24 ms·

While I agree with all the people who appreciate Dunes special effects, scenery, and actor choices…can we all agree that the directing is lack luster? The stor

While I agree with all the people who appreciate Dunes special effects, scenery, and actor choices…can we all agree that the directing is lack luster? The story isn’t being explained well. Emotions are being expressed with little or no back story and really fail to engage the audience emotionally. It really seems as if this would have been better done in GoT style. I mean I have to watch part two, but not because part 1 was good story telling or even acting. It wasn’t.

Zababa 5y ago
I don't really agree, I think it was great. I'm really glad it's not GoT style, and that it's more austere, cold in a way, as I think it's a better fit for the story. I don't think it failed to engage the audience emotionally, but rather that you personally failed to engage with it. Same thing with the lack of backstory, I don't have many memories of the Lynch one and had no trouble following. I think maybe you are used to a certain style of movie that Dune differs from, and thus have a hard time with it?
- robbedpeter 5y ago
  Yes. A better style of movie, that engages in storytelling, and not shallow highlights riffing off the experience of the book, with sufficient razzle dazzle to make people who haven't read the book follow along. The power of Dune is the interwoven plots, not the linear narrative the movie attempts. It wasn't bad, but it certainly wasn't good.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    I think trying to find the book in the movie is useless, there's already the book for that, and the movie can't really be better at being a book than the book. I don't have many memories of Dune, but I have still strong ones of Hyperion, and I don't think I would ever be satisfied by a movie that attemps to be just the book. On the other hand, I would be fine with Villeneuve adapting it with his usual style (though maybe Hyperion is a bit too organic for his style? It's hard to say). > A better style of movie > It wasn't bad, but it certainly wasn't good. I think it was great.
- Jtsummers 5y ago
  Foundation (on Apple TV) seems to be trying to GoT-ify the books, and not for the better in some cases (characters are less thoughtful, more action-hero, kind of weird choices). Dune (2021) at least avoided that, but it really needed more dialog. There are a lot of ponderous and beautiful scenes and soundscapes + landscapes, what Villeneuve is great at (it's in all of his movies that I've seen, and an element I greatly enjoy). However, watching it with a friend he had more questions than answers by the end, and not just because it was the first half of the book (and the first of the original 6 books). More dialog with a bit more explanation, which could easily have fit into the movie with its long scenes just watching people stand there and look contemplative or worried without extending the total runtime. The pair of movies may work well as a whole, but this movie is not a terribly good standalone film.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    That might be a personal preference but I don't mind movies that take more investment to really get. Some things you'll understand by watching it a few more times, some things you'll get by reading the book, some things you'll get by learning about the movie itself. Some things also take time to digest.
    - Jtsummers 5y ago
      I liked the time spent on the visuals and music. It was dialogue that was missing. Long scenes that would not have been any cheaper or more expensive if characters had just spoken. Shadout, for instance, never got to be a real character. One scene of dialog, I think. Others suffered similarly.
      - Zababa 5y ago
        A long scene with dialogue is not the same as a long scene without it though.
  - imbnwa 5y ago
    Foundation is verging on CW-level sci-fi writing
- alanwreath 5y ago
  By GoT style - I’m referring to time being taken to tell the story. Not necessarily in the style of GoT. I should have been more explicit there. Heck I guess I could have supplanted it with “A series of unfortunate events” style . My point was that it takes time to explore the characters and give the audience (readers or not) a chance to connect with the characters.
  - alanwreath 5y ago
    An important note, I have read all of Dune, all the way up to the God Emperor. I wasn’t expecting the movie to be as good as the book. However, the feeling I get from the experience is lost opportunity. We won’t get another rendition of Dune probably in our lifetimes. Would have been nice if it was given more screen time / there’s a lot of good story there and if this movie is any indication all we’ll get is a couple deep stares by the protagonists with no context.
psyc 5y ago
It gave me the impression of a vignette from the Dune universe, as opposed to an epic space opera.
slmjkdbtl 5y ago
I think the story telling is ok at least much better than the David Lynch's version, but the characters and settings are actually a step down.
magicalhippo 5y ago
I quite liked the overall direction. I liked that I had to piece together the backstory. Not everything needs a Star Wars wall of text. For me the weak part was the casting of several of the supporting actors. Several of them just didn't work for me, and it felt like they were included more for their name than fitting the role.
tonfreed 5y ago
It's a setting that makes it really difficult to turn into a movie without a bunch of exposition. For example, even in the original book, you wouldn't really know why they have Mentats instead of computers unless you turned to glossary pages. I love the setting, but it just doesn't translate very well to the big screen at all, and I agree with you a long form TV series in the GoT style would have been much better.
- atoav 5y ago
  My girlfriend who never even knew what Dune was, was blown away by the world and the movie and hat no issues at all with the unexplained bits. If a movie just throws you into a new place of course that new place feels foreign and might be hard to read, but if I wanted a known thing I wouldn't go and watch a new movie in the cinema, right?
atoav 5y ago
