New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dune (1984)

post #1 of 76
11/23/07 at 9:01pm
Thread Starter 
Been many years since I've seen it and even longer having seen it all the way through.

It's a great flick! A little ahead of its time I think, but Lynch delivers on the visuals and at least strives for a unique production design. Some of the spaceship designs are ugly, but a few a cool.

The performances are all of course, Lychian, a bit off-center, but convincing. The Lychian moments are some of the best in the flick, most of them are with the Baron Harkonen.

Ebert's review was one of his many moments of 'not getting it,' as it's a strange film, beautiful and mysterious full of some of the best science-fiction ever filmed.

The film flopped here in the states, but DUNE's creator, Frank Herbert loved the hell out of it.

The film's failings are not it's fault really, it had so much, maybe too much back story to tell, Lynch did his very best making all that coherent and manageable. If you know nothing about the universe, hit wiki or pick up the books, because going in blind is not a good idea.

As for the 2000 mini version- Awful.
Reply
post #2 of 76
11/23/07 at 10:12pm
I remember seeing it on opening night in a nearly empty theater when I was thirteen. By the time the movie ended I was the only one left. I've loved it ever since. The tv mini series on SciFi was trash.
Reply
post #3 of 76
11/23/07 at 11:43pm
Same here. I was off in boot camp and A school when it came out, so I never got to see it in a theater. I finally caught it on video. While it absolutely has some storytelling flaws, there's so much there to like that I can overlook them. There have been few films that are so visually fascinating, for one thing. The designs, while really not what I pictured while reading the book (four times at that point), are incredible.

And I concur about the miniseries. Not the least of the reasons was the creator's sanctimonious bullshit about how he was bringing the true vision of the book to the screen at last. Fuck him. The one true vision of the book is in reading the book. Your job is to make a good movie, dickweed. And incidentally, if you don't have the budget to make a sci fi epic, then don't. Go make Lifetime movie.
Reply
post #4 of 76
11/24/07 at 1:03am
What's up with the extended version that came out a few years ago. I haven't had the chance to check that out. Is it an improvement or big mess?
Reply
post #5 of 76
11/24/07 at 1:29am
A very cool movie. The extended version was done by Universal for TV way back in the 80s, and Lynch took his name off it, it's pretty shitty. Make sure you watch the regular version first.
Reply
post #6 of 76
11/24/07 at 1:37am
My favorite part is the closing credits with the awesome Toto music playing and the characters showing up in front of like clouds or sand or something like casting call yeah I think that section is closest to the Lynch vision than any other part of that movie It's beautiful.
Reply
post #7 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:17am
Oh, I love Dune, also. It's big, messy and humorless to point of being laughable, but, damn, it's a grand vision.

I always say if you have to have a shitload of expository narration at the beginning, make sure a luminous 23 year-old Virginia Madsen is delivering it. Lynch got that right, at least.
Reply
post #8 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:48am
Saw it this summer for the first time in ages. I realized I had never seen the original version. I'd seen this film at least times on TV when I was a kid and a teenager and it was always the longer TV version. I prefer the longer TV version myself.

I completely understand why people hate this film but I still love it. What helped my enjoyment of the film is that my father had read the book and he would answer most of my questions about everything that isn't explained or doesn't make sense in the film.
Reply
post #9 of 76
11/24/07 at 4:13am
Thread Starter 
I don't understand why its hated. Unless you know zip about the universe than fuck you and happy confusion.

"Children of Dune" is a worthy follow up I think. Great score too.

