16 ms·

I was telling my partner that I felt the movie was meant for people who read the book. She thought it was boring. It’s missing a lot of smaller context and seem

I was telling my partner that I felt the movie was meant for people who read the book. She thought it was boring. It’s missing a lot of smaller context and seems dull without it. But if you’ve read the book(s), it’s actually a pretty good visual of the series. It would take too long and be dull to everyone if we sat through explanations of everything. This is a great supplement to anyone who didn’t read the book but saw the movie. That said, the book would probably be even better for that.

mzaccari 5y ago
I had tried to get into Dune many years ago, but found it hard to keep track of all that was going on. I wish I had pushed through, because I'm now enthralled by the Dune universe. I can say that the movie helped lay a foundation for me that has made the book far more enjoyable - to the point where I'm almost finished with the audiobook after only starting it last week!
- globular-toast 5y ago
  One thing that helped me with Dune is using the glossary at the back of the book. It's a bit odd and some might say due to bad writing, but he will just start using a word without ever letting you know what it means. The only way to know is from the glossary. Also, don't be afraid to consult a dictionary in some cases. I remember the word "qanat" appears a lot in some of the later books and I just ploughed through without even know what it was. Just look things up and you'll get more out of it.
  - toyg 5y ago
    > some might say due to bad writing Anybody can come up with a new language that happily condenses the concepts you need to have in your new world, but forcing the reader to read an encyclopedia to decipher it is just lazy. You are meant to weave the explanations in your narrative, so the reader picks them up seamlessly. It's a bit like building a UI that is unusable without reading a boring manual.
    - globular-toast 5y ago
      > You are meant to There are no rules except "be good". I've thoroughly enjoyed Dune every time I've read it and it had quite a profound effect on me as a youngster. There are countless thousands just like me and you can't argue with that really. > It's a bit like building a UI that is unusable without reading a boring manual. Well, I think the purpose of a UI is slightly different to that of a novel. One exists to be useful while other exists to be enjoyable. If it's useful it's useful. Doesn't matter if it requires a manual or not.
      - toyg 5y ago
        McDonald's is also enjoyable and enjoyed by millions, it's still not "good food"; as I always say, that sort of reasoning leads to us eating shit because billions of flies cannot be wrong (cit). The best part of Dune is clearly the worldbuilding rather than the prose. Yes it can be used, and the software is great when you get to know how it works, but there is a learning curve that similar software does not have.
        long_time_gone 5y ago
        Your reasoning contains the same assumptions, just in the other direction. You seem to be saying that if masses of people enjoy something it must be “bad” on some level.
        toyg 5y ago
        Nope, not said that anywhere above; just that popularity is not necessarily the be-all and end-all of literary quality.
        long_time_gone 5y ago
        > I always say, that sort of reasoning leads to us eating shit because billions of flies cannot be wrong (cit). You didn't make the distinction "is not necessarily" in your first comment. That changes the connotation.
  - jltsiren 5y ago
    If you read foreign literature, every single novel is like that anyway. Except that there is no convenient glossary at the back explaining the unfamiliar words.
  - JKCalhoun 5y ago
    > some might say due to bad writing My favorite part of "A Clockwork Orange" (book) was that very thing: the narrator just talking naturally and leaving the reader to figure out the slang (Nadsat). There too was a glossary in the back of the book but I soon dispensed with it and found I could get the gist of the slang well enough to just roll with it.
    - denton-scratch 5y ago
      This. You get the hang of the Clockwork Orange slang after a few pages, because the author is so slick with it.
sundance_X 5y ago
Your partner thought Hans Zimmer, indisputably maker of the epic sound that made inception great, was boring? Let's pause here...
ModernMech 5y ago
Totally agree. I watched it with my family and my mom was confused at times. I had to stop and explain things like the Mentats and the real power of the Spacing Guild. I don’t think they make clear in the movie just how important this spice thing is. She also thought the Baron was the Emporer for most of the movie. I don’t know why the emperor and Irulan don’t make an appearance. After the movie was over she said she liked it but she wasn’t sure if she could follow without my help.
- phonypc 5y ago
  The emperor and Irulan only make a personal appearance at the end of the book, don't they? During events the movie presumably doesn't cover at all?
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    I just thought exposition wise it might have been good. They talk about this Emperor a lot and he just never appears on screen.
  - jon-wood 5y ago
    They only make an appearance then, but throughout the book Irulan's commentary is interweaved between chapters. It feels like that could have been a useful path for a bit of exposition on the things that aren't explicitly covered in the plot.
- VortexDream 5y ago
  I feel like the 80s movie does this far better. For all its flaws. It makes an effort to show the emperor and the spacing guild and impress upon the viewer how involved and how powerful (or in the case of the spacing guild, how alien) they are. Might be interesting to see how they respond to the old movie by comparison.
  - bena 5y ago
    Yeah, the best version of Dune is somewhere between Villeneuve's version and Lynch's version. Villeneuve left out too much and Lynch compromised too much.
throw0101a 5y ago
> I was telling my partner that I felt the movie was meant for people who read the book. She thought it was boring. A lot of people who read the book because of the upcoming movie also thought the book was boring. I think that most people expect character-driven narrative, and so when you get a work that leans more towards ideas and concepts, people tune out. Edit: I think is also why the movie Sicario (also by Villeneuve) threw some people off, because it didn't operate with a "normal" narrative: SPOILER {the roles of main character and protagonist were two different people}: * https://thebarkbitesback.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/going-deep-inside-the-underbelly-of-sicario/ https://thebarkbitesback.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/going-deep...
- vetinari 5y ago
  On the other hand, if you take a book that leans towards ideas and concepts, and you make series with character-driver narrative out of it so people won't tune out, you get something like Foundation, that has only title and names of places and characters common with the original. All that made the original interesting is lost.
  - TeMPOraL 5y ago
