SF Debris Reviews David Lynch's "Dune"

[Nutso]

Part 1

Dune Review (Part 1)

Frank Herbert plus David Lynch equals a science fiction tale with a surreal bent that should not be watched while eating. Politics and prophecy shade a conflict over a desert planet that's the only source of an essential chemical called spice, while George Lucas takes careful notes.

Part 2

The conclusion to Lynch's controversial adaptation of Dune.

"...Dune is not Star Wars. Dune is Shakespeare. Dune is the battle of Henry V; the pathos of Hamlet; the betrayal of Julius Caesar; the witchcraft of MacBeth." - Charles Sonnenburg

[Atekimogus]

Like the book, liked the movie.

I don't really understand what all the hate is about, the film is imho quite epic and just looks damn great. I just like the artstyle, the sets, the costumes etc. etc. The soundtrack is also great imho, the main-theme is just grand.

Imho the only failing of the film is that it should have been a triology like Lord of the Rings to allow for better charactarization but considering the time it was made in.......... .


Tried to watch the mini-series and all but I just didn't like it at all. The movie is just iconic, the mini-series is just CGI dreck with bad actors imho.

[IanKennedy]

Alternatively if you've not read the book the film is completely impenetrable.

[Graham Kennedy]

Dune isn't really a filmable book, IMO. I thought the film did a poor job of doing it - the miniseries is much better, but still not really close.

[kostmayer]

Most definitely my fave book, read it over a dozen times and could read it again easily.

Saw the film before reading the book and have a soft spot for it, but it doesn't do the book justice. The mini series wasn't bad but not nearly long enough.

Imho the only failing of the film is that it should have been a triology like Lord of the Rings to allow for better charactarization but considering the time it was made in.......... .

Had this discussion recently. Couple of 3 to 3.5 hour films would have been about right, if Peter Jackson could do as good a job with Dune as he did with LOTR it could be really something.

[Mikey]

This is the rare instance in which I liked the movie-ization of a novel which I loved. On the surface one would tend to agree with GK that there's a lot in the book which can't translate to film; while there is much for which that is true, Lynch and DeLaurentiis seemed to have been able to walk the line between ignoring that material and assuming it, where for Peter Jackson (who was in an identical situation with his subject matter) it became a true bugbear with which he could never come to satisfactory grips. Of course I have certain issues with the translation from book to film, but these are so minor and so out-of-the-way of enjoying the film that they are tangential to any discussion save one focussed on them entirely.

Alternatively if you've not read the book the film is completely impenetrable.

I respectfully disagree; I saw the film as a young teen when it came out, before reading the novel, and I didn't have the issue you describe.

I don't really understand what all the hate is about

I believe that the anti-Dune sentiment comprises two parts: 1) It is epic, as you describe; one can't simply sit down to a bit of it for some light entertainment. It demands active watching and attention. 2) In a related way, it simply defies modern attention spans. There are those among modern media audiences who simply can't put the effort into watching a film for as long as one needs to do in order to appreciate Lynch's Dune.

Also, let's not forget the cast. Kyle MacLachlan (of course, Lynch's golden boy,) Freddie Jones, Brad Dourif, Richard Jordan, Sting (who was better in this than in Quadrophenia,) Dean Stockwell, Max von Sydow, Jurgen Prochnow, Sean Young, and some bald guy from a later sci-fi series.

[kostmayer]

Also, let's not forget the cast. Kyle MacLachlan (of course, Lynch's golden boy,) Freddie Jones, Brad Dourif, Richard Jordan, Sting (who was better in this than in Quadrophenia,) Dean Stockwell, Max von Sydow, Jurgen Prochnow, Sean Young, and some bald guy from a later sci-fi series

And a very young stab happy Alicia Witt, Sian Phillips, Kenneth McMillan..

Found this chart of frequent David Lynch Collaborators

I saw the film before reading the book and didn't have any problem following it either. And I'm a sucker for films that show its characters over the end Credits. Excellent music by Toto as well.

[Mikey]

Found this chart of frequent David Lynch Collaborators

I find it somewhat awesome that someone compiled that list, also that his own bit part in Dune went uncredited.

[Atekimogus]

Had this discussion recently. Couple of 3 to 3.5 hour films would have been about right, if Peter Jackson could do as good a job with Dune as he did with LOTR it could be really something.

I disagree with Peter Jackson doing a good job. Especially with the Hobbits - which I watched recently - it becomes painfully appearent how limited Jackson is. Now he has a few redeeming qualities eg. his cinematographie looks pretty and the special effects....are okish (ironically...I found the newer Hobbit films far inferior in the special effects department compared to the LOTR triology).


