregon, and Washington right about now probably will be less inclined to spend money to bring this aesthetic indoors! I agree with the dull and generic concerns mentioned above with that picture. The flag in the background is something I might expect a corporation’s marketing department to come up with. It does look like the generic sci-fi look, and it doesn’t feel lived in, especially since we’re talking about a society that is more monarchy like and more likely to tend towards the opulent and “showy”.
Why on earth (or Arrakis) do you think it’s ‘naturalistic’ for people to wear dull, colourless, dowdy clothing?
The miniseries was imaginative in clothing.
Even stillsuits have sometimes been imagined to be colourful and interesting:
This is one of my biggest pet peeves with a lot of fantasy and sci fi.
Humans throughout history have always tried to look good. Dull, colorless clothing has almost never been popular; people have almost always wanted to adorn themselves with color and fashion and to make themselves look attractive and bright.
Do you also remember the cat milking in the Lynch version? I don’t hate the Lynch version, but stuff like the cat milking and Balloon Baron were significant detractions, and I definitely prefer the miniseries to it. I find the Baron floating around the room and bizarre, pointless additions like having to milk a cat to be much worse than ‘I dislike some of the hats that are based off of real world hats’.
(This is the cat milking for anyone who forgot it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJrIi1CWwhc )
Book Baron wore anti-gravity devices to support his corpulence. I don’t recall if the book ever describes him as flying, but it’s hardly a stretch.
The cat milking, heart plugs, and so on were all part of the utter depravity of the Harkonnens. Lynch chose body horror to show that. It was certainly memorable. Lynch invented details that worked well on film.
As I said, the Lynch version certainly had faults. It’s ironic that despite its divergence from the book, it also only made sense if you had read the book. But fine details of the plot aren’t what I remember about a movie or book years later. It’s the feel of their worlds that they instilled in me.
What Smapti said. I doubt any of it will get into the picture. Hans Zimmer is credited for the music, at imdb. Pink Floyd is not mentioned, nor are any of their members, AFAIK.
Too good not to share, (I wish I had come up with it):
I must not hype. Hype is the joy-killer. Hype is the over-excitement that brings total disappointment. I will face my hype. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when hype has gone past I will turn my outer eye to the screen to see the actual product. Where the hype has gone there will be critique. Only it will remain.
I detest Hollywood, and I will see this in a theater.
The Lynch version was very, very pretty. Costumes and sets were magnificent. The movie itself was a hot mess.
“Weirding modules”? The what now? I remember watching in the theater, and when Paul called down the rainstorm at the end, my friends and I were shocked. Just how much damage did Paul do to the delicate melange-sandworm ecology?
I did like the Mentat chant, though.
“It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the juice of Sapphu that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire a stain, the stain becomes a warning.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.”
I had once heard about the Lynch movie, that those who read the book hated it, and those who hadn’t read the book couldn’t understand it.
Me too. I think the word “really” made me sound like I was doubting it. I think the guy who played Paul did a good job, especially in the Messiah and Children of Dune movies.