[amphibian]

stone monkey, on 22 May 2022 - 10:09 AM, said:

All the heavy lifting in this sentence is being done by the word "trying". At best, it's depth might be labelled undergraduate.

The source book/series is rather deep and I've been learning some terrific stuff about the Islamic recent history within it over the last year.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Gorefest, on 22 May 2022 - 10:59 AM, said:

To be fair, it is difficult for a dune to be deep. At the very least you'd need it to be above sea level.

'sand[...] and some black hole models display similar nonlinear effects. The bridge between the two is the holographic duality.'

From black holes to sands: Application of holographic duality to granular matter (phys.org)

[Gorefest]

Well, that's me told. I think...?

[ContrarianMalazanReader]

Lea Seydoux is Lady Fenring.

On that note, IMO Christopher Walken would've been much better suited to play Count Fenring.

[QuickTidal]

And Austin Butler as Feyd Rautha...a casting I like because I think Butler is great.

[QuickTidal]

They started shooting PART 2!

So happy. I hope hope hope they get to make MESSIAH as well and allow Villeneuve to complete it as a trilogy of films...evcen if we never got CHILDREN or GOD-EMPEROR, I would be super happy with a Dune/Dune Messiah trilogy of films.

[ContrarianMalazanReader]

Personally I find Villeneuve's adaptation lackluster, but I also hope that it leads to an adaptation that fully embraces the books' inherent weirdness years down the road, because that's my biggest gripe about Villeneuve, that he seems ashamed of the weirdness of the book.

Another thing that's been bothering me is how many are declaring this THE definitive adaptation of Dune.

[Macros]

I don't see there being another adaptation after this one.

[Gorefest]

Of course there will be, film studios love franchises. Every 20-30 years someone will pop up to make another 'really true to the source material' version or a 'creative reimagining'. Plus film and projection advances will open up new ways of displaying and experiencing the content.

[Macros]

So you think someone will have another bash at LotR? (Hopefully the hobbit granted)

[Tiste Simeon]

Macros, on 24 July 2022 - 10:16 AM, said:

So you think someone will have another bash at LotR? (Hopefully the hobbit granted)

Crikey I hope not, the LOTR trilogy is just about perfect.

The Amazon thing looks good IMO and I'm happy for expanding the Tolkein world in film/TV format but I don't want another stab at LOTR itself.

Agreed about the Hobbit, they need another go at that one...

[Gorefest]

Macros, on 24 July 2022 - 10:16 AM, said:

So you think someone will have another bash at LotR? (Hopefully the hobbit granted)

Didn't you hear they are making a TV series? Of course there will be more LotR films in the future. Guaranteed. Give it 20 years.

[flea]

ContrarianMalazanReader, on 22 July 2022 - 05:42 PM, said:

Personally I find Villeneuve's adaptation lackluster, but I also hope that it leads to an adaptation that fully embraces the books' inherent weirdness years down the road, because that's my biggest gripe about Villeneuve, that he seems ashamed of the weirdness of the book.

Another thing that's been bothering me is how many are declaring this THE definitive adaptation of Dune.

Your points are valid. That said, I think Villeneuve is a great filmmaker. What he does visually is exquisite, and his collaboration with Hans Zimmer is inspired. It has often said that Dune is not adaptable and, ultimately, I agree, because so much of the book relies on internal monologue -- it was pretty awkward in the Lynch version. But then I'm hopelessly tied to the written word. Nothing can compare to my sense of wonder at reading LOTR at age eleven. Star Wars might have had that effect on me, but it came out five years later, and the most wondrous part for me was the opening shot in which we hear the Imperial Cruiser fly overhead.

[ContrarianMalazanReader]

flea, on 25 July 2022 - 02:43 PM, said:

ContrarianMalazanReader, on 22 July 2022 - 05:42 PM, said:

Personally I find Villeneuve's adaptation lackluster, but I also hope that it leads to an adaptation that fully embraces the books' inherent weirdness years down the road, because that's my biggest gripe about Villeneuve, that he seems ashamed of the weirdness of the book.