I love the way it is directed. Finally a movie that doesn't treat the audience with contempt and just wants us to be a fly on a wall in a story bigger than life. I had no trouble following the story and I had both never read Dune before (yeah I know) and English is not my first language. The story lets those who want to dive into it do just that, but it is never spoonfeeding the audience, which is just too common and throws me off in so many movies because instead of feeling something that has been motivated by some inner forces of the world I am watching it feels like something just done to tingle my feelings in often very predictable ways. Just like in everyday life emotions are not a 100% explained but there is nothing arbitrary in that movie. E.g. the way Paul's mother acts is unexplained more or less, but it isn't unexplainable. By explaining this for example, the film would loose parts of what made it great to watch in my eyes. But tastes differ of course.
- alanwreath 5y ago
  While I share the distaste for spoonfeed drama/comedy (laugh tracks etc). I’m referring more to pacing and connection. Movies or shows that take the time to emotionally connect you with a character so you can share (even to a small degree) the weight of an event lend color to a story and make it personal.
  - atoav 5y ago
    I agree that the pacing in Dune was uncommon, but for me it fit quite well with the story, as it doubles the feelings Paul must have felt within the audience. He and his family is exposed to bigger forces and can do nothing about it, while being exposed to dreams and visions of far off places, all with a hint of puberty which is disorienting in it's own right. So a lot of this emotional "unguidedness" is part of the material the director worked with. Whether Paul or his family works as a projection surface for the viewers or not seems to be a bit of an individual topic. I personally didn't feel unable to empathize with the protagonists. If anything the untypical impending doom (like in a greek tragedy) that is so rare in hollywood cinema nowadays made me care in a different way. Yeah, Paul is the hero, but you can't shake the feeling it is not gonna end well. Instead it made me ponder more about the world and society that produces such fates and where one would find parallels in our time (opiates in Afghanistan maybe?) I like it when the filmic world is the protagonist before anybody in it and these films are sadly quite rare, especially with a decent production.
Slow_Hand 5y ago
As a massive fan of the book and someone who enjoyed the film and think it was excellent, my reservations about it boil down to the fact that Denis' directing style feels somewhat restrained compared to his previous films. My impression watching it for the first time was that the film was very fast-paced and as a result felt as though it was glossing over the lore. I chalk this up to the fact that the film has a LOT of narrative ground to cover, and even at 2.5 hours long the film could've still run for much longer. In my estimation what we end up missing as a result of this economy in storytelling is the feeling of "living" in the scene. There are few, if any, opportunities for the film to slow down and allow the viewer to immerse themselves in the gravity of each scene. What's missing is the opportunity for the viewer to reflect upon the information they are receiving and to figure things out as the characters are figuring them out, or before they do. There is little in the way of quiet moments that allow the viewer to process and come to certain realizations themselves. Unfortunately this is not a luxury that this movie is able to provide without making for a very long film. That said, I still love it.
SpikeDad 5y ago
Yep. For a world building story the movie was very pedestrian in making it seem like a new and different world. They made several poor choices cutting and modifying the story which I feel directly contradicts the spirit of the book. It felt like reading a Brian novel - a bunch of weird stuff that didn't have any heart or feeling. I watched it and will watch it again and maybe I'll change my opinion but it wasn't the savior of the Dune world story. I'll even pay to see it in a theater even though I saw it free on HBO.
- Fricken 5y ago
  Lynch and Jodorowsky had wildly imaginative visions for Dune. A precedent has been set that Villeneuve failed to live up to. The new Dune relied on mostly the same key scenes, and lifted dozens of shots directly from Lynch's Dune. Villeneuve isn't enough of of an artist to imagine his own film, so we instead got a watered down version of Lynch's Dune. Baron Harkonnen was properly villainous in Lynch's Dune. In Villenueve's Dune we got a fat guy in a mumu, and Gurney had to explain to us that the Harkonnen's are "brutal", because no actual brutality made it to screen. The new Dune had way more expository talking heads than the old Dune, yet I still managed to lose the plot. The battle sequences looked like something you'd see on the history channel. They sent a full crew out to the Wadi Rum desert and somehow managed to make it look like the rear-projection set of The Mandalorian. I loved Blade runner 2049, but I suppose with that film Villeneuve had an established style guide to work from, and understated performances fit with the tone of the film. Dune is a different beast, and Villeneuve doesn't have the chops, unfortunately.
- sdrothrock 5y ago
  > It felt like reading a Brian novel - a bunch of weird stuff that didn't have any heart or feeling. The novels were largely written by Kevin J. Anderson, who also was in the credits for the movie as a "Creative Consultant," so make of that what you will. I agree with your feeling, though; the metaphor I keep coming back to is that it was a tapestry that was reduced to a thread: Paul's rise. It felt like all the supporting characters and their motivations, which form a part of the tapestry of time that the entire Dune series covers, were reduced to steps that Paul is climbing to the top.
lemoncookiechip 5y ago
I can't agree with this. The movie was easy to follow (although the lore isn't spoonfed via long exposition scenes). I went to watch it with several people who had no prior knowledge and they seemed to genuinely enjoy it, as well as understand the plot. This is anecdotal evidence, but I found that online (Discord chat, reviews...), most people who had no prior knowledge of Dune, seemed to have enjoyed it more than the people who had prior book knowledge. My main concern going in was the 3rd act (or lack of one) but I was already fully expecting it, so I had no issues knowing it was only part 1.