    Oh yes. The Foundation series would stand fine on its own, but it's pretty much the exact opposite of everything the book trilogy was, making the experience extremely jarring to me (I've read the books somewhat recently, so they were fresh in my mind when I started watching).
  - ericmay 5y ago
    I agree. Having read the books of both series though and coming in with the expectation that I just wanted interesting science fiction I’ve been pleased with both the Dune movie and the Foundation series.
  - throw0101a 5y ago
    > All that made the original interesting is lost. The economist Paul Krugman of all people wrote a 'review' of each basically saying the same thing: > “Foundation” might seem unfilmable. It mostly involves people talking, and its narrative inverts the hero-saves-the-universe theme that burns many acres of CGI every year. The story spans centuries; in each episode everything appears to be on the brink, and it seems as if only desperate efforts by the protagonists can save the day. But after each crisis, Seldon’s prerecorded hologram appears to explain to everyone what just happened and why the successful resolution was inevitable given the laws of history. > So how does the Apple TV series turn this into a visually compelling tale? It doesn’t. What it does instead is remake “Star Wars” under another name. There are indispensable heroes, mystical powers, even a Death Star. These aren’t necessarily bad things to include in a TV series, but they’re completely antithetical to the spirit of Asimov’s writing. Pretending that this series has anything to do with the “Foundation” novels is fraudulent marketing, and I’ve stopped watching. * https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/26/opinion/dune-movie-foundation-series.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/26/opinion/dune-movie-founda... * https://archive.md/YFxVi https://archive.md/YFxVi
goldcd 5y ago
Agreed - I think the film did a great job of touching on stuff, without wasting time with exposition of it. Been enjoying the various in-depth reviews (and the linked story) which colour in the film's sketch a bit more.
627467 5y ago
I agree, I went by myself and left wondering how some one that didn't read the book would feel. Underwhelmed with the plot? Confused? But from my perspective the movie was a fantastic sensorial companion to the books. I felt it nailed everything (or maybe I was justed primed to accept this). Everyone must watch this in one of those simulator-4D screening rooms with vibrating chairs. I left unsure about the portrayal of Jessica and Gurney though. I found Jessica from the movie overly unsure and emotional to what I imagined. And Gurney too stiff.
- nso 5y ago
  I haven't read the books and went with a poker buddy to see it. After the movie I explained my experience to him like having been dealt 94o for two and a half hour straight, frustratingly waiting for something to manifest.
- ModernMech 5y ago
  > I found Jessica from the movie overly unsure and emotional That’s how I felt until she was slitting throats in the back of a thopter without a second thought lol
  - tokai 5y ago
    She was like a mix of Wendy from the Shining and Ripley from Alien.
- 1ibsq 5y ago
  I didn't read the book and really enjoyed the movie. Afterwards I didn't felt like there was a lot that happened in the movie, but that was not important. What I really enjoyed was the epic yet reduced aesthetics and the feel that this a bigger introduction to a hole new universe that could hold a lot of great stories. I'm thrilled for the following movies, but I don't really want to wait that long. So what I will be doing is start reading the books.
- gjulianm 5y ago
  I didn't read the book, didn't have any idea of the plot or anything. At about 1h into the movie (just before the invasion happens) I remember I thought "man this movie is pretty slow". Then the invasion happened (and it felt pretty rushed for such an apparently important moment) and then... it went back to being slow. The last half hour became unbearable knowing that nothing was going to happen and no plot lines were going to be resolved because it was part 1 of 2. Watching 30 minutes of a movie where almost nothing happens when you know there's not going to be a payoff doesn't feel nice.
scrollaway 5y ago
I didn’t read the book and I thought the movie was hard to follow but certainly not boring. I rewatched it (which I usually never do), and thoroughly enjoyed it the second time around.
residualmind 5y ago
For me it was actually a relief to see that not everything is being over-explained, a sickness many modern movies suffer from. Where is the fun if after the movie you don't talk about it, look things up, maybe even read the book?
- pferdone 5y ago
  As someone who loves Denis Villeneuve I did all that, although I felt "left behind" throughout the movie, because I didn't read the books. Visually amazing, but I was sad I couldn't appreciate it the way it could have been.
  - robotbikes 5y ago
    As someone who remembers watching the Lynch directors cut at a 24 sci-fi marathon and had no clue what was going on I felt like this movie did a good job introducing the world building without dwelling too much on the details. The various factions made sense and if I want more there are a lot of books to dive into.
    - Freak_NL 5y ago
      'A lot' is painfully subjective in this case. Depending on the school of thought there is just the one book (Dune); the six books by Frank Herbert; or those, plus all the output of Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson. The implication being that not all books may appeal to everyone who enjoyed Dune (the book).
      - throwaway17_17 5y ago
        I am really looking forward to being able to spend some time in forums and with friends over the coming months (and years given how often I talk about the things I like over and over again) and see how the feelings for the Dune(2021) film correspond to peoples feelings on which books are a part of the series. I am waiting to see the film until this weekend, so I will have to take my own impressions as a baseline and look forward to discussions and arguments on Dune saving from a dreadfully boring winter.
skohan 5y ago
Yeah I had the same feeling. I watched the new movie, and was left feeling underwhelmed. Striking aesthetics, and a true visual and audio experience. But the first half of the film felt like all exposition with no plot, and the film didn't give me much reason to care about the characters so I didn't. But the movie left me with a feeling of wanting more, so I did some research about the world Frank Herbert created, and I actually watched the film again and enjoyed it a lot more with a better understanding of the relevance of what I was seeing. To be honest, I think that's a bit of a failure of the film that it doesn't stand truly on its own. It seems that they tried to be very faithful to the text in terms of what they depicted - which I'm sure was appreciated by Dune fans - but I understand the source material was quite dense, so they would have had to leave quite a lot of important details out. And I think one of the mistakes of the film was to focus so much about Arakkis. The film opens with the struggle and exploitation of the fremen over spice extraction. But I think it's the wrong focus. The thing that makes Arakkis interesting is the fact that the entire empire hinges on the spice production there. The planet itself is just sort of a back-water. I think it would have been better to start with a vignette explaining the importance of spice, to properly set the stakes for the rest of the film.