Another thing that's been bothering me is how many are declaring this THE definitive adaptation of Dune.

Your points are valid. That said, I think Villeneuve is a great filmmaker. What he does visually is exquisite, and his collaboration with Hans Zimmer is inspired. It has often said that Dune is not adaptable and, ultimately, I agree, because so much of the book relies on internal monologue -- it was pretty awkward in the Lynch version. But then I'm hopelessly tied to the written word. Nothing can compare to my sense of wonder at reading LOTR at age eleven. Star Wars might have had that effect on me, but it came out five years later, and the most wondrous part for me was the opening shot in which we hear the Imperial Cruiser fly overhead.

About Villeneuve being a great filmmaker, this is one of those cases where everyone praises his movies, and I have seen a few of them but they have all failed to resonate with me. I respect BR2049 for being tonally consistent with the original Blade Runner; I saw Arrival based on the overwhelmingly positive reviews but frankly I felt indifferent towards the movie. As for his visual style, I find it bland and sterile, and his insistence on a muted colour palette only adds to the lifelessness. So yeah, I know I'm in the minority, and some will probably feel triggered and come at me with that whole "YOU'RE WRONG FOR NOT LIKING HIM!" but Denis Villeneuve simply doesn't do it for me. If it's any consolation, his quote about Dune being Star Wars for adults is what encouraged me to read the books, for which I am grateful.

This is why despite all its flaws the 1984 film adaptation wins out, because it fully embraced the book's inherent weirdness.

[flea]

ContrarianMalazanReader, on 26 July 2022 - 01:10 AM, said:

flea, on 25 July 2022 - 02:43 PM, said:

ContrarianMalazanReader, on 22 July 2022 - 05:42 PM, said:

Personally I find Villeneuve's adaptation lackluster, but I also hope that it leads to an adaptation that fully embraces the books' inherent weirdness years down the road, because that's my biggest gripe about Villeneuve, that he seems ashamed of the weirdness of the book.

Another thing that's been bothering me is how many are declaring this THE definitive adaptation of Dune.

Your points are valid. That said, I think Villeneuve is a great filmmaker. What he does visually is exquisite, and his collaboration with Hans Zimmer is inspired. It has often said that Dune is not adaptable and, ultimately, I agree, because so much of the book relies on internal monologue -- it was pretty awkward in the Lynch version. But then I'm hopelessly tied to the written word. Nothing can compare to my sense of wonder at reading LOTR at age eleven. Star Wars might have had that effect on me, but it came out five years later, and the most wondrous part for me was the opening shot in which we hear the Imperial Cruiser fly overhead.

About Villeneuve being a great filmmaker, this is one of those cases where everyone praises his movies, and I have seen a few of them but they have all failed to resonate with me. I respect BR2049 for being tonally consistent with the original Blade Runner; I saw Arrival based on the overwhelmingly positive reviews but frankly I felt indifferent towards the movie. As for his visual style, I find it bland and sterile, and his insistence on a muted colour palette only adds to the lifelessness. So yeah, I know I'm in the minority, and some will probably feel triggered and come at me with that whole "YOU'RE WRONG FOR NOT LIKING HIM!" but Denis Villeneuve simply doesn't do it for me. If it's any consolation, his quote about Dune being Star Wars for adults is what encouraged me to read the books, for which I am grateful.

This is why despite all its flaws the 1984 film adaptation wins out, because it fully embraced the book's inherent weirdness.

Arrival totally resonated with me, especially the last part of the film. But then either you like or dislike pickles -- there is no wrong there.