Zababa 5y ago

I don't really agree, I think it was great. I'm really glad it's not GoT style, and that it's more austere, cold in a way, as I think it's a better fit for the story. I don't think it failed to engage the audience emotionally, but rather that you personally failed to engage with it. Same thing with the lack of backstory, I don't have many memories of the Lynch one and had no trouble following. I think maybe you are used to a certain style of movie that Dune differs from, and thus have a hard time with it?

robbedpeter 5y ago
Yes. A better style of movie, that engages in storytelling, and not shallow highlights riffing off the experience of the book, with sufficient razzle dazzle to make people who haven't read the book follow along. The power of Dune is the interwoven plots, not the linear narrative the movie attempts. It wasn't bad, but it certainly wasn't good.
- Zababa 5y ago
  I think trying to find the book in the movie is useless, there's already the book for that, and the movie can't really be better at being a book than the book. I don't have many memories of Dune, but I have still strong ones of Hyperion, and I don't think I would ever be satisfied by a movie that attemps to be just the book. On the other hand, I would be fine with Villeneuve adapting it with his usual style (though maybe Hyperion is a bit too organic for his style? It's hard to say). > A better style of movie > It wasn't bad, but it certainly wasn't good. I think it was great.
Jtsummers 5y ago
Foundation (on Apple TV) seems to be trying to GoT-ify the books, and not for the better in some cases (characters are less thoughtful, more action-hero, kind of weird choices). Dune (2021) at least avoided that, but it really needed more dialog. There are a lot of ponderous and beautiful scenes and soundscapes + landscapes, what Villeneuve is great at (it's in all of his movies that I've seen, and an element I greatly enjoy). However, watching it with a friend he had more questions than answers by the end, and not just because it was the first half of the book (and the first of the original 6 books). More dialog with a bit more explanation, which could easily have fit into the movie with its long scenes just watching people stand there and look contemplative or worried without extending the total runtime. The pair of movies may work well as a whole, but this movie is not a terribly good standalone film.
- Zababa 5y ago
  That might be a personal preference but I don't mind movies that take more investment to really get. Some things you'll understand by watching it a few more times, some things you'll get by reading the book, some things you'll get by learning about the movie itself. Some things also take time to digest.
  - Jtsummers 5y ago
    I liked the time spent on the visuals and music. It was dialogue that was missing. Long scenes that would not have been any cheaper or more expensive if characters had just spoken. Shadout, for instance, never got to be a real character. One scene of dialog, I think. Others suffered similarly.
    - Zababa 5y ago
      A long scene with dialogue is not the same as a long scene without it though.
- imbnwa 5y ago
  Foundation is verging on CW-level sci-fi writing
alanwreath 5y ago
By GoT style - I’m referring to time being taken to tell the story. Not necessarily in the style of GoT. I should have been more explicit there. Heck I guess I could have supplanted it with “A series of unfortunate events” style . My point was that it takes time to explore the characters and give the audience (readers or not) a chance to connect with the characters.
- alanwreath 5y ago
  An important note, I have read all of Dune, all the way up to the God Emperor. I wasn’t expecting the movie to be as good as the book. However, the feeling I get from the experience is lost opportunity. We won’t get another rendition of Dune probably in our lifetimes. Would have been nice if it was given more screen time / there’s a lot of good story there and if this movie is any indication all we’ll get is a couple deep stares by the protagonists with no context.

