⊃∪∩⪽ | Legendary | October 22 2021 | Denis Villeneuve | Returns to IMAX on December 3

[thedast]

2 hours ago, Valonqar said:

I have a question for people who didn't read the book and didn't like the movie:

 

if the universe of the source is what you call humorless and sterile, what would you do in a movie adaptation? Stay true to it or turn it into something that it isn't? 

 

In the book, characters are preoccupied with various big, life and death worries. That leaves no place for humor or lightening up in any way. I daresay that sense of heavy foreboding is much thicker in the book than in the movie, which still did a good job with it. 

 

The universe in the book is exactly what you see in the movie. Very industrial future. Accent on mental abilities which in return mean suppressed emotions.  Paul's journey isn't an adventure. It isn't Star Wars where you have a more serious backdrop but the story at the front is light. It's heavy. His destiny is a burden rather than a reward.

 

So yeah, what would you do?

 

 

 

Disclaimer: I actually didn't hate it. TLDR: It was actually kind of engaging for the hour and some, an audio-visual feast. But once you get used to it, you realize nothing that interesting or unique is actually happening and the visions kind of already tell you where the story is going wiping it of any suspense. For me, I didn't need humor, I needed humanity. Dune felt very style over substance.

 

Yes the main characters are worried about life issues... but the movie to me didn't do enough to explain what those issues ARE so I can't relate. What came before all this? What's going on in the rest of earth (?), why do people need said spice to jump universes or whatever? Why is this important? What happens if you don't do it? There's no context. Some say this is the beginning of the story,  but it felt like I was dropped in the middle. The scale was so over-emphasized I couldn't get a proper bearing on where anything was geographically. People praise the world-building but I have no idea what anyone outside the royal families even do so why should I give a shit if it's burned down or whatever.

 

Maybe it plays out better in the books but it felt like the movie spent a lot on scenery chewing and exquisite screenshot ready frames than on the people beyond thin characterization.

 

I don't have a better suggestion tbh, I agree that it should definitely respect its source material, but maybe the source material just isn't that great.

 

That said... people like relatable characters. Something could have been done here. Most of the emotion was either stoic or pained. I'm not a fan of Momoa's acting but he came across as the most human person there. The movie was asking me to care what Paul did, but he was the personality-free son of a semi-decent colonizer, and his visions foreshadowed him going bad anyway, so why should I care? This blandness is why I didn't care much about Anakin Skywalker either despite knowing his motivations (and probably why SW gives you Luke's story before giving us Vader's backstory), and Lucas was wise enough to give us Obi-Wan to counteract this. His mother doesn't work for that here. She comes off fragile and her family had apparently been up to some eugenics shenanigans so they could kick rocks too.

 

I'm going into Part 2 only interested in the visuals of however this 'twist' plays out. The fact that the highest praise comes from the visuals/sound and it seems to undermine the constant condescension from the story's fans that it's somehow superior to the average Star Wars film (also overhyped eh). It's not. It's a basic and by now overdone (sorry) story hiding behind aesthetics and a painfully convoluted world.

 

If this story has struggled to find a wide audience for decades, I want those fans to consider there's a good reason beyond 'lol normies are basic and need Marvel quips', which I'm seeing a lot. The MCU wasn't around in the 80s.

 

 

[thedast]

41 minutes ago, No Eternals Spoilers 4 Cap said:

And Dune really doesn’t operate like this. It’s brutalist natural is a monotone as its score. I’m not asking for a dune to be some lighthearted farce.  But I do think a variety in their characters would’ve gone along way to improving the overall emotional experience of the movie. 

A simpler version of what I was thinking. I gave Paul for having no personality as a protagonist but almost everyone was this way. When you have this it just becomes a bunch of people expositing.

[Sano]

5 hours ago, Elessar said:

Some of the takes here are... strange.

Yeah agree. While it certainly wasn't a perfect movie, it did a long of things right. This was a review I posted just after seeing it:

 

It's a hard film to unpack. Personally I felt like they kept too many plotlines from the book, which prevented some of them from being given air to breathe. I also understand now how there's been opposing views on the pacing. First half is mostly exposition with many events happening in quick succession, while in the second half the scenes grow significantly longer and focus much more on the characters. Watching it, especially the first half, I felt it was somewhat disjointed. Probably lots and lots of scenes on the cutting room floor, which is a shame because there was a real hint of greatness there and the actors did a great job when they had something to work with. However that did not prevent me from getting emotionally attached to the characters, and I disagree with a few critics who thought the movie was lacking emotional depth. It's dripping with it feeling. The movie has a very ethereal vibe and I really dig that, and a few scenes, that I wont spoil, really hit home emotionally for me.

Obviously, the visuals were phenomenal. There were a few times I got goosebumps and I think I even audibly went "wow" as well. I don't think I've ever done that before, it was beautiful. The overall presentation of the movie was very creative as well, it's definitely different. I was worried about the score, but I enjoyed most of it, with one of two exceptions when the exaggerated wailing got borderline cringe. Same with a few short scenes that I felt could have been left out.

