FA+
Shop
D U N E
4 years ago
I saw it this week (very possible spoilers coming up).
Overall, the visuals were fantastic. I think one of my favorite aspects of the film was how they captured the ornithopters. Holy shit, I think Frank Herbert himself would have been pleased with how they depicted those flying vehicles. They were like giant metal dragonflies.
It's only one half of the story so far, so keep that in mind when I list the things I liked versus what I didn't from both films.
I think the main things I liked from the Denis Villaneuve film over the David Lynch version was
1) How they captured the look of the ornithopters.
2) The lack of Weirding modules. Though they made for a cool idea, they were never in the book, so I was confused why they were in the Lynch film, but I'm going to guess it's because they needed a quicker and easier way to showcase the Weirding Way.
3) No surprise here, I loved the hopping muad'dib (the native jerboa on planet Arrakis) that they showed in the desert. Anyone who is familiar with Paul Atreides' Fremen name will know and understand the visual significance.
What I liked about the Lynch version over the Villaneuve version:
1) The sandworms, I felt, were visually superior, at least in terms of design; they actually looked like more real earth worms, which I appreciated.
2) They spent a bit more time on Geidi Prime and had more dialogue with the Harkonnens, so you got see them more fleshed out. Kevin McMillan's depiction of Baron Harkonnon was cartoonishly evil as well as the Beast Rabban's depiction. I've yet to see Feyd Rautha show up in Denis Villaneuve's depiction of Dune, so I'm not sure how they'll bring him in to the story with part two.
For the most part, both films seemed to follow the same path story-wise, though Villaneuve's felt more like it stuck to the feel of the Herbert novel.
Visually, both films had a very strong stylistic choices. The music for both films was pretty good.
The time and limitations David Lynch was given had drastically affected how he wanted to make the film. It was campy in parts, I have to admit.
Villaneuve seemed like he was given much more freedom to capture Frank Herbert's book, which was definitely felt. The movie had a more serious tone to it. Stellan Skarsgard's portrayal of Baron Harkonnen felt much darker and more brooding. 'Cartoonish' would not be the word I'd use to describe the actor's take on the Atreides' arch enemy.
So for anyone who has seen the recent Dune film, have anything to add for either movies?
Overall, the visuals were fantastic. I think one of my favorite aspects of the film was how they captured the ornithopters. Holy shit, I think Frank Herbert himself would have been pleased with how they depicted those flying vehicles. They were like giant metal dragonflies.
It's only one half of the story so far, so keep that in mind when I list the things I liked versus what I didn't from both films.
I think the main things I liked from the Denis Villaneuve film over the David Lynch version was
1) How they captured the look of the ornithopters.
2) The lack of Weirding modules. Though they made for a cool idea, they were never in the book, so I was confused why they were in the Lynch film, but I'm going to guess it's because they needed a quicker and easier way to showcase the Weirding Way.
3) No surprise here, I loved the hopping muad'dib (the native jerboa on planet Arrakis) that they showed in the desert. Anyone who is familiar with Paul Atreides' Fremen name will know and understand the visual significance.
What I liked about the Lynch version over the Villaneuve version:
1) The sandworms, I felt, were visually superior, at least in terms of design; they actually looked like more real earth worms, which I appreciated.
2) They spent a bit more time on Geidi Prime and had more dialogue with the Harkonnens, so you got see them more fleshed out. Kevin McMillan's depiction of Baron Harkonnon was cartoonishly evil as well as the Beast Rabban's depiction. I've yet to see Feyd Rautha show up in Denis Villaneuve's depiction of Dune, so I'm not sure how they'll bring him in to the story with part two.
For the most part, both films seemed to follow the same path story-wise, though Villaneuve's felt more like it stuck to the feel of the Herbert novel.
Visually, both films had a very strong stylistic choices. The music for both films was pretty good.
The time and limitations David Lynch was given had drastically affected how he wanted to make the film. It was campy in parts, I have to admit.
Villaneuve seemed like he was given much more freedom to capture Frank Herbert's book, which was definitely felt. The movie had a more serious tone to it. Stellan Skarsgard's portrayal of Baron Harkonnen felt much darker and more brooding. 'Cartoonish' would not be the word I'd use to describe the actor's take on the Atreides' arch enemy.
So for anyone who has seen the recent Dune film, have anything to add for either movies?
Otherwise I loved it.
You BARELY can hear him talk, lol.
The "Gom Jabbar" scene I love what they did but I think they could have made it you heard Pauls thoughts "I must not fear, fear is the mind killer, and fear is the little death that brings total obliteration..I will face my fear and let it over me and through me.."
Unfortunately I haven't read the books, I probably will..
Oh, man. I loved the ornithopters in the 2021 Dune. They were like metallic dragonflies.
Lynch clocked in at around the same length as Villaneuve, roughly 2.5 hours, but Lynch managed the whole book. The Smithee cut of Dune is 3 hours, with up to 7 minutes still seperate footage. Even if there is only 30 minutes of cut content from Villaneuve, the Villaneuve production will have more content than the 1984 Smithee cut once part 2 arrives. I'd say expect between 5 and 8 hours for the total Villaneuve adaptation.
My criticisms are just nit-picking:
1) too much Chani in the visions, easily 4 unnecessary minutes. Probably a Zendaya contractual obligation.
2) too washed out colors. I know Villaneuve wanted an oppressive desert, but the spice is invisible in the desert, and all the non-desert scenes are still too desaturated.
3) fighting is too modern UFC-style all across the board, good for fremen but ill-fit for Atriedes, Harkonnen, and Sardaukar troops
4) mumbling actors and sound mixing makes it impossible to hear certain words. Music is constantly in the background so there is never silence.
5) too timid to lay out the aristocratic intrigue; why Leto was in an unwinnable situation, why the sardaukar were brought in, and what Kanly means.
That said, among the numerous merits of the movie, we got Salusa Secundus and...
HAMMMMBURGAH CHEESEBURGAH BIG MAC WHOPPPPURRRR
Somehow, stylistically, it fit. Hey, man. Sometimes ya gotta go with creative instincts.