psyc 5y ago

It gave me the impression of a vignette from the Dune universe, as opposed to an epic space opera.

slmjkdbtl 5y ago

I think the story telling is ok at least much better than the David Lynch's version, but the characters and settings are actually a step down.

magicalhippo 5y ago

I quite liked the overall direction. I liked that I had to piece together the backstory. Not everything needs a Star Wars wall of text. For me the weak part was the casting of several of the supporting actors. Several of them just didn't work for me, and it felt like they were included more for their name than fitting the role.

tonfreed 5y ago

It's a setting that makes it really difficult to turn into a movie without a bunch of exposition. For example, even in the original book, you wouldn't really know why they have Mentats instead of computers unless you turned to glossary pages. I love the setting, but it just doesn't translate very well to the big screen at all, and I agree with you a long form TV series in the GoT style would have been much better.

atoav 5y ago
My girlfriend who never even knew what Dune was, was blown away by the world and the movie and hat no issues at all with the unexplained bits. If a movie just throws you into a new place of course that new place feels foreign and might be hard to read, but if I wanted a known thing I wouldn't go and watch a new movie in the cinema, right?

atoav 5y ago

I love the way it is directed. Finally a movie that doesn't treat the audience with contempt and just wants us to be a fly on a wall in a story bigger than life. I had no trouble following the story and I had both never read Dune before (yeah I know) and English is not my first language. The story lets those who want to dive into it do just that, but it is never spoonfeeding the audience, which is just too common and throws me off in so many movies because instead of feeling something that has been motivated by some inner forces of the world I am watching it feels like something just done to tingle my feelings in often very predictable ways. Just like in everyday life emotions are not a 100% explained but there is nothing arbitrary in that movie. E.g. the way Paul's mother acts is unexplained more or less, but it isn't unexplainable. By explaining this for example, the film would loose parts of what made it great to watch in my eyes. But tastes differ of course.

alanwreath 5y ago
While I share the distaste for spoonfeed drama/comedy (laugh tracks etc). I’m referring more to pacing and connection. Movies or shows that take the time to emotionally connect you with a character so you can share (even to a small degree) the weight of an event lend color to a story and make it personal.
- atoav 5y ago
  I agree that the pacing in Dune was uncommon, but for me it fit quite well with the story, as it doubles the feelings Paul must have felt within the audience. He and his family is exposed to bigger forces and can do nothing about it, while being exposed to dreams and visions of far off places, all with a hint of puberty which is disorienting in it's own right. So a lot of this emotional "unguidedness" is part of the material the director worked with. Whether Paul or his family works as a projection surface for the viewers or not seems to be a bit of an individual topic. I personally didn't feel unable to empathize with the protagonists. If anything the untypical impending doom (like in a greek tragedy) that is so rare in hollywood cinema nowadays made me care in a different way. Yeah, Paul is the hero, but you can't shake the feeling it is not gonna end well. Instead it made me ponder more about the world and society that produces such fates and where one would find parallels in our time (opiates in Afghanistan maybe?) I like it when the filmic world is the protagonist before anybody in it and these films are sadly quite rare, especially with a decent production.