The Lynch version has some excellent stuff. The first part is great, especially the steampunk aesthetic. It feels like it was shot in chronological order, since the first half is so much better, and I believe I read that the production ran out of money, and the second half looks that way. There is no getting around the problems of adapting the text. The multiple points of view do not translate to film here, and the multiple voice-overs are cheesy. I'm not sure there is a compromise -- one can focus on either the external or internal. The external is called film, and the internal is literary.

The reminds me of problems with adapting The Great Gatsby. Nick is really the main character, since he is the only dynamic character in the novel. His changes, however, are internal. A film adaptation necessarily needs to focus on action, which is why every version makes Gatsby the subject. Gatsby and Daisy, however, are essentially ciphers, each essentially a smile (Gatsby) or a voice (Daisy).

I suppose in theory a strong adaptation of Dune is possible, but I don't see it, especially given how marketing would dictate one that is really tied to the book.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

flea, on 26 July 2022 - 03:26 PM, said:

ContrarianMalazanReader, on 26 July 2022 - 01:10 AM, said:

flea, on 25 July 2022 - 02:43 PM, said:

ContrarianMalazanReader, on 22 July 2022 - 05:42 PM, said:

Personally I find Villeneuve's adaptation lackluster, but I also hope that it leads to an adaptation that fully embraces the books' inherent weirdness years down the road, because that's my biggest gripe about Villeneuve, that he seems ashamed of the weirdness of the book.

Another thing that's been bothering me is how many are declaring this THE definitive adaptation of Dune.

Your points are valid. That said, I think Villeneuve is a great filmmaker. What he does visually is exquisite, and his collaboration with Hans Zimmer is inspired. It has often said that Dune is not adaptable and, ultimately, I agree, because so much of the book relies on internal monologue -- it was pretty awkward in the Lynch version. But then I'm hopelessly tied to the written word. Nothing can compare to my sense of wonder at reading LOTR at age eleven. Star Wars might have had that effect on me, but it came out five years later, and the most wondrous part for me was the opening shot in which we hear the Imperial Cruiser fly overhead.

About Villeneuve being a great filmmaker, this is one of those cases where everyone praises his movies, and I have seen a few of them but they have all failed to resonate with me. I respect BR2049 for being tonally consistent with the original Blade Runner; I saw Arrival based on the overwhelmingly positive reviews but frankly I felt indifferent towards the movie. As for his visual style, I find it bland and sterile, and his insistence on a muted colour palette only adds to the lifelessness. So yeah, I know I'm in the minority, and some will probably feel triggered and come at me with that whole "YOU'RE WRONG FOR NOT LIKING HIM!" but Denis Villeneuve simply doesn't do it for me. If it's any consolation, his quote about Dune being Star Wars for adults is what encouraged me to read the books, for which I am grateful.

This is why despite all its flaws the 1984 film adaptation wins out, because it fully embraced the book's inherent weirdness.

There is no getting around the problems of adapting the text. The multiple points of view do not translate to film here, and the multiple voice-overs are cheesy. I'm not sure there is a compromise -- one can focus on either the external or internal. The external is called film, and the internal is literary.

Those expectations are primarily derived from convention, not inherent limitations of the form. Multiple voice overs are not inherently any more cheesy than having multiple narrators in an audiobook. Internal experience involves visual imagery and self-talk, both of which can be represented in film (not to mention virtual reality...). (Granted, some people do not consciously experience mental imagery or self-talk, but they're a tiny minority of the population.)

Whether a big budget film could break from those expectations and still make enough of a profit is a bit of an open question.

Non-diegetic music in film could easily be considered 'unrealistic' (which it is, unless it's intended to represent music in the mind of a character---which it almost never is) and 'cheesy'; it's typically not because of the conventions audiences are accustomed to. Of course, the award-winning score for Villeneuve's Dune broke with big budget movie expectations a bit (but not without precedent)....

Hopefully in the not too distant future the cost of SFX and virtual actors will drop precipitously, just as virtual reality opens up more immersive viewing options (possibly even adding meaningful kinetic, tactile, olfactory, or even electromagnetic or drug dimensions...).