- arcbyte 5y ago
  You mean like this: https://youtu.be/eqvSJp-6qT4 https://youtu.be/eqvSJp-6qT4 Your points are well taken. The movie could probably have used a bit more teen angst between Paul and Chani or somebody else to help with caring about characters for people new to the book. I loved it because I've read the book and seen the other movie and TV shows, but I can see how it would come across a bit like Blade Runner 2049 where it had amazing visuals but could leave certain audiences bored.
  - Tenoke 5y ago
    It's like 2049 in the sense that both overly rely on the admittedly really great cinematography, score and atmosphere. I enjoyed both but 2049 had a somewhat thin plot while Dune spent most of the movie on exposition and set-up as if I'm watching the first episode of a TV show.
  - 5y ago
tgv 5y ago
I hadn't read the books, and I was seriously underwhelmed. It looked decent, but that was about it. It was very slow, there was no way to empathize with any of the characters, as they were unlikable, and often disposed of after a short screen time, and the story was cheesy mysticism in a Game of Thrones sauce. Even the sandworms were not that impressive. On the plus side, I don't like Hans Zimmer's underscores, but I thought this soundtrack was almost completely excellent (except for the use of choir). I got completely downvoted for my opinion on Seveneves. This one won't fare better, I'm afraid.
- moonchrome 5y ago
  Music was the worst part of the movie for me. A lot of things were so over the top that it felt distasteful. It didn't have that Avengers style light hearted, not-taking yourself too seriously and intentionally over the top vibe - it tried to take itself seriously and yet had a bunch of blockbuster cliche moments. And the dramatic music braaping every time someone does anything stood out the most in this regard.
  - tgv 5y ago
    I liked how the music didn't succumb to "Mickey Mousing", where everything that happens on screen is accompanied by a change in the soundtrack, but instead was composed of (sometimes pretty) long lines that faded in and out. And no attempt to cover up lacking development with rhythmic distraction, either. It didn't result in memorable tunes, which is a pity. Over the top, probably, but mainly because it had been mixed too loud. The sound editor could have done that more tastefully. Still not as bad as TENET, although that's a pretty low bar. How much our tastes can differ!
    - throw0101a 5y ago
      > The sound editor could have done that more tastefully. An interview with Mark Mangini, the sound designer, with someone whose sound was used in Dune (for the desert mouse, muad'dib): * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtfzjehDg74 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtfzjehDg74
naasking 5y ago
> She thought it was boring. It’s missing a lot of smaller context and seems dull without it. Not just dull, but even confusing at times because it was too minimal at parts. The actual importance of spice and its qualities is only briefly touched upon, and I think the Bene Gesserit's political importance and their long-term planning and meddling was a little too underplayed. Those are pretty important elements driving the story.
- euroderf 5y ago
  Agreed - thus one can argue that the movie is aimed at people who have read the book. Without the background knowledge provided by the book, the film is in a limbo of much ado about nothing.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
MichaelMoser123 5y ago
i thought they were trying to stage a kind of 'star wars' set in the desert. They are probably planning for several sequels, that's why they had to stretch it a bit.... (at least the worms were fun)
- jon-wood 5y ago
  They've not really stretched it at all, Dune is a long dense book, and to try and do it justice in a single film would result in a confused mess. Just look at the David Lynch version, which even as a huge fan of the book I can't even begin to follow.
  - throw0101a 5y ago
    > David Lynch version, which even as a huge fan of the book I can't even begin to follow. What Lynch did very well was the feeling of 'old and decadent' for the society everyone lived in.
- drchickensalad 5y ago
  Star wars was inspired by dune
m12k 5y ago
I think it's also worth reflecting on how modern attention spans have shortened. Modern media has spoiled us with instant and constant gratification in our pockets. Dune, the book, was written in an era where it was still considered acceptable for media to demand something of its consumers, like attention, patience and so on - and the movie is a faithful adaptation of the book.
- gjulianm 5y ago
  I honestly don't like too much these kinds of takes. People still read long, boring books, still concentrate and pay attention to certain media... Responding to criticism that something is boring, slow-paced or whatever with the equivalent of "the youngs these days" is not too productive.
  - marcellus23 5y ago
    I think there is an argument to be made that movies have generally gotten dumber and plots more obvious. So when a film comes along that expects you to do a bit more work, I think lots of people find it confusing. (for example, figuring out that the reason no one uses guns is that shields only block fast things -- the former is unexplained, but easily deduced from the latter, which is reinforced many times.)
    - kevinh 5y ago
      The gun example is a bad one—that's not why they don't use guns. They don't use lasguns because they cause a nuclear explosion when fired against shields.
      - MayeulC 5y ago
        Oh, and since you are the only one mentioning it on this page, one of my pet peeve with the movie is: why so freaking many lasers? Two is two more than we should have seen, I think. (the other pet peeve is that they don't draw blood every time we see a crysknife).
      - 5y ago
dfxm12 5y ago
I haven't read the book. I thought the plot was easy to follow and exciting enough. I don't know what really needed a more thorough explanation. I mean, the Butlerian Jihad certainly sounds interesting, but now that I know about it, my opinion or understanding of the plot hasn't really changed. In general I'm not a fan of the type of movie where everyone knows there's going to be a sequel so the emotional climax of the movie is closer to the middle and there's not too much suspense towards the end. So, overall, I just thought the ending was pretty dull.
atoav 5y ago
My girlfriend didn't read the book, but liked the movie a lot. "Finally a movie that takes its time to show as a different world instead of taking it as a backdrop of the same stories", she said. And I am with her. I like movies that just want to take me to a place instead of firing me up emotionally with cheap tricks while using the scenario as an exchangable backdrop.
- neither_color 5y ago
  I've never read the book and what you and your gf say is exactly what I thought while watching it. I was really immersed by the world-building and visually delighted the whole time. I don't even remember some of what the plot was about, I dont care.
