Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Denis Villeneuve’s Dune

12526272931

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,155 ✭✭✭✭banie01




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The entire point is privileged saviour types are not to be blindly followed or worshipped.

    At no stage in the second movie did I ever think Paul was being portrayed as a hero as opposed to a protagonist which people seem to confuse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,022 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    I dunno, I find the whole Tleilaxu and Ghola stuff might be a bit much for general audiences, and his kids do come into it a bit here.

    Also, ending a trilogy with a political movie that has very few battles (unless they bring those in from the intervening years) won't really sell for audiences I'd think. People will be disappointed expecting similar as Part 2



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    It's got a few weird bits alright but I reckon they are ones you can just leave out. I never understood the need for Gholas or the love for Duncan. He just seems to me to be such a minor character.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Herbert's work had a fairly horny streak really; thinking of something like Hellstrom's Hive of his non-Dune works and how a great deal of that book worked sex into the whole narrative (IIRC a character is even killed via sex)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,022 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Ya, I do think they'll need to bring battles in to it. If you go from an epic like this to a slower film like Messiah is, I think you disappoint a lot of people. They'd need to just skip most of the time gap and show some of the holy war and then have the political and heir side alongside that I think, at which point you're only loosely adapting Messiah then.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,341 ✭✭✭Cordell


    It can have big epic battles from the jihad and it can have some epic stone burner Oppenheimer like moment to provide the eye candy. And it can also develop all the lore and background that was left out from the first 2, and that will make a perfect ending of a brilliant trilogy.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    There's plenty of the Jihad you can cover if some action set-pieces are required, as well as expanding out how the Great Houses have reacted to Paul's ascension to Messiah. Long while since I read Dune: Messiah but aren't there a bunch of still-active disparate forces plotting against him from the Houses?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,159 ✭✭✭cosatron


    would you recommend reading messiah, i just read the first one.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yes, but it's a slightly different beast from what I recall; more of a meditation on power and being trapped in your own myth. There's still plenty of courtroom chicanery, but you can get teh first nods towards the series getting very philsophical as it runs along.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,341 ✭✭✭Cordell


    I would recommend all 6 books but indeed they get progressively philosophical (that is, weirder :)) and maybe a bit harder to read and follow.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,183 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    I enjoyed that. Maybe not as much as part one but that was at least partly down to my reaction to the SCALE of Part one immediately after Covid. It was a breath-taking example of what what a HUGE F*cking screen can bring.

    The bit where they they take down the ornithopter. Chani laughing running over to Paul. Then CRASH!!! it just explodes beside them.

    It's been decades since I read the books but I did like how they made it more obvious how much the Bene Geserit manipulated the Fremen. It's in Part one as well so not a spoiler. It may be that I simply missed it initially (I was about 15 reading it initially and have MAYBE read it and Messiah once more in the subsequent 30+ years).

    Maybe not a spoiler but just in case: Did they alter Austin Butler's voice to sound like Stellan Skarsgard? Not only the gravelly-sounding voice but even the slight accent. I thought that was a nice touch. You definitely got the point that they were related.

    My only real complaint was Christopher Walken. It kind of took you out of the moment:


    I mean, you expect a bad Walken impression: "Muad... DIB???!!!"


    So I really enjoyed this. I hope they get to do Messiah and am looking forward to the Bene Geserrit series.

    Post edited by TheIrishGrover on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,183 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    Isn't he tied to "Rendezvous with Rama"? Talk about the BEST director for the job... Might be good for everyone: He can do SCALE (Dune). He can so slow (Arrival). This would be both. Advertising execs would have the easiest sell: From the creator of 2001 and the director of Dune 1&2 and Arrival. Show scenes of the HUGE ship etc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭RGARDINR


    I saw it and really enjoyed it. 4 out of 5 for me. I think the last battle scene could of been 10 mins longer as just felt rushed for what it was.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yeah I recall mutterings he was attached to Rama - though the article I shared kinda hinted that Villeneuve was a bit pooped from big blockbuster shooting; so wouldn't be surprised if Dune 3 gets pushed out and Villeneuve takes a break with a small "one for me" project. He hasn't really done one like that since ... Prisoners? Sicario was a bang-bang thriller, maybe Enemy given it was predominantly straightforward. Either way he has made SciFi since Sicario onwards.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I would say definitely read Messiah after the first.