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 26 July 2022 - 04:29 PM

[Tiste Simeon]

Just watched this yesterday, really enjoyed it, especially for some reason the vehicle design (I loved those bug helicopter things!)

I have read the book once or twice many years ago but don't remember a lot so have no issues around true to the book arguments.

[QuickTidal]

Tiste Simeon, on 05 February 2023 - 09:43 AM, said:

Just watched this yesterday, really enjoyed it, especially for some reason the vehicle design (I loved those bug helicopter things!)

I have read the book once or twice many years ago but don't remember a lot so have no issues around true to the book arguments.

I missed this post by you Tiste! So glad you enjoyed it.

Part II comes out in November I believe.

Oh, and something we've not talked a lot about...

The TV show started shooting in November (DUNE: SISTERHOOD on HBO Max; a prequel that details the beginnings of the Bene Gesserit order 10k years before DUNE....specifically Villenueve's DUNE, so I expect design similarities)...and the cast is pretty fucking STACKED.

Emily Watson - Valya Harkonnen
Shirley Henderson - Tula Harkonnen
Indira Varma - Empress Natalya
Sarah-Sofie Boussnina - Princess Ynez
Shalom Brune Franklin - Mikaela
Faoileann Cunningham - Sister Jen
Aoife Hinds - Sister Emeline (Ciran Hinds daughter!)
Chloe Lea - Lila
Travis Fimmel - Desmond Hart
Mark Strong - Emperor Javicco Corrino (Um... Mark Strong as the Emperor of the time? YES PLEASE)
Jade Anouka - Sister Theodosia
Chris Mason - Keiran Atreides
Josh Heuston - Constantine Corrino
Edward Davis - Harrow Harkonnen

[Gothos]

This was an amazing movie, the next part can't come quick enough. Huge kudos for keeping pretty close with the books, these days this seems to be some sort of faux pas. The casting was brilliant, and it's been a while since I've been visually awed by a movie, decades.

QuickTidal, on 13 May 2022 - 03:35 PM, said:

You literally cannot win apparently. Cast the whole thing across the spectrum and you still get shit on? I don't know why people bother.

If we are going to cut into the minutae of race for a fucking fictional tale set tens of thousands of years in the future out in the stars...then I'm afraid we've all lost the plot.

I see you're starting to see that appeasement never works

[Maark Abbott]

QuickTidal, on 24 February 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

Tiste Simeon, on 05 February 2023 - 09:43 AM, said:

Just watched this yesterday, really enjoyed it, especially for some reason the vehicle design (I loved those bug helicopter things!)

I have read the book once or twice many years ago but don't remember a lot so have no issues around true to the book arguments.

I missed this post by you Tiste! So glad you enjoyed it.

Part II comes out in November I believe.

Oh, and something we've not talked a lot about...

The TV show started shooting in November (DUNE: SISTERHOOD on HBO Max; a prequel that details the beginnings of the Bene Gesserit order 10k years before DUNE....specifically Villenueve's DUNE, so I expect design similarities)...and the cast is pretty fucking STACKED.

Emily Watson - Valya Harkonnen
Shirley Henderson - Tula Harkonnen
Indira Varma - Empress Natalya
Sarah-Sofie Boussnina - Princess Ynez
Shalom Brune Franklin - Mikaela
Faoileann Cunningham - Sister Jen
Aoife Hinds - Sister Emeline (Ciran Hinds daughter!)
Chloe Lea - Lila
Travis Fimmel - Desmond Hart
Mark Strong - Emperor Javicco Corrino (Um... Mark Strong as the Emperor of the time? YES PLEASE)
Jade Anouka - Sister Theodosia
Chris Mason - Keiran Atreides
Josh Heuston - Constantine Corrino
Edward Davis - Harrow Harkonnen

Oh god they're adapting the Butlerian Jihad aren't they. It's already a write off due to that fact alone.