Slow_Hand 5y ago

As a massive fan of the book and someone who enjoyed the film and think it was excellent, my reservations about it boil down to the fact that Denis' directing style feels somewhat restrained compared to his previous films. My impression watching it for the first time was that the film was very fast-paced and as a result felt as though it was glossing over the lore. I chalk this up to the fact that the film has a LOT of narrative ground to cover, and even at 2.5 hours long the film could've still run for much longer. In my estimation what we end up missing as a result of this economy in storytelling is the feeling of "living" in the scene. There are few, if any, opportunities for the film to slow down and allow the viewer to immerse themselves in the gravity of each scene. What's missing is the opportunity for the viewer to reflect upon the information they are receiving and to figure things out as the characters are figuring them out, or before they do. There is little in the way of quiet moments that allow the viewer to process and come to certain realizations themselves. Unfortunately this is not a luxury that this movie is able to provide without making for a very long film. That said, I still love it.

SpikeDad 5y ago

Yep. For a world building story the movie was very pedestrian in making it seem like a new and different world. They made several poor choices cutting and modifying the story which I feel directly contradicts the spirit of the book. It felt like reading a Brian novel - a bunch of weird stuff that didn't have any heart or feeling. I watched it and will watch it again and maybe I'll change my opinion but it wasn't the savior of the Dune world story. I'll even pay to see it in a theater even though I saw it free on HBO.

Fricken 5y ago
Lynch and Jodorowsky had wildly imaginative visions for Dune. A precedent has been set that Villeneuve failed to live up to. The new Dune relied on mostly the same key scenes, and lifted dozens of shots directly from Lynch's Dune. Villeneuve isn't enough of of an artist to imagine his own film, so we instead got a watered down version of Lynch's Dune. Baron Harkonnen was properly villainous in Lynch's Dune. In Villenueve's Dune we got a fat guy in a mumu, and Gurney had to explain to us that the Harkonnen's are "brutal", because no actual brutality made it to screen. The new Dune had way more expository talking heads than the old Dune, yet I still managed to lose the plot. The battle sequences looked like something you'd see on the history channel. They sent a full crew out to the Wadi Rum desert and somehow managed to make it look like the rear-projection set of The Mandalorian. I loved Blade runner 2049, but I suppose with that film Villeneuve had an established style guide to work from, and understated performances fit with the tone of the film. Dune is a different beast, and Villeneuve doesn't have the chops, unfortunately.
sdrothrock 5y ago
> It felt like reading a Brian novel - a bunch of weird stuff that didn't have any heart or feeling. The novels were largely written by Kevin J. Anderson, who also was in the credits for the movie as a "Creative Consultant," so make of that what you will. I agree with your feeling, though; the metaphor I keep coming back to is that it was a tapestry that was reduced to a thread: Paul's rise. It felt like all the supporting characters and their motivations, which form a part of the tapestry of time that the entire Dune series covers, were reduced to steps that Paul is climbing to the top.

lemoncookiechip 5y ago

I can't agree with this. The movie was easy to follow (although the lore isn't spoonfed via long exposition scenes). I went to watch it with several people who had no prior knowledge and they seemed to genuinely enjoy it, as well as understand the plot. This is anecdotal evidence, but I found that online (Discord chat, reviews...), most people who had no prior knowledge of Dune, seemed to have enjoyed it more than the people who had prior book knowledge. My main concern going in was the 3rd act (or lack of one) but I was already fully expecting it, so I had no issues knowing it was only part 1.