I read somewhere that Peter Berg is remaking DUNE again. Get off the first book already!
Reply
post #10 of 76
11/24/07 at 4:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Alexor
Saw it this summer for the first time in ages. I realized I had never seen the original version. I'd seen this film at least times on TV when I was a kid and a teenager and it was always the longer TV version. I prefer the longer TV version myself.
I can't stand it. I can only take so much hand-holding. Those bits where characters stand still while a narrator tells us who they are are excruciating. Almost as excruciating as the parts where the narrator fills us in on hundreds of years of history while conceptual art is flashed on the screen. Bleah.
Reply
post #11 of 76
11/24/07 at 5:45am
In my mind Dune is the very definition of a noble failure. I still love it, though, and I've watched it maybe more than times than Star Wars. The weird part is that there are no individual scenes stuck in my mind but this weird feeling of watching something really alien and different from most sci-fi. I think it's mostly due to Lynch's direction and the production design that it happens. Even the weird designs that don't look quite right serve to show you that is civilization is as far removed from our own as it can get.
Reply
post #12 of 76
11/24/07 at 6:10am
The way Lynch turned Baron Harkonnen into this cruel scheming inhuman being practically forces you to fear for his enemies, whether you like them or not. He's just an awesome villain.
Reply
post #13 of 76
11/24/07 at 7:54am
Love the hell out of it, and really wished it did better in the theaters during it's initial run, if only to get Lynch back to do the sequels. Great acting all around, beautiful costume designs (oh, how I wish I had one of the stillsuits), and the story moved along at a very good pace, completely pulling me in.

I didn't mind the extended version at all; yes the Prologue was kind of meh, but the extended and extra scenes made up for it. As to the Sci-Fi series, I only watched it once, as well as Children of Dune (mostly for Susan Sarandon); wasn't too bad - pales next to Lynch's take, but I agree with Greg David - if you're not going to spend the money, don't do it (see Sci Fi's Flash Gordon - better yet, DON'T). Dune needs, nay, demands a huge budget to bring it to life.

Plus, Patrick Stewart as Gurney Halleck!
Reply
post #14 of 76
11/24/07 at 9:26am
I usually take movies on their own merits, and don't attach the underpinnings of "my expectations from the novel" to them. For some reason, I couldn't do that with Dune. Whether it's the singularity of Herbert's vision, or the fact that I read the first three Dune books so young, I found it impossible to divorce my imaginary vision of "how things should look" to what I found on screen.

It is certainly an interesting movie, and for those who love it, I can't say you're wrong; but it just doesn't feel like "Dune" to me.
Reply
post #15 of 76
11/24/07 at 1:43pm
Having never read the book, I didn't enjoy the movie at all. I love David Lynch films yet there just seemed to be something missing from this one.

I will say though that the score by Toto is amazing!
Reply
post #16 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:16pm
Thread Starter 
Glad to see so many aren't playing follow the sheep by hating this flick. As I said, if it fails at anything, it's too much in so little time. Dave should have made it as a mini-series to give it time to breathe, but still, for what it is, it's damn fine film that has inspired me to read the books again.

Agree with Greg, the extended tv version is a pain in the ass. Talk, talk, talk,.....Lynch hated it too, by removing his name from the credits.
Reply
post #17 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:26pm
I´ve yet to see a decent ´ornithopter´ in ANY of the iterations.

I also have my worries after Paul ascends the worm for the first time, there is God-awful/totally awesome (depending on my mood at the time) guitar power-chord that REALLY throws me out of the movie...
Reply
post #18 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg David
I can't stand it. I can only take so much hand-holding. Those bits where characters stand still while a narrator tells us who they are are excruciating. Almost as excruciating as the parts where the narrator fills us in on hundreds of years of history while conceptual art is flashed on the screen. Bleah.
I could be completely wrong. I've seen the TV version so many times and was so young at the time, I don't think I can be objective about it.