By the end, I felt like they did manage to make the film feel cohesive and I really liked were it ended as well. I went with a friend of mine and she knew nothing of Dune, nor sci-fi really, and she liked it a lot. I've had some scenes lingering in my mind that I can't wait to revisit and I kinda want to see the movie again already as I think I'll enjoy it even more on a second viewing.

All in all I would rate it a 7,5/10. I still loved most of it and want to see it again.

TLDR:
Ethereal and beautiful movie with a strong visceral soundtrack and powerful emotional scenes, that feels somewhat disjointed and tries to balance perhaps too many plotlines.

[Ozymandias]

[Menor the Destroyer]

I thought there was plenty of personality. I don't think characters need to be demonstrative to be different from each other. In fact I thought Jessica was too emotive. I do think that Gurney, who is supposed to add a lighter touch, was played far too seriously by Josh Brolin. His quotations felt more ponderous than witty.

[CoolioD1]

there wasn't a fun quirky one who was all "um... so that happened?" so all the characters seemed the same to me as well.

[titanic2187]

Whilst I hope this develop into a proper trilogy. I am not sure if there is enough hype or interest to carry this franchise for 2 more films. Dune part 1 successfully sold as an cinephile event and IMAX event of the year (and also the biggest charity event on HBO max) , but that event buzz is hard to replicate for sequel.  

[ZackM]

2 hours ago, Menor said:

The more I think about the ending, it works pretty well for me. It was the right place to cut it off. Paul's transformation is evident.

I felt the same way after my 2nd viewing.  The story itself may not be resolved, but the first phase of Paul's journey is.

[Valonqar]

3 hours ago, No Eternals Spoilers 4 Cap said:

I will take this. 
 

For me, it’s about the peaks and valleys. I am gonna use my two current favorite TV Shows as examples: Succession and Ted Lasso.
 

Ted Lasso is a comedy. But if you watch season 2, it legit went into drama (both in subject matter and 40 min episodes). It never lost its Ted Lasso Je ne sais quoi, but now the material is a bit heavier cause it’s dealing with mental health issues. 
 

Secession is Drama. But it’s wickedly funny to the point of Dark Comedy.  Everyone on the show is an ambitious cesspool of human being, but because of the show’s clear POV it’s able to infuse humor. 
 

Both shows are also good cases for you can have serious characters in comedies (Sharon in Ted Lasso) or funny characters in dramas (Tom, Greg, Roman in Secession) without ruining the world. Sometimes those are even the most compelling characters, because they feel out of their element.
 

I think you need both because all of writing is basically building tension and then releasing it, regardless of the genre or medium. 

 

And Dune really doesn’t operate like this. It’s brutalist natural is a monotone as its score. I’m not asking for a dune to be some lighthearted farce.  But I do think a variety in their characters would’ve gone along way to improving the overall emotional experience of the movie. 

 

Thank you!  I do think that the movie went into greater lengths to make characters more human than their book versions. For example, Duke and Paul relationship that the book examines is that of Duke and his heir specifically. So the movie lightens that up/makes it emotionally resonant by shifting the focus to father/son. It isn't  a massive change since outcome and everything that leads up to it remains the same. But it allows the actors to be more relaxed around each other than the book characters. Likewise, Paul and Duncan are given a more modern dudebro dynamic which is in line with Duncan's character, arguably the most relaxed of book Dune cast. Etc.

 

The movie dropped also some trippy book points for world-building and storytelling clarity and I think it worked well because the core story and the world are intact but are now understandable to the uninitiated (not all but many followed the story easily). But then that's compared to the book which people who didn't read it wouldn't know what accommodations have been made, and movies should be judged as standalones anyway. 

 

@thedast thanks for your comments. I'm bad at multi-quoting so the above is a reply to your post too. I just want to say re: who does what outside of noble houses. The houses live off trade and mining spice (first the Harkonnens and now Atreides). The Emperor (yet to be seen) taxes both ha ha. Since spice = space travel, no spice = no space travel = no space trade = no $$$$ = Woof. I thought they explained it in the movie but anyway I hope this crash course helps. 

 

@titanic2187 Dune Messiah aka movie 3 isn't a pressing matter. They wouldn't greenlight it before seeing how Pt 2 did. Dune is a self-contained book. You don't have to read the sequels (all considered lesser by the way) to have a sense of closure. There's audience interest for Pt 2, however. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by Valonqar

[Steele131]

1 hour ago, titanic2187 said:

Whilst I hope this develop into a proper trilogy. I am not sure if there is enough hype or interest to carry this franchise for 2 more films. Dune part 1 successfully sold as an cinephile event and IMAX event of the year (and also the biggest charity event on HBO max) , but that event buzz is hard to replicate for sequel.  

Or could be a breakout sequel, especially with hopefully no Covid by the time it releases. 

[Valonqar]

59 minutes ago, ZackM said:

I felt the same way after my 2nd viewing.  The story itself may not be resolved, but the first phase of Paul's journey is.

 

Exactly. It's a proper climax. The story builds up to his first phase and peaks at the right time. 

