Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Turnaround, Jan 7, 2017.
Apparently, neither did anyone else, since the 1984 movie bombed big time at the box office.
Supposedly the first book to Dune is the best selling scifi book of all time. I think the Lord of the Rings is considered fantasy. Some people would call that a distinction without a difference.
Why did the David Lynch movie fail? I took my uncle along to see that movie (he was a scifi fan who wasn't really familiar with Dune) and he was lost. My recollection is that the movie rolled along so fast that unless your read the book you were lost. Some people complain about Sting playing the villain... I really don't think that was the problem.
If the new movie gets great reviews and good word of mouth out of the gate it might be successful. But if the hardcore fans walk out of theater in the first few days and can't enthusiastically recommend it to a friend I don't think it will get much traction by casual movie goers..
Just saw the "trailer tease," I guess, an announcement of the official trailer coming Sept 6. You don't see much, but the makeup look nice and costuming, although, not as good as.... just saying.
One question I have about this — the movie just seems to be called Dune? Not “Dune Part 1” or “Dune Book I” or “Dune: [Something]”? I would have thought they’d want to indicate it’s not going to cover the entire book.
I think that for both science fiction and fantasy readers, there indeed is a distinction.
The L.O.T.R., like the Oz series of books are clearly fantasy and not even close to science fiction.
I think that the science fiction universe, although certainly with dedicated followers is a smaller demographic than general fantasy.
Fantasy falls into a more general category with the public in general.
It is so easy to take a fantasy story and make a movie out of it. Think, Alice in Wonderland.
Where science fiction stories have much more selective audience. For that reason, I think it is much more difficult to get a studio to green light a science fiction story.
Asimov's Foundation trilogy is a foundation of science fiction, yet we have no movie?
Star Trek = Science Fiction
Star Wars = Science Fantasy
I never read the books but I did like the 1984 movie. I didn't have any problem following it and I thought the casting was excellent.
There are a couple of problems here. Science Fiction tends to run hot and cold in the theaters, peaking in general during the 1950's.
But also, the populatity of best selling science fiction stories are spread out over time, thinning out the audience.
By this, I mean that there is no recent critical mass of readership.
Two huge recently successful movie franchises, Harry Potter and the Twilight movies were based on the recent success of two highly selling series of books.
No doubt thst the Dune books wete the best selling science fiction books in history, selling millions of copies.
The Twilight series, small when compared to the success of the Harry Potter books, sold 100 million copies.
I do attribute their ultimate success as movies by keeping close to their loyal fanbase.
The question becomes one of numbers. At what point in adapting a book to a screenplay do we stick close to the original and its fans or do we follow the book in a more conceptional fashion that will grab movie fans who have not read the book?
I grew up as an only child in sn era that did not have VHS tapes, DVD's, HBO and streaming movies, so I read books.
If I grew up again today, would I have still read books like I did?
How many people between the ages of 10-20, read Dune since the beginning of the new millennia?
My take is that it had production and tone problems right from the start, it was half the movie everybody envisionned, whether on the producers' or the director's side.
And possibly David Lynch wasn't the best choice for director although they didn't let him realise his full vision for it.
It is an imperfect/unfinished movie but at least the production design is iconic to say the least. The new stillsuits don't look half as good as the originals IMO.
For the technology that they had in 1984 and even with their large budget, it was an expensive proposition.
I think they did an excellent job on the visual aspects, practical sets and matt paintings.
Yeah, the new Stillsuits seem like they are very klunky looking. I haven’t read Dune in quite some time, but I thought they were described as “slick” and concealable under clothing. I always pictured them as something akin to a wetsuit with some additional “pouches” where the water collected (And some “additional equipment” in the crotch area - but very advanced and small). The “pumps” were in the heels of the shoes, so I never imagined a need for that kind of bulk anywhere.
Any word on what time the Official Trailer is released?
From the official Dune twitter acct.
Here are the times for the premiere of the trailer today: 9am PST 12pm EST 5pm UK time 6pm Central European time
The trailer will be available on
YouTube channel and
Exactly. The new ones look like some videogame armors.
I guess the trailer will show if I prefer the other new design choices.
Well, they are certainly not being prompt....
Thought I would do something different and try to “tune in” right at 9AM Pacific (Daylight savings) Time, and nothing there. Yet.
Pink Floyd on the soundtrack? Cool!
Not bad! Intriguing even! PF for background was an interesting choice for the Trailer. Stillsuits (what they showed) weren’t as bad as what I feared. Hopefully the Movie differs from the the Trailer on Paul & Jessica’s initial flight through the Desert being chased by Shai Hulud doesn’t turn into what is implied in the Trailer.
Yeah, and appropriate in light of their involvement in the aborted 1970s adaptation.
It looks great but I really don't care for the song that comes in half way through, it breaks the mood completely.
Third time's the charm?
DUNE Behind The Scenes | DUNE Trailer Debut Event Conversation
I'm not sure the Pink Floyd sing lends itself to the material... and I'm a big Pink Floyd fan. Other than that I have to say that it looks better than I thought it would.
I thought the use of Pink Floyd was dumb, and if the idea was to give a cute little callout to Jodorowsky it was even dumber. The whole thing looked very generic. (To be fair, I think trailers do that to almost any film.)
Sorry but it looks kinda lame. DL's version may have been a narrative mess but it was visually outstanding. This looks more like the Twilight version. I'm sure it will be huge as a result. Being a little judgy, I know, but a preview should whet the appetite and this does not.
Twilight? I got more of a Game Of Thrones vibe.
Well I didnt see Game of Thrones. Someone else called it Generic looking. I think that nails it.
Would you say it's......COMFORTABLY dumb?...
I don’t remember much of the original movie but as a Toto fan I have both versions of the soundtrack. This looks interesting though.
Separate names with a comma.