But his biggest failure is....he can't write believable dialogue even if his life would depend on it. It's not that appearent in the LOTR triology since there he has enough material to copy paste. (Which is exactly what he did and what I found the most grating thing about the whole movies...he LITERALLY just took some dialogue from one scene in the book...and put it in a COMPLETELY different scene in the movie, speeches from Minas Thirith battle suddenly appear at Helms Deep and vice versa.)


But with the Hobbit it becomes painfully appearant. We have 3 movies of about 2 1/2 hours each...and nobody is talking. There are MINUTES of film where nobody says a thing. And when they open their mouth it's only rubbish which is supposed to sound "epic"...but nobody talks in "epic" and hence it is forced and unbelievable. Heck...without spoiling something but enough said that a few characters bite the dust. I didn't care one bit. That's because after 3 movies I still didn't really know ANY of them. Heck..even if Bilbo would have been pushing daisies at one point....I wouldn't really care much to be honest.


So no...I don't think Jackson could have tackled a Dune triology. He would have lost himself into beautiful panorama shots of a desert planet, excellent CGI of worms and whatnot, beautiful costumes and props.....but three movies of his would contain less information than the original one from Lynch, at least imho.

[IanKennedy]

I respectfully disagree; I saw the film as a young teen when it came out, before reading the novel, and I didn't have the issue you describe.

You must be very special then We've always known this, of cause. As the SFdebris review says it's typically the thing that's said against the film. I pretty much agree with his discussion on it. A whole lot of information provided way too fast.

[Graham Kennedy]

I respectfully disagree; I saw the film as a young teen when it came out, before reading the novel, and I didn't have the issue you describe.

You must be very special then We've always known this, of cause. As the SFdebris review says it's typically the thing that's said against the film. I pretty much agree with his discussion on it. A whole lot of information provided way too fast.

You should try the book, you know. It's really good, and afterwards the film would make sense!

[Mikey]

You must be very special then We've always known this, of cause. As the SFdebris review says it's typically the thing that's said against the film. I pretty much agree with his discussion on it. A whole lot of information provided way too fast.

I'm not special at all. Rather, I think it's more proper to say that folks who couldn't at least passably muddle through the film on a stand-alone basis are... er... paddling without both oars in the water. Sure it was convoluted, but there's no background material in the book that's absent from the films that's required for understanding the film. Trust me, if I understand something, chances are that it's easily understood. I'm not nearly as intelligent as how you credit me.

You should try the book, you know. It's really good, and afterwards the film would make sense!

While I genuinely appreciate your valiant attempt at sarcasm, your essay unfortunately fails because: a) I already indicated that I had read the novel, just subseqient to watching the film; and b) the whole point was that I indicated that the film made sense, even prior to my reading of the novel. However, as one of the world's foremost proponents of caustic sarcasm, I applaud your effort and encourage you to keep trying.

As an aside, did anyone else find the sequels to decrease exponentially in quality as they went on chronologically? (I won't even mention Brian Herbert's books. )

[Graham Kennedy]

While I genuinely appreciate your valiant attempt at sarcasm, your essay unfortunately fails because: a) I already indicated that I had read the novel, just subseqient to watching the film; and b) the whole point was that I indicated that the film made sense, even prior to my reading of the novel. However, as one of the world's foremost proponents of caustic sarcasm, I applaud your effort and encourage you to keep trying.

That all kind of falls flat when you go back and notice that I wasn't actually talking to you.

As an aside, did anyone else find the sequels to decrease exponentially in quality as they went on chronologically? (I won't even mention Brian Herbert's books. )

Oh yes. Yes indeed.

[Mikey]

That all kind of falls flat when you go back and notice that I wasn't actually talking to you.

I beg your pardon, then. Since your post cited a quote that was a jibe at my quote, it seemed like... well, never mind, you get the idea.

Oh yes. Yes indeed.

It seems to me that, quite independent of the talent of the writer, whenever books (or the ideas behind them) begin to get messianic, the quality of hte books goes downhill in a hurry.

[kostmayer]

As an aside, did anyone else find the sequels to decrease exponentially in quality as they went on chronologically? (I won't even mention Brian Herbert's books. )

Yeah - I got about 3 books into the sequels. The first 2 sequels - I felt like I didn't know the characters, I couldn't relate them to the characters of the first book. And God Emperor of Dune was Godawful.