People are replying asking "Why call it Dune then? (If it does not have anything to do with the books)". That wasn't what I was talking about – some imaginary

People are replying asking "Why call it Dune then? (If it does not have anything to do with the books)". That wasn't what I was talking about – some imaginary filmatisation which has nothing to do with the book. I was talking about not staying true to the "author's vision". You can make a Dune movie in many ways. You can have the same characters, ornithopers and main events, while having a completely different vision for it. Dune is also a book full of ideas. You can play up many different angles – ecological aspects, loyalty to leaders, political drama, religious fanaticism, etc. – while still being very much a Dune filmatisation. And a film maker can put their own spin on any of those, or bring up their own topics which makes sense to treat within the Dune framework. Sure, for the money people, being a Dune filmatisation means people will see it because they know that Dune is a famous book (irrespective of weather they read it). But only die hards who have read the book (and have a very immature view of film as a medium) would judge it for how true it stays to the author's vision. The rest will be happy if it is a good movie. Note also that Lynch's Dune influenced the later books!