11 ms·
Not really digging it. Really liked Lynch's, even though it's a bit off in a few aspects(weirding way changes, trying to 1:1 a book:movie, etc). But just the a
by dugditches 6y ago
Not really digging it.
Really liked Lynch's, even though it's a bit off in a few aspects(weirding way changes, trying to 1:1 a book:movie, etc). But just the amount of passion and effort that went into it(costumes, practical effects, sets, etc). How strange and unique everything was and looked.
This really just feels like a SciFi paintjob on a modern SuperHero movie. Kind of sterile.
Also not really feeling the StillSuit's looking like motorcycle and airsoft gear slapped together. Versus the old rubber looking ones in the original.
- petermcneeley 6y agoIt is the dialog. There is not one drop of Dune in it.
- orange3xchicken 6y agoI'm not sure I agree. They have taken some liberties with the dialogue, but many of the quotes in the trailer are near-direct from the novel. Anyways this seems like something that would be hard to tell from what little the trailer offered in terms of talking. Just from the trailer, this seems like it will at least be more faithful to the source than the Lynch version.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- almostdeadguy 6y agoTotally agree, this looks like it'll be missing everything that's weird and wonderful about Dune. Lynch's Dune can be bewildering coming at it without the context of the book, but that aspect of it is frankly just something you get used to with Lynch's works, and like you said its filled with so much oddness and detail. The hulking Heighliner spacecrafts, the mutated ghoulish guild navigator, the fascinating cave-like imperial palace set, the manic cyst-covered Harkonnens. I've never understood why it gets a bad rap, I think it's a hugely underrated film that did a wonderful job capturing the strange universe of Dune.
- TinkersW 6y agoIt captured some aspects of the books, but diverged heavily in some baffling ways.. 1. Everything with the Harkonnens is gross, it wasn't like that in the books. This aspect alone made the movie hard to take serious. 2. the stupid blaster guns that were added 3. the ending was complete nonsense and did not come from the book Not sure how you can say this new movie is missing stuff, it appears to be a much more accurate retelling of the book to me.
- kinghtown 6y agoI’m thinking it will be a pretty good movie based on Villeneuve‘s track record but I’m betting this bigger budget will bring on more studio story experts and general meddling and in the end we’ll get another genre movie with touches of good taste decisions (Trailer does have very nice cinematography/lighting and the sand worm looks good) mixed with watered down/familiar design and formulaic story beats. I think the movie will shoot itself in the foot by trying to make everyone happy. It seems like it will be a well-made film that no one seems to love. The Pink Floyd cover doesn’t work for me either.
- scoutt 6y agoI mostly agree, but one disappointment with the 1984 movie I remember were the Sardaukar suits. Seemed rushed and not fear-inducing as they should be.
- zxwx 6y agoLynch's Dune never looked so good! The actors were fully committed, whereas those in the trailer look like they're just reading the lines. No conviction. Guess we'll see if that holds in the full film. Lynch's version also had an unbeatable cast: the Baron, the Reverend Mother, both mentats, Sting in his finest moment as Feyd Rautha, Kyle MacLachlan, etc. Throw in the sets and costumes and it's a tough act to follow. It would have benefitted from another hour, but so it goes. Plus, those sandworm teeth in the trailer just don't look like they'd make a good crysknife. It would have been nice to see what Lynch made of Return of the Jedi, which he apparently turned down for this, but I'm glad he made Dune.