    Its a good completion of Paul's story arc.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,922 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    The film’s fine and improved in some regards over the original, but runs into two very personal issues for me: I don’t really care much for Villeneuve as a director, and - a more recent development - I’m not sure I really care for Dune either.

    Villeneuve… it’s the same as ever for me, honestly. I just can’t warm to his films. I appreciate him as a very talented craftsman, but there’s just something sterile about his directorial style for me. Beautiful images often, but ones that keep me at an odd remove. Still think Arrival is the strongest of his big sci-fi titles, and that’s at least partially down to the source material being more intriguing IMO. I’m not going to pretend Lynch’s Dune doesn’t have a plethora of problems, but it has a potent sense of the strange and uncanny that I don’t think you get with Villeneuve’s pristine, somewhat chilly minimalism.

    Dune… I dunno man. I’ve never read the book, but between the two cinematic adaptations I’m not convinced it’s something I’ll get around to. I think a lot of the storytelling is so built around lore dumps, convoluted naming conventions and prophecies that it just loses me somewhere along the way. This has more narrative momentum than the first, but it just loses me in proper nouns along the way. Some interesting ideas about religious fundamentalism, but feels like the real payoffs are still a film away. The story had a weird vibe of simultaneously being too rushed (some sequences felt like they cut off a few shots or even scenes too early) and over-egging some other stuff.

    But credit where it’s due here too. I get the criticism that Timothee and Zendaya feel too much like modern teens in their performances here, but I did appreciate Chani’s character arc as the skeptic amid mounting religious fervour. Bardem as well delivered some much needed levity amid a film that very much takes itself ultra seriously even when it’s a bit ridiculous, and Austin Butler made for a fine, menacing villain. Some beautiful imagery, as expected: highlights include the floating ascent near the start of the film, and the firework illuminated hallway rendezvous. I do think Villeneuve and his team have a tendency to cut away too fast, but again he’s surrounded by an incredibly accomplished team of filmmakers. As much as Villeneuve’s films leave me cold, I can still appreciate this film’s compositional and visual direction being on a different level to the average contemporary spectacle movie.

    Post edited by johnny_ultimate on


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I had meant to mention how the one true innovation this film brought was showing fireworks ... that weren't fireworks. Dunno why but that little detail was something that really sold this idea that oh, it really is in this far-far future. lol



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,022 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    It's such a short book that it won't hurt to read it. I didn't particularly like it but it's a lot better than what comes after still.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,022 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    That's the thing though, you're not really remaking Messiah at that point. Like a lot of the interesting stuff from a film point of view happens in the 12 year gap. The war, the reaction of the great houses, Paul's visions coming to fruition. Messiah, as a book, brings you to the end of the story.

    Like if they remake it as is, you'll have people going in expecting lots of action as the holy war starts but they get lots of talk about breeding programs, bringing people back from the dead and a bunch of politics. I don't think that film works as a fantasy/sci-fi blockbuster.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,449 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    'I haven't read the book but ... here's my opinion on it anyway' 😁

    The two new films are very good but they're very much Villeneuve. A man who eschews dialogue for visual storytelling wherever he can. They give you a great flavour of the Dune universe, but there's so much more to it than these films.

    If you forget about the films and take Dune as literary work alone, it's absolutely incredible and IMO one of the greatest Sci fi stories ever written. It's essential Sci Fi reading.

    You can in no way form an opinion on the book series from these films as much as you could from the David Lynch film. Definitely give it a read sometime when you can.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,922 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Honestly I wish this film had less dialogue at times 😅

    Obviously can’t comment on the book, but just based on the films I’m not super into some of the storytelling ideas being put forward. Whereas I was intrigued enough by the ideas in Arrival that I chased up Ted Chiang’s stories and thought they were incredible.

