DUNE - Looks like Hollywood's gonna try again...

Couldn't find one so I decided to start my own. There's a new film adaptation of Frank Herbert's sweeping sci-fi epic, Dune. I'm cautiously optimistic, hoping that it could possibly live up to the LotR films.

THE SPICE MUST FLOW!

What we know so far: Peter Berg's directing, and some n00b by the name of Josh Zeturner is working on the script. Paramount's the studio, and Kevin Misher, Richard Rubenstein and Sarah Aubrey are producing.

 

LINK PLEASE

 

Not a bad time for it. You know, it's just what we need. Another movie about people fighting for control of a desert planet called Iraqis, er, Arrakis, so they can control the oil, er, spice, but the the locals declare jihad, amassing an army of Fedayeen, er, Fedaykin, to retake the planet for themselves...HOLD ON A MOMENT!!!!!!

 

Peter Berg is directing?

No thanks.

 

Well yeah, the whole environmental, war for resources thing is sort of the stated slant of the whole thing. I'm not too excited about Peter Berg, either, but just look at Peter Jackson's pre-LotR resume...

 

Made me smile.

It has the potential to be good, great even, but making an epic movie into a <3 hour film is something that would task the greatest film-maker, and Berg is just competent. And who is going to play Paul? No "name" actor springs to mind.

 

Christian Bale.

 

Again, before LotR, Peter Jackson did really, really stupid movies.

Paul starts off the novel as a fifteen year old. It'd probably be a no-name.

 

===

 

Hm. I'm disappointed.

 

Wasn't impressed with the sci-fi channel mini-series. Not expecting a new theatrical movie to be any better.

 

Let's just hope Allen Smithee is not involved

 

I love all three versions of DUNE: David Lynch's 1984 theatrical film, the expanded Lynch film with the "Alan Smithee" credit, and the 2000 Sci-Fi Channel movie. The Lynch version is technically a superior film, but the S-F movie fills in all the little details and feels as though one is reading a novel; it's very immersive. I mislike the idea of another re-make, since it's been done already fulfilling the two extremes of possibility: one imaginative but inaccurate rendition, and one book-accurate but slow-moving rendition. The re-make must fall somewhere in the middle -- inaccurate and boring -- and I don't like the sound of that.

 

more CG worms and less 80s electric guitar themes.

I liked the Sci-fi version...it was well cast and did a decent job to staying true...it's biggest draw back wasn't it's pace...as anyone familiar with the book or even the 80s version knows it's not fast paced...the problem was the obvious limitations of scope and effects.

If they could have filmed the desert on location instead of in studios, I think the 2000 version would be lauded as a master stroke.

If they were wise, they would cling more to the sci-fi vision then the 80s rock-opera...and perhaps...make it a 2 parter.

 

I'm interested that Peter Burg is doing this - I like his style.

 

What's a "tentpole film"?

 

This movie had best be over 3 hours long, such as split up into 3 possibly, for it to even have a chance of working. Otherwise, pass it over to the list of movie/miniseries versions that have failed to live up to the awesome potential of the novel.

 

I really liked the sci-fi channel version. I'm down for a remake.

 

I for one do laud the SF Channel movie as a "masterstroke". Budgetary limitations do not undermine cinematic brilliance, IMO. The creators designed the sets to look and function like the sets of a stage play, and I think they work beautifully in conjunction with the atmospheric lighting. The writing and performances are topnotch, the characterizations note-perfect, the epic scope well-established and maintained throughout. If some viewers take issue with the sets, I would suggest that those viewers 1) have never seen a stage play, and 2) lack imagination.

If this new film were going to be a scene-for-scene transposing of the SF movie from the small screen to the big, from stage sets to on-location shooting, then I'd be all for it, assuming the casting was right. But that's not what's going to happen. The director is going to adapt the material, undermining the political intrigue which is is so much a part of the story, and inserting new scenes, combining characters, and all of that Hollywood claptrap that we've seen ruin book adaptations time and time and time again. I hope this project stalls itself out in the pre-production phase. The SF movie is the definitive version of Dune; there is no reason to attempt another.

It's a big-budget, highly-anticipated film that a studio hangs its hopes on for the season.

 

I dunno, I'd be open to a deeper, LotR style adaptation...

Frankly, I don't care how many adaptations they make. Everyone can try their hand, for all I care.

 

What's more, rather than assuming everything will be done wrong, we can look at it as one more chance for certain things to be done right. How's about a wishlist:

1) Ornithopters with mobile wings, that actually fit the definition of the word "ornithopter."
2) That one Baron floats in the movie may be an interpretation. That both Barons in both movies float is a misreading. The Baron is said to carry most of his weight on suspensors, the implication being that he walks around, but is too morbidly obese to walk around without decreasing his weight through antigravity.
3) Swords and knives. Hand to hand melee fighting is so much cooler to watch than gun combat, so why won't anyone just follow the books and have large scale melee combat instead of giving everyone guns. Weirding is a martial art, too. No blur effect super fast movement beyond what may actually be physically possible; Matrix fighting sans bullet time.

Further: the Fremen do use guns, and are good at it. Fremen gun kata, anyone?
4) No one sees Guild Navigators. Let's not see them, either.
5) Solid blue eyes that don't glow. How hard is that, really? In the Children of Dune miniseries, when Paul's eyes go entirely black from the stone-burner (how does that translate to being burned out?) that's closer to what extreme spice addiction looks like than glowing blue eyes.
6) The Voice has to not sound like a robot/demon voice. C'mon.
7) Let's not shy away from the Baron's pederasty.
8) The Fremen are space-Arabs. Deal with it.

 

A tentpole movie is a film that a studio invests heavily in when it comes to marketing. Essentially, the biggest film of the year for them, or one of the big ones.

 

Yes. Fremen Gun Kata would be fun.

 

Anybody got any ideas for casting? I think bringing Matt Kesslar (Feyd Rautha from the SciFi version) would be good as Feyd again, considering he did the best with what he had, and actually made Feyd a more believable person than Sting in a codpiece.

 

I doubt they'd reuse cast members.

Haley Joel Osment as Paul, anyone?