- inanutshellus 5y ago
  My wife, after the movie: "SooOooo I wasn't excited to see this movie. I think I might have seen the old one, but I don't remember liking it. This movie though was amazing and now I'm just mad I have to wait two years to see the sequel!"
- q1w2 5y ago
  The 1984 movie did a better job of efficiently explaining what was happening. Two good examples are the pain box and the slow blade penetrate the shield in training. While the new Dune movie mention how they work - they just do a bad job of communicating that as effectively as the 1984 movie. To really appreciate this movie, you either needed to have read the book, or watched the prior movie (1984), or the TV mini-series'. They also introduced things from the book, like how to walk in sand, and the visions of the jihad, but describe them poorly, and leave the viewer wondering why they're even mentioned. It's just badly written. ...but there were other issues with the movie as well. Long useless sequences of sand visuals that added nothing to the story - and that annoying scream sound that left our eardrums ringing, for no other purpose than to try to make the audience feel like an uneventful scene is somehow important to the plot. A lot of people complained about the voice-overs in the 1984 film but they actually added a lot of value by efficiently introducing concepts to the viewer succinctly - especially the intro in the beginning which sets up the universe. The best take on this universe after the book is actually SciFi channel mini-series in 2000 and then the Children of Dune in 2008.
pyrrhotech 5y ago
I felt it had the opposite problem of the Hobbit trilogy. Too much cramped into 2 movies and left out too much context and supporting details that would make the world more interesting and understandable to viewers. I think it would have been better as a 10 episode series or movie trilogy instead of 2 movies.
petercooper 5y ago
The movie could have certainly done with a video game-esque five minute opening monologue explaining everything. I had to brief family members on the overall setting and basic plot because the movie assumes a lot of knowledge, I felt (particularly around who the Bene Gesserit are). FWIW, I have never read the book, but had seen the Lynch movie and was obsessed with the video game which doesn't really cover a lot of the plot either, but I think does a good job of setting.
colechristensen 5y ago
What it lacked was subtle details, and pacing. Watch The Godfather or an episode of The Simpsons, both examples of fitting in an enormous amount of detail without being rushed. There was a lot of detail missing that could have been there.
- nirav72 5y ago
  The Godfather re-cut to be in chronological order was even better. I believe it was on HBO.
brightball 5y ago
My son read the book and we went to see the movie. He liked it a lot but I was definitely thinking that it would be tough for anyone else.
marcellus23 5y ago
I don't buy this at all. I never read the book and found the movie easy to follow. I certainly buy that some people were confused, but I don't agree that means the movie was poorly made. Some things are just not for certain people. It's a work of art as much as a product — it should not be designed-by-committee to achieve maximum popularity.
make3 5y ago
I feel like it was pretty obvious what was going on, and I didn't read the book
goldenkey 5y ago
I watched it last night. It was a bit of a letdown for me. After 2.5 hours, the movie ended and I know I might be in the minority but I feel like the movie was ending at a beginning, it could have been longer. I suppose the cheap cliffhanger ending is meant to sell tickets to the sequels. But it felt even cheaper than Star Wars in terms of summation and closure. I felt like after that much investment of time, the ending could have been a little bit more resolved rather than "New Beginning!" vibes. The movie isn't really notable in my mind without seeing the sequels. I surmise that once sequels come out, watching them back to back, will be a satisfying experience. But this movie, in isolation, is a bit too void of what a movie ought to contain.
- scrollaway 5y ago
  This wasn’t a cliffhanger ending, it really wasn’t. There were so many points where the movie could have ended on a cliffhanger and it didn’t, instead it ended on a propre “pause”: things aren’t over but they’re also not left hanging. I was really afraid of it ending like the golden compass movie’s cliffhanger which left me with such an awful taste in my mouth and then didn’t get a sequel…
  - goldenkey 5y ago
    I suppose it wasn't a cliffhanger, but it just felt a bit like the start of a movie rather than the end. Star Wars has done that a bit, but I felt like Dune did it in more of a suave, almost perfect way, which kind of made me sad there wasn't another 2 and a half hours to watch. I suppose I'll wait for the sequel. Reflecting back on the movie, I really like the aspect of surviving in a desert, and flowing, becoming one with the Dao, the energy of the universe. It was really well done, and even if that's the only thing the movie provided, that is a sage adage that I will hold in my heart for years to come.
klik99 5y ago
My wife, who usually hates Sci-Fi, had the opposite reaction - I thought they did a great job keeping the feeling while streamlining things - disappointed by the lack of politics but think it was the right decision. It somehow felt like a rich world despite not getting into the details. The glaring omission, especially given our current zeitgeist, was the subversion of sci fi tropes, the questionable "white saviour" elements, the environmental concerns and treatment of the native people, but those come up more in the second part of the book anyway, so I'm holding on to hope that will be explored more in the second movie
thrower123 5y ago
I'm really not sure who they made the movie for. There's not really enough exposition to explain why anything is happening if you did not read the books, yet it feels very repetitive if you are a book fiend. The best explanation of watching the movie I've seen is a friend who felt they were reciting a litany as they watched each scene. "And now Gurney trains Paul in shield-fighting" "and now the Gom Jabbar" "and now the Shadout Mapes presents the Crysknife" "Now the Duke rescues the workers from the sandcrawler" "Now Paul and his mother face the worm", etc. I'll give the movie this, it hit pretty much all the episodes that one would expect.
fumar 5y ago
I watched it with folks new to Dune and they were dazzled by the art. It’s an engrossing film to watch on the big screen and I loved the feeling of being dumped into this fictional world. It is a direct contrast to the modern humanity instilled into all of the Marvel or similar films that use our society as a cultural backdrop for fictional future or alien worlds. In that vein, it is similar to the book. The book doesn’t provide immediate context. The reader collects the puzzle pieces over hundreds of pages.
drewcoo 5y ago
Also true of Also true of Lynch's version. Also true of Jodorowsky's abortive attempt. Is it that Dune books seem slow-moving? Is it the concepts being difficult to visualize? Also, are Dune and Don Quixote both cursed to never quite make satisfying films?

mzaccari 5y ago

I had tried to get into Dune many years ago, but found it hard to keep track of all that was going on. I wish I had pushed through, because I'm now enthralled by the Dune universe. I can say that the movie helped lay a foundation for me that has made the book far more enjoyable - to the point where I'm almost finished with the audiobook after only starting it last week!

globular-toast 5y ago
One thing that helped me with Dune is using the glossary at the back of the book. It's a bit odd and some might say due to bad writing, but he will just start using a word without ever letting you know what it means. The only way to know is from the glossary. Also, don't be afraid to consult a dictionary in some cases. I remember the word "qanat" appears a lot in some of the later books and I just ploughed through without even know what it was. Just look things up and you'll get more out of it.
- toyg 5y ago
  > some might say due to bad writing Anybody can come up with a new language that happily condenses the concepts you need to have in your new world, but forcing the reader to read an encyclopedia to decipher it is just lazy. You are meant to weave the explanations in your narrative, so the reader picks them up seamlessly. It's a bit like building a UI that is unusable without reading a boring manual.
  - globular-toast 5y ago
    > You are meant to There are no rules except "be good". I've thoroughly enjoyed Dune every time I've read it and it had quite a profound effect on me as a youngster. There are countless thousands just like me and you can't argue with that really. > It's a bit like building a UI that is unusable without reading a boring manual. Well, I think the purpose of a UI is slightly different to that of a novel. One exists to be useful while other exists to be enjoyable. If it's useful it's useful. Doesn't matter if it requires a manual or not.
    - toyg 5y ago
      McDonald's is also enjoyable and enjoyed by millions, it's still not "good food"; as I always say, that sort of reasoning leads to us eating shit because billions of flies cannot be wrong (cit). The best part of Dune is clearly the worldbuilding rather than the prose. Yes it can be used, and the software is great when you get to know how it works, but there is a learning curve that similar software does not have.
      - long_time_gone 5y ago
        Your reasoning contains the same assumptions, just in the other direction. You seem to be saying that if masses of people enjoy something it must be “bad” on some level.
        toyg 5y ago
        Nope, not said that anywhere above; just that popularity is not necessarily the be-all and end-all of literary quality.
        long_time_gone 5y ago
        > I always say, that sort of reasoning leads to us eating shit because billions of flies cannot be wrong (cit). You didn't make the distinction "is not necessarily" in your first comment. That changes the connotation.
- jltsiren 5y ago
  If you read foreign literature, every single novel is like that anyway. Except that there is no convenient glossary at the back explaining the unfamiliar words.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  > some might say due to bad writing My favorite part of "A Clockwork Orange" (book) was that very thing: the narrator just talking naturally and leaving the reader to figure out the slang (Nadsat). There too was a glossary in the back of the book but I soon dispensed with it and found I could get the gist of the slang well enough to just roll with it.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    This. You get the hang of the Clockwork Orange slang after a few pages, because the author is so slick with it.

sundance_X 5y ago

Your partner thought Hans Zimmer, indisputably maker of the epic sound that made inception great, was boring? Let's pause here...

ModernMech 5y ago

Totally agree. I watched it with my family and my mom was confused at times. I had to stop and explain things like the Mentats and the real power of the Spacing Guild. I don’t think they make clear in the movie just how important this spice thing is. She also thought the Baron was the Emporer for most of the movie. I don’t know why the emperor and Irulan don’t make an appearance. After the movie was over she said she liked it but she wasn’t sure if she could follow without my help.

phonypc 5y ago
The emperor and Irulan only make a personal appearance at the end of the book, don't they? During events the movie presumably doesn't cover at all?
- ModernMech 5y ago
  I just thought exposition wise it might have been good. They talk about this Emperor a lot and he just never appears on screen.
- jon-wood 5y ago
  They only make an appearance then, but throughout the book Irulan's commentary is interweaved between chapters. It feels like that could have been a useful path for a bit of exposition on the things that aren't explicitly covered in the plot.
VortexDream 5y ago
I feel like the 80s movie does this far better. For all its flaws. It makes an effort to show the emperor and the spacing guild and impress upon the viewer how involved and how powerful (or in the case of the spacing guild, how alien) they are. Might be interesting to see how they respond to the old movie by comparison.
- bena 5y ago
  Yeah, the best version of Dune is somewhere between Villeneuve's version and Lynch's version. Villeneuve left out too much and Lynch compromised too much.

throw0101a 5y ago

> I was telling my partner that I felt the movie was meant for people who read the book. She thought it was boring. A lot of people who read the book because of the upcoming movie also thought the book was boring. I think that most people expect character-driven narrative, and so when you get a work that leans more towards ideas and concepts, people tune out. Edit: I think is also why the movie Sicario (also by Villeneuve) threw some people off, because it didn't operate with a "normal" narrative: SPOILER {the roles of main character and protagonist were two different people}: * https://thebarkbitesback.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/going-deep-inside-the-underbelly-of-sicario/ https://thebarkbitesback.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/going-deep...

vetinari 5y ago
On the other hand, if you take a book that leans towards ideas and concepts, and you make series with character-driver narrative out of it so people won't tune out, you get something like Foundation, that has only title and names of places and characters common with the original. All that made the original interesting is lost.
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  Oh yes. The Foundation series would stand fine on its own, but it's pretty much the exact opposite of everything the book trilogy was, making the experience extremely jarring to me (I've read the books somewhat recently, so they were fresh in my mind when I started watching).
- ericmay 5y ago
  I agree. Having read the books of both series though and coming in with the expectation that I just wanted interesting science fiction I’ve been pleased with both the Dune movie and the Foundation series.
- throw0101a 5y ago
  > All that made the original interesting is lost. The economist Paul Krugman of all people wrote a 'review' of each basically saying the same thing: > “Foundation” might seem unfilmable. It mostly involves people talking, and its narrative inverts the hero-saves-the-universe theme that burns many acres of CGI every year. The story spans centuries; in each episode everything appears to be on the brink, and it seems as if only desperate efforts by the protagonists can save the day. But after each crisis, Seldon’s prerecorded hologram appears to explain to everyone what just happened and why the successful resolution was inevitable given the laws of history. > So how does the Apple TV series turn this into a visually compelling tale? It doesn’t. What it does instead is remake “Star Wars” under another name. There are indispensable heroes, mystical powers, even a Death Star. These aren’t necessarily bad things to include in a TV series, but they’re completely antithetical to the spirit of Asimov’s writing. Pretending that this series has anything to do with the “Foundation” novels is fraudulent marketing, and I’ve stopped watching. * https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/26/opinion/dune-movie-foundation-series.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/26/opinion/dune-movie-founda... * https://archive.md/YFxVi https://archive.md/YFxVi

goldcd 5y ago

Agreed - I think the film did a great job of touching on stuff, without wasting time with exposition of it. Been enjoying the various in-depth reviews (and the linked story) which colour in the film's sketch a bit more.

627467 5y ago

I agree, I went by myself and left wondering how some one that didn't read the book would feel. Underwhelmed with the plot? Confused? But from my perspective the movie was a fantastic sensorial companion to the books. I felt it nailed everything (or maybe I was justed primed to accept this). Everyone must watch this in one of those simulator-4D screening rooms with vibrating chairs. I left unsure about the portrayal of Jessica and Gurney though. I found Jessica from the movie overly unsure and emotional to what I imagined. And Gurney too stiff.

nso 5y ago
I haven't read the books and went with a poker buddy to see it. After the movie I explained my experience to him like having been dealt 94o for two and a half hour straight, frustratingly waiting for something to manifest.
ModernMech 5y ago
> I found Jessica from the movie overly unsure and emotional That’s how I felt until she was slitting throats in the back of a thopter without a second thought lol
- tokai 5y ago
  She was like a mix of Wendy from the Shining and Ripley from Alien.
1ibsq 5y ago
I didn't read the book and really enjoyed the movie. Afterwards I didn't felt like there was a lot that happened in the movie, but that was not important. What I really enjoyed was the epic yet reduced aesthetics and the feel that this a bigger introduction to a hole new universe that could hold a lot of great stories. I'm thrilled for the following movies, but I don't really want to wait that long. So what I will be doing is start reading the books.
gjulianm 5y ago
I didn't read the book, didn't have any idea of the plot or anything. At about 1h into the movie (just before the invasion happens) I remember I thought "man this movie is pretty slow". Then the invasion happened (and it felt pretty rushed for such an apparently important moment) and then... it went back to being slow. The last half hour became unbearable knowing that nothing was going to happen and no plot lines were going to be resolved because it was part 1 of 2. Watching 30 minutes of a movie where almost nothing happens when you know there's not going to be a payoff doesn't feel nice.

scrollaway 5y ago

I didn’t read the book and I thought the movie was hard to follow but certainly not boring. I rewatched it (which I usually never do), and thoroughly enjoyed it the second time around.

residualmind 5y ago

For me it was actually a relief to see that not everything is being over-explained, a sickness many modern movies suffer from. Where is the fun if after the movie you don't talk about it, look things up, maybe even read the book?

pferdone 5y ago
As someone who loves Denis Villeneuve I did all that, although I felt "left behind" throughout the movie, because I didn't read the books. Visually amazing, but I was sad I couldn't appreciate it the way it could have been.
- robotbikes 5y ago
  As someone who remembers watching the Lynch directors cut at a 24 sci-fi marathon and had no clue what was going on I felt like this movie did a good job introducing the world building without dwelling too much on the details. The various factions made sense and if I want more there are a lot of books to dive into.
  - Freak_NL 5y ago
    'A lot' is painfully subjective in this case. Depending on the school of thought there is just the one book (Dune); the six books by Frank Herbert; or those, plus all the output of Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson. The implication being that not all books may appeal to everyone who enjoyed Dune (the book).
    - throwaway17_17 5y ago
      I am really looking forward to being able to spend some time in forums and with friends over the coming months (and years given how often I talk about the things I like over and over again) and see how the feelings for the Dune(2021) film correspond to peoples feelings on which books are a part of the series. I am waiting to see the film until this weekend, so I will have to take my own impressions as a baseline and look forward to discussions and arguments on Dune saving from a dreadfully boring winter.

skohan 5y ago

Yeah I had the same feeling. I watched the new movie, and was left feeling underwhelmed. Striking aesthetics, and a true visual and audio experience. But the first half of the film felt like all exposition with no plot, and the film didn't give me much reason to care about the characters so I didn't. But the movie left me with a feeling of wanting more, so I did some research about the world Frank Herbert created, and I actually watched the film again and enjoyed it a lot more with a better understanding of the relevance of what I was seeing. To be honest, I think that's a bit of a failure of the film that it doesn't stand truly on its own. It seems that they tried to be very faithful to the text in terms of what they depicted - which I'm sure was appreciated by Dune fans - but I understand the source material was quite dense, so they would have had to leave quite a lot of important details out. And I think one of the mistakes of the film was to focus so much about Arakkis. The film opens with the struggle and exploitation of the fremen over spice extraction. But I think it's the wrong focus. The thing that makes Arakkis interesting is the fact that the entire empire hinges on the spice production there. The planet itself is just sort of a back-water. I think it would have been better to start with a vignette explaining the importance of spice, to properly set the stakes for the rest of the film.