    Never say never though - perhaps one of these years I’ll tackle Herbert’s book, and wouldn’t at all be surprised if the films can only go so far in adapting it. Though I know from reputation that the quality swiftly falls off a cliff after Messiah!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    its an unmitigated masterpiece for me. I never would have imagined Dune would be up there with Star Wars, or LOTR, but here we are, 1 film away from bookending an epic tale over a trilogy of films.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,341 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Indeed the films only go so far. He did an excellent job of adapting the book into films that worked for both readers and non-readers, but if you haven't read the book you are missing out, a lot more will make more sense if you know the backstory.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,183 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    It is ... quite something how well that fits into the vibe of Lynch's Dune!

    I still maintain a fondness for that 80s version, even if its plot and faithfulness to the book was threadbare, it was a fabulous fever dream of a thing.

    And it was about as close as we're likely to get to seeing a Navigator on the big screen; methinks Villeneuve's version will stay clear of those (not sure if we maybe saw them in part 1, at the start, behind the Emperor's spokesperson).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,449 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    I have no shame in saying I absolutely love Lynch's Dune. Between the soundtrack, set design and cast it definitely has a lot going for it. After watching almost six hours of Villeneuve's Dune I'm also amazed Lynch managed to fit so much of the story into under two and a half hours.

    I think there's actually a great film in there somewhere that Lynch could bring out if he were to do a properly edited directors cut. (not that he'd ever go anywhere near it! 😥)



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,922 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Yeah I saw Lynch’s Dune in the cinema a few years ago and it felt like a fever dream. So loud and odd. It’s all over the gaff narratively, but it’s very similar to this movie - to the point I got Deja vu as it hits so many similar scenes and narrative beats. This one just has space to actually develop scenes and ideas, whereas that crams everything into an unwieldy whole 😅

    But as far as production design goes, there’s something viscerally weird about Lynch’s Dune, which the new version loses in favour of narrative coherency.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    His take on "the voice" as the trigger to fire Wielding guns was a massive mistake on his part. That and his panto Harkonnen's (not that Villeneuve isnt guilty of similar) made the movie look a bit silly. He also doesn't really tackle the deeper themes of Dune.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Oh it's a completely superficial treatment of the story, and as you said the Weirding Modules was an odd choice, but it's a film whose appeal lies solely in its baroque, utterly sensual aesthetic. In some ways it front-loaded the more philsophhical, surrealist nature of the later novels.

    Notable that the Westwood Studios video-game adaptations of Dune would use the 1984 film's aesthetic as its cue; man I do nostalgically miss those days of FMV cut-scenes, especially in the RTS genre. Commander Worf as Duke Atreides? Yes please.




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The art direction was great and you can see Villeneuve borrowed a fair bit from it too.

    My introduction to Dune was Dune 2: Battle for Arrakis. I still say "battle of Arrakis" in my head every time I hear someone talk about Dune pt.II



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,175 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    With Villeneuve reportedly story boarding Dune since his teens, I'd hardly think you could say it wasn't for him.



  • Registered Users Posts: 899 ✭✭✭El Duda


    Dune: Part Two – 8.5/10

    I think there are three levels on which one can enjoy this film:

    1. As a piece of narrative story-telling. Being into the characters and being emotionally invested

    2. As a piece of world building and atmosphere driven sci-fi

    3. As a cinematic spectacle and shining example of progressive technical achievement

    For me, it’s almost entirely 2 & 3. 