Quote:
Plus, Patrick Stewart as Gurney Halleck!
There are a lot of cool actors in this. I just watched Das Boot last sunday and I'd forgotten Duke Leto was a U-boat captain. Also, Alicia Witt. So creepy became so sexy.
Reply
post #19 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:30pm
Thread Starter 
A warning to those who have yet to see the movie, don't do it without at least knowing some of the back story, otherwise you will be lost. Just like Star Trek, you don't jump into this vast history without doing some homework.
Reply
post #20 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Zod
Dave should have made it as a mini-series to give it time to breathe, but still...
Dave?
Reply
post #21 of 76
11/24/07 at 2:55pm
I love Lynch's Dune. It's such a beautiful-looking film, and the attempt to stuff so much into a two-hour movie makes it hallucinatory and magical in a way that a more straightforward adaptation probably wouldn't have been.
Reply
post #22 of 76
11/24/07 at 5:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Collins
Way to make me feel really, really old, but - didn't the mini series just come out a couple of years ago?
I was talking about the TV cut of the Lynch film.
Reply
post #23 of 76
11/24/07 at 5:40pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Collins
Way to make me feel really, really old, but - didn't the mini series just come out a couple of years ago?
Sci-Fi channel version? 2000 I think.
Reply
post #24 of 76
11/24/07 at 6:12pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
Dave?
Lynch.
Reply
post #25 of 76
11/24/07 at 7:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Zod
A warning to those who have yet to see the movie, don't do it without at least knowing some of the back story, otherwise you will be lost. Just like Star Trek, you don't jump into this vast history without doing some homework.
Yeah, when it debuted in theaters they passed out little pamphlets like a program for a play with a list of all the major characters, etc. As a kid, this was a novelty for me. My head was so filled with Star Wars at the time Dune came out that I fell in love with it right away.
Reply
post #26 of 76
11/24/07 at 7:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Zod
A warning to those who have yet to see the movie, don't do it without at least knowing some of the back story, otherwise you will be lost. Just like Star Trek, you don't jump into this vast history without doing some homework.
This is probably as good an explanation for why the film failed as any. It really only worked for people who were already fans of Herbert's work, since they were the only ones who could fill in the blanks. Everyone else just walked out confused.
Reply
post #27 of 76
11/24/07 at 8:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg David
This is probably as good an explanation for why the film failed as any. It really only worked for people who were already fans of Herbert's work, since they were the only ones who could fill in the blanks. Everyone else just walked out confused.
I had not read any of the "Dune" series when I saw the theatrical release, but didn't have any problems filling in the blanks, and still enjoy that Lynchian take on the time honored "Magic Baby" plot line. That can either be attributed to my near god-like intellect, or simply that I had read enough fantasy/science fiction to where everything introduced was easily deciphered using other source material.

I still think this is the most accessible Lynch film to date, even with Thufir milking cats and the Baron pulling heart plugs. It had a great look, nifty tech toys, and enough bizarre characters to make it something I still revisit from time to time.
Reply
post #28 of 76
11/24/07 at 8:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg David
This is probably as good an explanation for why the film failed as any. It really only worked for people who were already fans of Herbert's work, since they were the only ones who could fill in the blanks. Everyone else just walked out confused.
Worse, many Herbert fans were pissed and hated the film. Not many possible customers left.
Reply
post #29 of 76
11/24/07 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg David
This is probably as good an explanation for why the film failed as any. It really only worked for people who were already fans of Herbert's work, since they were the only ones who could fill in the blanks. Everyone else just walked out confused.
Not so! I had the pamphlet.
Reply
post #30 of 76
11/25/07 at 10:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix natalya
Does anyone know what the "Wierdling Way" was? In the books, it was a form of Bene Gesserit muscle training, in the movies it seems to be a kind of Force Power.
They weirding(spelling?) modules in the movie. Its like Lynch switched the secret weapon from turning the freemen into super soldiers, to those modules. It has been a long time since I read the book, but if I remember correctly, the plan was to use the Freemen to counter the emperor's Sardaukar. It sort of gets switched to the modules in the movie.

Also I think the extended TV version is total crap. I totally understand why it says Alan Smithee as the director. I though with the extended scenes and such, that it would be interesting. Not so, the original is so much better. Watch that if you have the choice.
Reply
post #31 of 76
11/25/07 at 11:02am
This always struck me the same way the first Harry Potter movie did, as more a "greatest hits" collection than a cohesive movie. It hits all the plot points of the book with none of the depth. It's a visual guided tour of the book.
Reply
post #32 of 76
11/25/07 at 12:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix natalya
Does anyone know what the "Wierdling Way" was? In the books, it was a form of Bene Gesserit muscle training, in the movies it seems to be a kind of Force Power.
From Wikipedia:

Quote:
The film makes departures from the novel, most notably in the case of the Weirding Way, which in the novel is a super-martial art form that allows Paul Atreides to move with lightning speed (and is properly termed "prana-bindu training"). In the film it is replaced with "Weirding Modules," sonic weapons that resemble small video cameras and amplify the user's voice into a destructive force. At the time of release, this was controversial among Dune fans.[17][18] Reportedly, the original technique was left out because it was thought that a pitched combat of Fremen fighting Sardaukar while using the book's Weirding Way would resemble an unsophisticated kung-fu film; additionally, the Weirding Modules provided an opportunity for the use of special effects. This change literalized a moment in the novel in which Paul says his name had become a death-prayer, as the Fremen shout "Muad'dib!" before killing an opponent. In the film, a Fremen training with the weirding module says "Muad'dib" and accidentally destroys a ceiling leading Paul to make the remark "my name is a killing word."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dune_%2...from_the_novel
Reply
post #33 of 76
11/25/07 at 1:14pm
I love the look and atmosphere of the film and I think that Lynch is great in translating the Shakespearean/mafia intrigue of the first half of the book to the screen. The moment Paul is adopted by the Fremen, however, Lynch drops the ball.
Reply
post #34 of 76
11/25/07 at 1:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastronikolas
I love the look and atmosphere of the film and I think that Lynch is great in translating the Shakespearean/mafia intrigue of the first half of the book to the screen. The moment Paul is adopted by the Fremen, however, Lynch drops the ball.
I think the messiah aspect of Dune, was what Lynch did best. The weakest part of the film is the massive amount of back story and narrative that is crammed in. Some events just speed on by, blink and you missed some important information. That made it hard for a casual viewer, or someone unfamiliar with the source story. I read the novel after having seen (and liked) the movie many times, and suddenly some throw away sounding lines made sense.
Reply
post #35 of 76
11/25/07 at 1:59pm
Lynch completely misses the point with Paul's messianic nature. While Herbert was clearly against the notion of a saviour appearing out of nowhere and making everything better, Lynch has Paul being responsible for raining in Arrakis.

Paul in the book is like Michael Corleone. A young man forced to take extreme measures and losing his soul as a price for his victory. Paul in the movie is such an uebermensch he can do no wrong.
Reply
post #36 of 76
11/25/07 at 2:49pm
While without a doubt Lynch's weakest, and something of a mess at times, this is still certainly not a bad film at all. There are a lot of individual scenes that work; it just feels as though the whole doesn't quite fit together as well as it could.
Reply
post #37 of 76
5/23/08 at 3:45pm
It's rare that a movie can get by on the same two music cues throughout it's whole running time.

Oh, and I thought this movie was dumb. I watched it for the first time this morning.
Reply
post #38 of 76
5/23/08 at 5:09pm
If you combined the production design of the 1984 film with the script of the mini series, you might have something worth getting excited about.

Otherwise, the movie's a mess on just about every level. Stick with the novel, unless you enjoy watching good (if sometimes horribly miscast) actors deliver three hours of exposition.

And don't get me started on that ridiculous Toto score. Not sure what Dino's fascination was with having rock bands do movie scores (Flash Gordon) but this was just inappropriate.
Reply
post #39 of 76
5/23/08 at 5:19pm
I have many problems with the movie, but the music isn't one of them. Indeed, I'm actually a big fan of Toto's score to this movie and I think that it works both within the movie itself and as a stand-alone piece of music. It's jarring to hear electric guitar power chords during some of the battle scenes, but you get used to them fairly quickly.
Reply
post #40 of 76
5/23/08 at 5:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
I have many problems with the movie, but the music isn't one of them. Indeed, I'm actually a big fan of Toto's score to this movie and I think that it works both within the movie itself and as a stand-alone piece of music. It's jarring to hear electric guitar power chords during some of the battle scenes, but you get used to them fairly quickly.
I think the piece of music I detest most in the film takes place during the final battle, when Paul rides in on the worms. Even when I was 13 years old I thought it was unintentionally funny ... and those were the days when I could forgive a film for anything (*cough* Buckaroo Banzai.)