arcbyte 5y ago
You mean like this: https://youtu.be/eqvSJp-6qT4 https://youtu.be/eqvSJp-6qT4 Your points are well taken. The movie could probably have used a bit more teen angst between Paul and Chani or somebody else to help with caring about characters for people new to the book. I loved it because I've read the book and seen the other movie and TV shows, but I can see how it would come across a bit like Blade Runner 2049 where it had amazing visuals but could leave certain audiences bored.
- Tenoke 5y ago
  It's like 2049 in the sense that both overly rely on the admittedly really great cinematography, score and atmosphere. I enjoyed both but 2049 had a somewhat thin plot while Dune spent most of the movie on exposition and set-up as if I'm watching the first episode of a TV show.
- 5y ago

tgv 5y ago

I hadn't read the books, and I was seriously underwhelmed. It looked decent, but that was about it. It was very slow, there was no way to empathize with any of the characters, as they were unlikable, and often disposed of after a short screen time, and the story was cheesy mysticism in a Game of Thrones sauce. Even the sandworms were not that impressive. On the plus side, I don't like Hans Zimmer's underscores, but I thought this soundtrack was almost completely excellent (except for the use of choir). I got completely downvoted for my opinion on Seveneves. This one won't fare better, I'm afraid.

moonchrome 5y ago
Music was the worst part of the movie for me. A lot of things were so over the top that it felt distasteful. It didn't have that Avengers style light hearted, not-taking yourself too seriously and intentionally over the top vibe - it tried to take itself seriously and yet had a bunch of blockbuster cliche moments. And the dramatic music braaping every time someone does anything stood out the most in this regard.
- tgv 5y ago
  I liked how the music didn't succumb to "Mickey Mousing", where everything that happens on screen is accompanied by a change in the soundtrack, but instead was composed of (sometimes pretty) long lines that faded in and out. And no attempt to cover up lacking development with rhythmic distraction, either. It didn't result in memorable tunes, which is a pity. Over the top, probably, but mainly because it had been mixed too loud. The sound editor could have done that more tastefully. Still not as bad as TENET, although that's a pretty low bar. How much our tastes can differ!
  - throw0101a 5y ago
    > The sound editor could have done that more tastefully. An interview with Mark Mangini, the sound designer, with someone whose sound was used in Dune (for the desert mouse, muad'dib): * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtfzjehDg74 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtfzjehDg74

naasking 5y ago

> She thought it was boring. It’s missing a lot of smaller context and seems dull without it. Not just dull, but even confusing at times because it was too minimal at parts. The actual importance of spice and its qualities is only briefly touched upon, and I think the Bene Gesserit's political importance and their long-term planning and meddling was a little too underplayed. Those are pretty important elements driving the story.

euroderf 5y ago
Agreed - thus one can argue that the movie is aimed at people who have read the book. Without the background knowledge provided by the book, the film is in a limbo of much ado about nothing.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

MichaelMoser123 5y ago

i thought they were trying to stage a kind of 'star wars' set in the desert. They are probably planning for several sequels, that's why they had to stretch it a bit.... (at least the worms were fun)

jon-wood 5y ago
They've not really stretched it at all, Dune is a long dense book, and to try and do it justice in a single film would result in a confused mess. Just look at the David Lynch version, which even as a huge fan of the book I can't even begin to follow.
- throw0101a 5y ago
  > David Lynch version, which even as a huge fan of the book I can't even begin to follow. What Lynch did very well was the feeling of 'old and decadent' for the society everyone lived in.
drchickensalad 5y ago
Star wars was inspired by dune

m12k 5y ago

I think it's also worth reflecting on how modern attention spans have shortened. Modern media has spoiled us with instant and constant gratification in our pockets. Dune, the book, was written in an era where it was still considered acceptable for media to demand something of its consumers, like attention, patience and so on - and the movie is a faithful adaptation of the book.

gjulianm 5y ago
I honestly don't like too much these kinds of takes. People still read long, boring books, still concentrate and pay attention to certain media... Responding to criticism that something is boring, slow-paced or whatever with the equivalent of "the youngs these days" is not too productive.
- marcellus23 5y ago
  I think there is an argument to be made that movies have generally gotten dumber and plots more obvious. So when a film comes along that expects you to do a bit more work, I think lots of people find it confusing. (for example, figuring out that the reason no one uses guns is that shields only block fast things -- the former is unexplained, but easily deduced from the latter, which is reinforced many times.)
  - kevinh 5y ago
    The gun example is a bad one—that's not why they don't use guns. They don't use lasguns because they cause a nuclear explosion when fired against shields.
    - MayeulC 5y ago
      Oh, and since you are the only one mentioning it on this page, one of my pet peeve with the movie is: why so freaking many lasers? Two is two more than we should have seen, I think. (the other pet peeve is that they don't draw blood every time we see a crysknife).
    - 5y ago

dfxm12 5y ago

I haven't read the book. I thought the plot was easy to follow and exciting enough. I don't know what really needed a more thorough explanation. I mean, the Butlerian Jihad certainly sounds interesting, but now that I know about it, my opinion or understanding of the plot hasn't really changed. In general I'm not a fan of the type of movie where everyone knows there's going to be a sequel so the emotional climax of the movie is closer to the middle and there's not too much suspense towards the end. So, overall, I just thought the ending was pretty dull.

atoav 5y ago

My girlfriend didn't read the book, but liked the movie a lot. "Finally a movie that takes its time to show as a different world instead of taking it as a backdrop of the same stories", she said. And I am with her. I like movies that just want to take me to a place instead of firing me up emotionally with cheap tricks while using the scenario as an exchangable backdrop.