    I’m shocked by how much George Lucas plagiarised the original novel(s). Star Wars is basically this but with a few specifics tweaked. The reason I bring this up as I think it is a great comparison in terms of characters and how much they resonate with the audience. Star Wars hit every one of the three levels I set out, especially number 1. You just believe the characters and you root for the rebellion from start to finish. When you find out that Vader is Luke’s Father you FEEL the impact etc…

    Dune doesn’t reach that level at all imo. I have a great admiration for Timothée Chalamet, but I can’t help but feel like I want him to be a better actor than he is. When I’m watching Dune, I’m not seeing Paul Atreides. I’m seeing Timothée Chalamet. Instead of rooting for Paul and his character within the Dune story, I’m rooting for Timothée and hoping he proves his acting chops. When I say that Rebecca Ferguson is the best thing in these films, I mean the actor rather than the character of Lady Jessica.  

    Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy jumped into my mind immediately after seeing it. Much like LOTR, Dune is a film that will be loved by many but despised by a vocal minority. It’s the sort of production that doesn’t come along very often. It will have huge longevity and its own loyal fandom who will utterly adore everything Dune related. I’ve been to the cinema over 100 times in the last 2 years (since it opened) and I’ve not seen anything like this. Despite that lack of ‘level 1’ enjoyment, it still resonated with me for a day or so afterwards. The world building and level of spectacle on show is just way too immense. I’m fully expecting my second viewing in iMax to blow my bloody socks off. 

    Where most are enthralled by the spectacle, others won’t be able to get past their lack of connection to the story. Which is understandable. To not feel for the characters shows that there’s is something that isn’t working, and no amount of technical wizardry is going to solve that. 

    Perhaps with further viewings and a deeper understanding of some of the rushed plot points, I will eventually connect with the story a bit more, but for now 2 out of 3 is more than enough for me.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yet again (IIRC), Villeneuve has said there won't be a directors cut at all (not that that has stopped studios from pushing out "alternate" cuts under directors' noses), but interestingly cut scenes involve Tim Blake Nelson, who had been announced as cast but disappeared from the theatrical cut - no clue who he was meant to play - and Stephen McKinley Henderson, who remained a character in the back half of the book.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,155 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Can totally see Tim Blake Nelson as Hasimir Fenring. Had he and McKinley both been kept in the cut? The aftermath of the Paul V Feyd fight would have drawn more out of Walken.

    I'd also hazard that had McKinley been kept in the cut? That much more could have been made of Atriedes honour and fealty, they care for their own.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    went again today with my wife. I very rarely rewatch a film I’ve already seen and the last time I took a repeated trip to the cinema was The fellowship of the Ring. But I jumped at the chance to see again. It’s glorious. That opening line “he who controls the spice controls the universe”, sang in those vocals… man, it gave me goosebumps. It’s like a battle cry. It’s peak cinema.

    Timmy C is so perfect as Paul, he’s exactly that charismatic type you genuinely believe in. For the 2nd time I walked out of the movie and had to remind myself this guy isn’t a protagonist. We’ll be looking back in years to come wondering how this film packed in so much talent. Butler, Chalamet, Zendaya, Pugh, Taylor-Joy… every one of them will be huge.

    In terms of sequels, I think it’s up there with The Dark knight and Godfather Part 2.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,874 ✭✭✭buried


    Enjoyed it and liked the fact it got a bit more weirder than the first one. But some of the story progression is a bit all over the shop and also highly rushed. For example, too much time was spent making an eegit out of Bardem's character it was hard to take his few non-eegity scenes seriously at all. Looks amazing and all that but the story progression let it down a good bit. I get they have to try to fit all the stuff in from the books and nobody really wants to be looking at a desert for 5 hours, so there is that. Been hearing all this noise from the likes of Christopher Nolan, putting this on par with "The Empire Strikes Back" though, Shtap, shtap, shtap.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Star Wars and Lord of the Rings are probably out there on their own with the general public but Dune will certainly be in the level down. I'm talking about Terminator, Alien or Independence Day level following.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,559 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    I read the first 3 books - are the last 3 worth reading? I needed a break as I read the first 3 one after another and i was going spice mad ;-p



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I dunno; I think Dune could well live up there with SW and LotR with the general public's perception of the Big Ones, purely down to it being a "star power" blockbuster epic that seems to have gone down quite well with broader demographics. For sure as you say it's gonna float around the top tier for the next few years.