I think some people would be surprised to learn Paul was MUCH younger than Kyle MacLachlan in the novel. It had more of a "Clockwork Orange" vibe, with a teen committing horrible, horrible acts. In Dune Messiah, Paul actually says he admires Hitler for the number of foes he killed using primitive methods. Those books are a lot more fucked up than most people realize. That moral ambiguity is totally absent from the film, which treats Paul like Luke Skywalker.
Reply
post #41 of 76
5/31/08 at 11:04pm
Speaking as a fan of the original novel (and the second, the ones after that are crap, though ), I despise this movie. The visuals are amazing, but not all of them jibe with the novel. Worse, though the basic plot is intact, almost none of the characters stay intact. Paul is totally, and shamefully botched, turned from a tragic pawn of destiny to a gung-ho messiah.
The Baron Harkonnen is one sick and twisted human being, but the movie depicts him as a perverted beast. It's demeaning to the character, who doesn't need the bizarre habits Lynch gave him to come off as a hardcore evil bastard. Also, casting STING of all people as Feyd Rautha has to rank among the most deranged casting decisions for a book adaptation.
I have little faith Peter Berg can make a better movie, though.
Reply
post #42 of 76
6/1/08 at 12:10am
I agree with you about the movie.

But come on... HERETICS OF DUNE and DUNE: CHAPTERHOUSE was pretty good. The Sci-fi Channel Miniseries was slightly more faithful to the novels in my opinion.
Reply
post #43 of 76
6/1/08 at 3:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix natalya View Post
I agree with you about the movie.

But come on... HERETICS OF DUNE and DUNE: CHAPTERHOUSE was pretty good. The Sci-fi Channel Miniseries was slightly more faithful to the novels in my opinion.
I never got to Chapterhouse of Dune, as the one before it was so utterly bizarre. The whole Duncan Idaho clone business is really about as dumb a plot contrivance as one can imagine.
Reply
post #44 of 76
6/1/08 at 3:59am
They are Gholas not clones. And the Tilexau have been using them in the first three DUNE novels as well.

HERETICS OF DUNE is more pure fantsy Sci-fi than the other novels. Think of the The Honoured Matres and Face Dancers as Romulans and Dominion changelings.
Reply
post #45 of 76
6/1/08 at 2:32pm
I never made it all the way through the Dune series The first couple of books were good then things sort went of the rails. I do enjoy the Dune movie, mainly for the Lynch aspects. I guess it helps that I watched the movie (a ton of times) before reading the novels. So all the differences I found interesting, not insulting. I am really not sure how you could do a faithful Paul adaptation, was he not around 12 when the novel begins ? Then ends up in orgies and such ? Do not think that flies in a big budget movie.
Reply
post #46 of 76
6/1/08 at 2:36pm
He was Fifteen and the book spans two or three years.

You can get someone like Emile Hirsch and still be faithful to Herbert's intent for the character.
Reply
post #47 of 76
6/1/08 at 7:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastronikolas View Post
He was Fifteen and the book spans two or three years.

You can get someone like Emile Hirsch and still be faithful to Herbert's intent for the character.
That's actually a pretty good choice.


Anyone who makes another Dune film should really embrace the fascistic nature of the story. It needs to be more Fight Club and less Flash Gordon, if that makes any sense.


I never made it past Heretics of Dune, which I tried to read 5-6 times but never got very far into it. Something about the novel worked against my attention span and I always lost interest about 50 pages into it.
Reply
post #48 of 76
6/1/08 at 7:58pm
This movie also has some of the worst matte work I've ever seen. I caught the last half of it on cable and it's just jarringly bad FX work.
Reply
post #49 of 76
6/1/08 at 9:31pm
Hated this movie when I saw it in a theater (Love the book and read it every year or so). A few weeks ago I rented the DVD to see the extended version. It was better than I remembered, but they did exagerate the characters (The Baron) and misintrepreted others (Paul, as noted above)

Also, is it my imagination or was there some effort at improving some of the FX in the Extended version? Some of the effects work in the Theatrical release were a lot worse than the TV version.
Reply
post #50 of 76
6/2/08 at 2:43am
The best thing to come out of this thread is the suggestion of Emille Hirsch for Paul Atredies in Bergs new film.

Inspired choice.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video