neither_color 5y ago
I've never read the book and what you and your gf say is exactly what I thought while watching it. I was really immersed by the world-building and visually delighted the whole time. I don't even remember some of what the plot was about, I dont care.
inanutshellus 5y ago
My wife, after the movie: "SooOooo I wasn't excited to see this movie. I think I might have seen the old one, but I don't remember liking it. This movie though was amazing and now I'm just mad I have to wait two years to see the sequel!"
q1w2 5y ago
The 1984 movie did a better job of efficiently explaining what was happening. Two good examples are the pain box and the slow blade penetrate the shield in training. While the new Dune movie mention how they work - they just do a bad job of communicating that as effectively as the 1984 movie. To really appreciate this movie, you either needed to have read the book, or watched the prior movie (1984), or the TV mini-series'. They also introduced things from the book, like how to walk in sand, and the visions of the jihad, but describe them poorly, and leave the viewer wondering why they're even mentioned. It's just badly written. ...but there were other issues with the movie as well. Long useless sequences of sand visuals that added nothing to the story - and that annoying scream sound that left our eardrums ringing, for no other purpose than to try to make the audience feel like an uneventful scene is somehow important to the plot. A lot of people complained about the voice-overs in the 1984 film but they actually added a lot of value by efficiently introducing concepts to the viewer succinctly - especially the intro in the beginning which sets up the universe. The best take on this universe after the book is actually SciFi channel mini-series in 2000 and then the Children of Dune in 2008.

pyrrhotech 5y ago

I felt it had the opposite problem of the Hobbit trilogy. Too much cramped into 2 movies and left out too much context and supporting details that would make the world more interesting and understandable to viewers. I think it would have been better as a 10 episode series or movie trilogy instead of 2 movies.

petercooper 5y ago

The movie could have certainly done with a video game-esque five minute opening monologue explaining everything. I had to brief family members on the overall setting and basic plot because the movie assumes a lot of knowledge, I felt (particularly around who the Bene Gesserit are). FWIW, I have never read the book, but had seen the Lynch movie and was obsessed with the video game which doesn't really cover a lot of the plot either, but I think does a good job of setting.

colechristensen 5y ago

What it lacked was subtle details, and pacing. Watch The Godfather or an episode of The Simpsons, both examples of fitting in an enormous amount of detail without being rushed. There was a lot of detail missing that could have been there.

nirav72 5y ago
The Godfather re-cut to be in chronological order was even better. I believe it was on HBO.

brightball 5y ago

My son read the book and we went to see the movie. He liked it a lot but I was definitely thinking that it would be tough for anyone else.

marcellus23 5y ago

I don't buy this at all. I never read the book and found the movie easy to follow. I certainly buy that some people were confused, but I don't agree that means the movie was poorly made. Some things are just not for certain people. It's a work of art as much as a product — it should not be designed-by-committee to achieve maximum popularity.

make3 5y ago

I feel like it was pretty obvious what was going on, and I didn't read the book

goldenkey 5y ago

I watched it last night. It was a bit of a letdown for me. After 2.5 hours, the movie ended and I know I might be in the minority but I feel like the movie was ending at a beginning, it could have been longer. I suppose the cheap cliffhanger ending is meant to sell tickets to the sequels. But it felt even cheaper than Star Wars in terms of summation and closure. I felt like after that much investment of time, the ending could have been a little bit more resolved rather than "New Beginning!" vibes. The movie isn't really notable in my mind without seeing the sequels. I surmise that once sequels come out, watching them back to back, will be a satisfying experience. But this movie, in isolation, is a bit too void of what a movie ought to contain.

scrollaway 5y ago
This wasn’t a cliffhanger ending, it really wasn’t. There were so many points where the movie could have ended on a cliffhanger and it didn’t, instead it ended on a propre “pause”: things aren’t over but they’re also not left hanging. I was really afraid of it ending like the golden compass movie’s cliffhanger which left me with such an awful taste in my mouth and then didn’t get a sequel…
- goldenkey 5y ago
  I suppose it wasn't a cliffhanger, but it just felt a bit like the start of a movie rather than the end. Star Wars has done that a bit, but I felt like Dune did it in more of a suave, almost perfect way, which kind of made me sad there wasn't another 2 and a half hours to watch. I suppose I'll wait for the sequel. Reflecting back on the movie, I really like the aspect of surviving in a desert, and flowing, becoming one with the Dao, the energy of the universe. It was really well done, and even if that's the only thing the movie provided, that is a sage adage that I will hold in my heart for years to come.

klik99 5y ago

My wife, who usually hates Sci-Fi, had the opposite reaction - I thought they did a great job keeping the feeling while streamlining things - disappointed by the lack of politics but think it was the right decision. It somehow felt like a rich world despite not getting into the details. The glaring omission, especially given our current zeitgeist, was the subversion of sci fi tropes, the questionable "white saviour" elements, the environmental concerns and treatment of the native people, but those come up more in the second part of the book anyway, so I'm holding on to hope that will be explored more in the second movie

thrower123 5y ago

I'm really not sure who they made the movie for. There's not really enough exposition to explain why anything is happening if you did not read the books, yet it feels very repetitive if you are a book fiend. The best explanation of watching the movie I've seen is a friend who felt they were reciting a litany as they watched each scene. "And now Gurney trains Paul in shield-fighting" "and now the Gom Jabbar" "and now the Shadout Mapes presents the Crysknife" "Now the Duke rescues the workers from the sandcrawler" "Now Paul and his mother face the worm", etc. I'll give the movie this, it hit pretty much all the episodes that one would expect.

fumar 5y ago

I watched it with folks new to Dune and they were dazzled by the art. It’s an engrossing film to watch on the big screen and I loved the feeling of being dumped into this fictional world. It is a direct contrast to the modern humanity instilled into all of the Marvel or similar films that use our society as a cultural backdrop for fictional future or alien worlds. In that vein, it is similar to the book. The book doesn’t provide immediate context. The reader collects the puzzle pieces over hundreds of pages.

drewcoo 5y ago

Also true of Also true of Lynch's version. Also true of Jodorowsky's abortive attempt. Is it that Dune books seem slow-moving? Is it the concepts being difficult to visualize? Also, are Dune and Don Quixote both cursed to never quite make satisfying films?