    Obviously it's all splitting hairs but as I saw with someone's review on letterbox, I suspect Dune will be one of those series that like LotR, for a small percentage it'll be something they just can't get behind. Which is obviously fine, opinions differ n' all that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,874 ✭✭✭buried


    Yeah, I'm talking about the writing aspect for motion pictures such as this, not the thematic/visual 'brand' of it. Without going into spoiler territory, I think the first 20 to 30 minutes of this could have been cut in order to prolong the final third act. They didn't have to leap into this straight from the last one, in fact, I thought they hadn't done so, until I saw the body of yer man.

    The final act is extremely rushed and clunky. It needed to be fleshed out more. It's not smooth in the way the story flows in Empire Strikes Back. Now, I don't have a biased fan complex trying to make out the brand of 'Star Wars' is better, sorry if that's how it came across. The majority of Star Wars is poor, but the writing/story execution of Empire Strikes Back is standalone brilliant, far better than this. This is technically brilliant, fantastic spectacle on the big screen and everyone should go see it, just for me, the writing aspect could have been better.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,555 ✭✭✭EagererBeaver


    Enjoyed it but I'm trying to stay more loyal to the book I think he, knowingly or otherwise, sacrificed the pacing of the movie. A solid 30 mins could have been edited. I get they needed to set up Feyd but almost the entire Giedi Prime scenes could have gone and I'd not have missed it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭thefa


    I actually really enjoyed how it closed out. Some movies rely on having longer action set pieces at the end but it isn’t alway necessary.

    I can’t put on spoiler tags so;


    In the same way I accepted the Sardauker and Harkonnen could quickly dispatch the strong but unprepared Atreides in the first film, it works that the Sardauker could be steamrolled with a combination of atomic weapons, worms and basically being surrounded by Fremen. The duel also didn’t go on too long.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,603 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    Saw this morning absolutely loved it, proper epic.

    Zendaya and Bardem were excellent, Butler was also really good too, proper scary.

    Negatives Christopher Walken...was well himself, I would also say needed more Florence Pugh but I am guessing a lot more of her in part 3.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Pugh was great but the character is just a prop in the first book. The amount of fleshing out Villeneuve managed to do for her was fantastic. What we saw was an Irulan that you really don't see till later on in the books.

    She really makes you pay attention when on screen. Was also really impressed by Ferguson who I didn't really know. Another real scene stealer.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,603 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    Pugh was excellent but wanted more of her no idea on books tbh, Ferguson is always really good totally agree on that (if you want to see her on top form the TV show Silo is excellent and she is lead).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,555 ✭✭✭EagererBeaver


    Had heard some negatives about Walken basically playing Christopher Walken (Mark Kermode) but tbh, he had so little dialogue that I didn't really get that.

    Zendaya and Butler were the stars of the show for me. Pugh was terrific in her limited role.

    Bardem started to annoy me a bit towards the end. Not sure they managed to really capture the religious fervour aspect of things



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The moment Ferguson just stared at a bunch of Fremen women and children was such a wonderful moment of pure predatory instinct. She was sizing them up in such a psychotic way you saw early on just how tragic the whole story was gonna end up on a societal level.

    Silo was one of the best TV shows of the last couple of years. Definitely deserves eyeballs and a lot of it was Ferguson, who played someone inherently spiky and unlikable with almost supernatural deftness.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,765 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I didn't watch Silo because it had that well worn post apocalypse bunker society plot but I'm gonna give it a go now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,588 ✭✭✭Homelander


    Really enjoyed it, the execution is absolutely incredible. It's just such a beautiful movie.

    I feel the movies leave so many obvious questions unanswered but I guess there's only so much focus they can have given the scope of what's being portrayed.

    My only negative takeaway from Part Two is Christopher Walken. Seriously, an awful choice, and he's neither good nor convincing in the movie. Everyone else is absolutely at the top of their game, flawless.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement