Dune (The 2021 Movie)

[Riedquat]

I found both the David Lynch film and the book to be rather unintelligible tbh. Funnily enough, I used to own a rather good Command and Conquer clone called Dune 2000 which did a better job of explaining the plot to me in FMV snippets. That and it had John Rhys Davies in it which is always a win.

Going a bit off-topic but arguably Dune 2000 isn't really a C&C clone, it's more of a remake of Dune 2, and it would be more accurate to describe Command and Conquer as a clone of that (or better a descendent).

All I've seen of the Lynch film are a few clips and Chuck's review. I found the book OK but it never grabbed me that much, the worldbuilding was interesting but didn't really grab me and none of the characters did anything for me either. Thus the new film isn't something I'll go out of my way to watch.

[Mabus]

Saw it. Excellent film. Probably the best film I've seen in a while. The ending is a bit off, but I guess that's what happens when the studio doesn't allow you to get a 3 hour movie.
Furiously waiting for part 2 now.

[Nealithi]

What I have seen. . .
The ornithopters look like someone that knows something about aviation helped design them this time. So while the concept is a bit dated, I see the improvement.

Jason Momoa as Duncan Idaho? From what I remember of the book and the other movie. That is a pretty big name for a small part, unless they changed the part.

Timothée Chalamet as Paul Atreides. Okay this one is me getting old so pardon this. IS HE TWELVE!?
Now that is out of my system, I do not know how well he can act. But he seemed alright in the few snippets I have seen.

[Madner Kami]

What I have seen. . .
The ornithopters look like someone that knows something about aviation helped design them this time. So while the concept is a bit dated, I see the improvement.

They're more "dragonflyers" now, rather than Ornithopters. But I was fine with that change. Makes more sense anyways imo.

Jason Momoa as Duncan Idaho? From what I remember of the book and the other movie. That is a pretty big name for a small part, unless they changed the part.

Duncan Idaho becomes immensely important later down the line, but is pretty inconsequential in the first book and is so in this movie as well. They threw a lot of named talent at that movie and I guess he had nothing better to do. Momoa mostly plays himself, which kinda fits with Idaho.

Timothée Chalamet as Paul Atreides. Okay this one is me getting old so pardon this. IS HE TWELVE!?
Now that is out of my system, I do not know how well he can act. But he seemed alright in the few snippets I have seen.

25. OG Paul is 15, so he's visually well cast. But Paul isn't just the 15 year old kid and there's the tricky part and why the previous adaptations always upaged the character. Paul, due to his upbringing and his genetic makeup isn't just a 15 year old kid and that's where Chalamet shines. He both pulls off the kid-Paul, as well as the awakening Kwisatz Haderach-Paul pretty darn well.

In general, most of the cast is perfect for their roles and the only actor I found unsuited was Rebecca Ferguson, which I feel is a visual fit but not much more, as nicely displayed by this quote from an interview:

[...]

"For me, it was very much a new world, which means I'm an open book, but an open book that will do research," the Mission: Impossible actress told Empire for the magazine's November 2020 issue. "I love learning new things. When I eventually started reading the book, I found it so complex and difficult, I didn't finish it. It was like doing a crossword puzzle: 'What's in the middle of a stone?' and I'm going, 'I don't know — a hard f***ing material?' and then it's like the letters in the middle of the word. My mindset was not there."

Luckily, Ferguson could rely on Villeneuve (whom she described as "such a nerd about this book!") and her co-star Oscar Isaac, who portrays Duke Leto Atreides. "[They're like] Tweedledum and Tweedledee," she continued. "I eventually sat down with Denis and said, 'I don't get the book. Can you please explain it to me as if I'm a child?'"

[...]

[Frustration]

Saw it. Excellent film. Probably the best film I've seen in a while. The ending is a bit off, but I guess that's what happens when the studio doesn't allow you to get a 3 hour movie.

There were a lot of parts present in the trailers that weren't actually in the movie; I have the sneaking suspicion that the Director's Cut will be something like four hours long. What we got was the Flash Notes version of the film.

[hammerofglass]

Saw it. Excellent film. Probably the best film I've seen in a while. The ending is a bit off, but I guess that's what happens when the studio doesn't allow you to get a 3 hour movie.

There were a lot of parts present in the trailers that weren't actually in the movie; I have the sneaking suspicion that the Director's Cut will be something like four hours long. What we got was the Flash Notes version of the film.

Honestly that sounds awesome.

[chaos42]

i felt it was ok, i am mixed on how i feel i have read the book so im not sure its going to hit all the parts that are important and since its a part 1 any complaints i have could be fixed in part 2 so im stuck on it. The best i can give it is its an ok movie its going to depend on the rest of the next one weather or not its a good or great movie or bad because of this.

Overall i did like the designs and style but im not sure i like some of the things they added and subtracted. Nothing really was a breaker for this movie but it just didn't really grab me the way the original did with its style and the sci fi channel one had a lot more details about the plot so im just unsure how i feel.

[TexasRed]

I'll keep this concise, I've seen the movie now, and I've read the books multiple times over the years and frankly I loved it. I think every decision that was made was logical and helped with the process of translating such a dense, heavy work of literature onto the screen. That being said I can't wait for a directors cut.

[McAvoy]

Gonna go see if tomorrow.

[Frustration]

I can't say every decision was logical. Many of them were. But some characters are present while their arcs have been deleted, which is illogical. Thufir Hawat in particular doesn't seem to have any purpose in this adaptation; his character is present seemingly only because he's in the books, but the part could have been eliminated completely from the adaptation I saw without losing a thing. [edit to add] Oddly, Piter de Vries has a similar problem: there's no real development for him, the commentary his role provides on the nature of rationality and its failure modes in the novel never occurs, and he's not important in any particular way.

Other characters have suffered for having parts of their development removed, especially Jessica - it's a major plot point in the novel that she's more driven and decisive than Leto, particularly once a revelation occurs (which I don't think does in the movie). Those of you who know the novel know whereof I speak. The only reason she doesn't dominate and control Leto is that she genuinely loves him - and this impacts other plot developments which now doesn't have as much foundation.

Feyd Rautha doesn't exist, presumably because it was felt that a character called "The Butcher" would be a better stand-in. But the original character is never seen in the novel, is explicitly intended as a sacrifice by the Baron, and exists only to make Feyd seem benevolent in contrast to his desperate attempts to produce the demanded melange. So all of the content related to Feyd - especially that the main difference between him and Paul was his upbringing - and the subtle political manipulation involved has been lost.

It's a very complex and subtle novel that's very hard to adapt. But I'm still hoping that there's content which had to be removed due to total length and we'll see in a Director's Cut.