[Sano]

Just watched it again from the comfort of my own home without any distractions. Must say, it was way better on the second viewing. While it was far less of an experience, it actually made it easier to highlight the quality of the film. Everything made more sense and flowed better because I was noticing a lot more of the small things that indicated what was going on. The film is also much smarter than I gave it credit for,

Spoiler

like how when Paul was hallucinating in the first worm scene and he said "I recognise your footsteps old man". We wasn't talking about Gurney, he was talking about recognising the worm. Indicating that he is linked to it in some other way. And the way he killed Jarmis was like a bullfighter, the grandfather and bull theme coming full circe.

 

Damn I'm glad that removing the experience of the theater, although amazing, didn't diminish the movie and that the story was far better on the second viewing. I'll bump my rating up to a 8/10. Nice.

Edited October 23, 2021 by Sano

[Valonqar]

6 minutes ago, Sano said:

 

  Hide contents

like how when Paul was hallucinating in the first worm scene and he said "I recognise your footsteps old man". We wasn't talking about Gurney, he was talking about recognising the worm. Indicating that he is linked to it in some other way. And the way he killed Jarmis was like a bullfighter, the grandfather and bull theme coming full circe.

 

 

 We need a spoiler thread to talk about the movie freely.

 

yes big payoff to bullfighter grandpa theme. 

 

There's no question that he is linked to the sandworm because the big moneyshot, when he and Jessica try to run away from it, actually shows that the worm wasn't going to attack them but was making the connection. You probably noticed that the attacking worm always came from underneath to swallow the prey (the spice mining station, Liet Kynes and the Sardaukar) but this one revealed itself to Paul and was looking at him. magnificent scene. 

 

As for "I recognize your steps", that's something he tells Gurney in the book on Caladan when Gurney chastises Paul for sitting with his back to the door. It shows that Paul is mentally attuned to his surroundings thanks to Bene Gesserit training. Like how Jessica knew that Shadout Mapes concealed a weapon. So you can read it either way, that he recognized Gurney or the worm, it's still the same ability.

 

I also liked how his last visions have Jamis as a mentor who would trach him the way of the desert. Which he does but not how Paul expected. He read correctly that Chani stabbing him didn't mean actual but transformative death, but he didn't understand Jamis teaching until later.

[dudalb]

18 hours ago, tonytr87 said:

I frankly don't understand why people are giving it shit for ending that way when Fellowship and Two Towers ended in similar ways. It's absolutely a complete film if you're looking at it from the standpoint of Paul's character arc and journey. 

I think partially because with FOTR and TTT the studio made clear in the marketing  you were not getting a complete film but the first and second part of a  three part film. "Dune"'s marketing was not nearly as clear on that point. Flashing a Part one on the screen during the  credits will not really fix the problems of people feeling they were sold a incomplete product. It;s all about expectations. Yes, i think the studio should have been more upfront about this being Part One in the marketing, instead of a vague "The Saga Begins slogan.

I have not seen the film, but I think if you have read the book you might well read things into the ending that arenot cleat to somebody who has not read the novel, and the ending does seem incomplete to them.

Edited October 23, 2021 by dudalb

[ViktorLosAngeles]

If Friday is 17.5$ (including those 5.1 million $ previews), I expect Saturday to be somewhere between 13.5 and 14.5, and Sunday... Hmmm... Probably around 9-10 million$.

 

So, 40 million $ should be doable, but I'll settle for 38 million $ as well.

[Steele131]

18 minutes ago, ViktorLosAngeles said:

If Friday is 17.5$ (including those 5.1 million $ previews), I expect Saturday to be somewhere between 13.5 and 14.5, and Sunday... Hmmm... Probably around 9-10 million$.

 

So, 40 million $ should be doable, but I'll settle for 38 million $ as well.

I think it just breaks 40M

[von Kenni]

I just finished second viewing. This time on a small screen. Works. A beautiful masterpiece that breaks patterns like sand walk. They really pulled it off creating a distinctive world. The first act of a bigger story. Blown away how this was able to happen. Like Peter Jackson with LOTR, Dune needed Denis Villeneuve.

[Warmaster506]

This movie is fucking amazing. Nukes Disney Star Wars.  

[Macleod]

15 hours ago, Saul Goodman said:

Thought it was decent but nothing more than that. It could have used more world building and character moments. The visuals are good, albeit sometimes way too drab. Made me appreciate David Lynch's Dune more, kind of crazy how he got that made in the early 80s with much lesser of a budget than this one.

 

Again, budgets all relative to their era.  $40 million was considered *huge* in the 1980s...and that was raised *independently* of a major studio, Universal only really distributed.  

 

11 hours ago, Valonqar said:

I have a question for people who didn't read the book and didn't like the movie:

 

So yeah, what would you do?

 

Based on a lot of the reaction here, this movie clearly needs a Ferris Bueller who talks to the audience.  

*Disclaimer, I haven't seen Villenuveeeeee's Dune, yet.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Macleod

[HouseOfTheSun]

terribly boring