3 ms·

The thing with dune is the first 2 books are perfect for that sort of thing. Then it goes kind of meta weird. Not sure most audiences would be up for that. T

The thing with dune is the first 2 books are perfect for that sort of thing. Then it goes kind of meta weird. Not sure most audiences would be up for that. The last movie I was pumped for. However, I did not realize you could make dune that mind blowing boring. It was very nicely done, but kind of boring. I think that is because the book breaks one of the rules of movies/tv 'show dont tell'. Whereas the dune books are nothing but 'tell'. It is why a lot of Steven King books fall flat in the movies. That can be tough. As that can get rather dull. As you look at what the chars are seeing but you are missing out on their commentary. They tried that in the 84 dune and it just came out awkward.

cousin_it 4y ago
> Whereas the dune books are nothing but 'tell'. I still feel like the books could be "shown" quite effectively. For example, think of the first scene in the book: a child sees his mother bring in a mysterious old woman, who then puts the child through a brutal test. In the book, the psychology of that situation is sold through lots of dialogue and internal monologue, but on screen you can make it come across with barely any words at all, by acting and cinematography and music and so on. Similar for other scenes in the book, it has so much cool imagery.