Dune...again!

  • Thread starter Thread starter "Eh...?"
  • Start date Start date
E

"Eh...?"

Guest
So Paramount are remaking Dune, with Peter Berg directing. I'm not familiar with his work but will no doubt check out his Will Smith super hero film this summer. Anyway, why would anyone want to make this again? It's got to be one of the most impossible books to put to film. the Sci-Fi miniseries was average and Lynch's film was... well... in hinRABight Twin Peaks in Space! It had a fantastic soundtrack by Toto though... check it out.

Anyway, this will either be expensive, long, increadibly complicated and high-browed, none of which will suit the US viewing public, or a dumbed down, flashy action Sci-Fi which will do no justice to the book. I can't wait!
 
David Lynch's version has a fascinating history and is proof, as if it were needed, that studio executives should never interfere with directorial decisions. The result of the DeLaurentiis interference is something of a mess to say the least.

The only good thing that really came out of that version was that during its development Dan O'Bannon, Ridley Scott and H R Giger were involved. The three of them went on to collaborate on a little sci-fi movie of their own called Alien...

I'm not sure about Peter Berg directing a new version. He's pretty versatile - actor, writer, director - and The Kingdom is a good film but I'm not sure if he's up to the task of tackling Frank Herbert's epic (or if anyone is.)
 
I'd be careful with statements like that. People who follow the christian faith may not have tired of it, but plenty of other people have little or no interest in it.

In the case of Dune, you are correct that it is allegorical and the whole arc of the books is an extremely good commentary on religion in general and christianity in particular. However, I suspect that this will either be very unsubtely covered in the new film or overlooked entirely.
 
While I like the original Dune, I agree that no film could cover all the nuisances of the book. It has so much to cover and the power struggles are analogous to many things other then Christianity. Might be an interesting film, but until we see it we will never know how good it is.
 
Everyone said Lord of the Rings was unfilmable, but look what happened there.
Dune is one of my favourite books ever. I'd love someone to do it justice.

I found the first movie disappointing. The mini series was ok, but I'd love to see someone make a really good version of it.
And why not now that technology has moved on so far since the Laurentiis attempt.

Bring it on!

I'm going to spend a little time now casting all the characters in my mind. :)
 
Very true, but I think they mean Aliens, which was a lot more Giger inspired then the first film ever was. Was so much darker and sinister that it had Giger splashed all over the screen.
 
Aliens was Cameron, not Scott. The history is that the Dune film began development in the early 70's and spent 10 years in development hell with people such as David Lean & Ridley Scott attached, until in the early 80's Lynch got involved. Scott went on to make Blade Runner directly after his involvement in the Dune project. Giger was involved in an earlier attempt to make the film by a french company. That version was intended to be a massive 10hr production! I guess Giger may have talked about his experience with Scott during the making of Alien and got Scott interested in Dune as it was the next project he moved on to (for a short time).
 
Developing and making a film are two different things, it may have started in the 70's, but as you said yourself things changed; so the look of both film changed as well. It could very well have been that Alien would have been darker like the sequel, but we will never know now what the original vision was.
 
Quite. Oh, do you mean they did a good job? They lost a lot of the depth of the books. For example, there's a reason that Glorfindel can stand up to the Nazgul, and that reason does not apply to Arwen.

A movie of Dune is almost bound to lose the intricate plotting and the "wheels within wheels". If we're willing to discard that, I think the Lynch version is pretty good. I love it for the degree to which he captured the characters. They are all spot on. I also love the gorgeous visuals. There is a great deal which is good about that film.
 
I found LOTR books a bit wordy, so I don't really mind the loss of depth [as you put it] in the films. I enjoyed them. :)
And I thought the film makers did a god job considering how much material they had to work with. Something has to go when you film a literary tome like that.
But that's the prob making long books into movies, every fan of the book will be annoyed if their favourite bits are missed out in the film, and we all have our different favourite bits. Can't please all of us.

I thought the Lynch Dune movie was ok considering what technology was available to him back then.

And I welcome another attempt now that technology has progressed. I'm happy to see someone elses 'take' on one of my favourite books.

And I'm still casting this one in my mind. :D
 
Wasn't the original something like 6 hours long before having to be cut right down.
I like Dune, both the original and TV series that released.
Have never read the books by Frank Herbert, i'm not really one for reading, and I guess that's a bonus when watching movies, too often I read how people watch a movie after reading the book and find so many faults to pick.
 
Back
Top