|
Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? Outside of the story that lost me the dialogue was just constantly overly dramatic and boring as gently caress, can I get some conversation between characters that make them relatable and feel human? The best little bit of character building was the joke about the main character not gaining muscle. Outside of that there are no character arcs, everyone is the same as they were at the beginning except the dead characters who's deaths had no impact or bearing on anything. Maybe another viewing and some weed would help me enjoy this.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? Don't watch it again, just move on, you won't enjoy it no matter what you do with this opinion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 02:58
|
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 02:59
|
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZGJ3pGEuas
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:04
|
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? here let me help. you like weed right? wouldn’t you be upset if all the weed came from one planet and the new duke of that planet was messing it up and you couldn’t get your weed anymore?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:05
|
|
|
I know that its only the first half of the story but I would have thought people would realize something was up with all the "chosen one" poo poo around paul right around when he was having a mental breakdown in the tent over how becoming the "chosen one" means doing a galactic genocide.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:08
|
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? nah you're right, that's the movie. Being familiar with the book didn't enhance the movie, it only made me frustrated at all the rich texture the book had that was "streamlined" for the movie just leaving it feeling completely austere. But read the book because it's good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
Most of the movie left me really cold, and I'm uncertain why. I don't think it's short on characterisation, and I like the visuals and production design, the cast is great, but I'm just sitting here shrugging at all the big dramatic moments for reasons which escape me. The gom jabbar scene owns though. I either don't know or have forgotten anything of how the reverend mother will play into things after this, but that scene gives a palpable feeling that she's gotten more than she bargained for with Paul, and may even have just hosed up terribly by subjecting him to this. It becomes clearer as the movie goes on that Paul has some terrible destiny, and the gom jabbar feels like a stepping stone on the way to it. Possibly the real stepping stone is the conversation with his mother afterwards where he finds out he might be "the one" but the point still stands that the reverend mother has set something in motion just by being there. The shots of a mouse hanging out a way away from the action and the conversation about the date palms were pretty good foreshadowing. Big things are gonna be happening around Paul, whether or not he wants them to. There's a lot of rather blunt exposition in the film, so something a bit more thematic/metaphorical is welcome
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:16
|
|
|
i liked dune
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAlAnderson/status/1452011130151395335
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/bealoayza/status/1451594510706909200?s=20
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mindykaling/status/1452152617874898945
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:I know that its only the first half of the story but I would have thought people would realize something was up with all the "chosen one" poo poo around paul right around when he was having a mental breakdown in the tent over how becoming the "chosen one" means doing a galactic genocide. Also that the very idea of him being the chosen one has been deliberately planted on presumably multiple planets by a shadowy illuminati conspiracy
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Are you guys watching on a proper HDR display? The HBO Max stream looked fine to me compared to IMAX. Yeah Max stream on HDR tv. It's just better with additional saturation. Like quite a bit better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:37
|
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 03:52
|
|
|
fadam posted:What’s the reason behind cutting Feyd? I can’t remember if he factors in much in the first part of Dune They can introduce Feyd in the media hype before part 2 comes out, in the books the only thing he does in time line of part 1 is sit around sulkily learning how the Baron goes about his business. He's around the same age as Paul and his coming-of-age moment his 17th birthday when he manufactures an artificial assassination plot in the gladiatorial arena to make himself look heroic would be happening around the time Paul's learning to live like the Fremen. They could have teased him at the end of the first movie but maybe they're just holding him back because that's their publicity strategy or maybe they have had casting issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:05
|
|
|
sigher posted:Did I do myself a disservice seeing this without having read the book or knowing about it outside of name? I came out of this with a "meh" at best opinion and I was stoked since I love Villenueve, the visuals didn't even blow me away like Villenueve tends to. I felt like there was just so many concepts and names thrown at me it was just kinda hard to follow. I'm not sure what the story even is, spice is used for fuel, is thus valuable and people want to rape the planet for it... right? But why am I supposed to care for the people that do so? It seems like our lead and his race of white people are supposed to be good and I'm supposed to care for those white people instead of the other race of white people which happen to look creepy and thus they are bad. The latter race of whites only come off as creepy because they look like cenobites from Hellraiser but they share the same motives and the other group? Apparently? joss whedon wrote this
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:28
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/1452419299201662978
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:29
|
|
|
I've been seeing people say they didn't like where it leaves off, but it seems fine to me? Paul has accepted his role as the one, thus the main focus of part one has reached its conclusion. I guess it doesn't have the exhausting 50 minute long action scene, but I consider that a plus in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:30
|
|
|
It ended like the fellowship of the ring did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:32
|
|
|
I don't think Feyd will be in part 2. His character is pretty meaningless and serves no purpose other than to get clowned by paul, which is telegraphed from his very first scenes. I can't imagine they're going to waste screen time developing him in part 2.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:33
|
|
|
Put Sting in Part 2. In some background role. Very minor. No dialogue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:34
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:I don't think Feyd will be in part 2. His character is pretty meaningless and serves no purpose other than to get clowned by paul, which is telegraphed from his very first scenes. I can't imagine they're going to waste screen time developing him in part 2. With how little they developed Rabban in the movie, who in the book is actually more developed than Feyd, I can't imagine them introducing Feyd and developing him at all. There isn't any mention of the Harkonen's plan here, they're just generic bad guys, so unless way more screentime is dedicated to the Harkonen's (and who wants that, they're so drat unpleasant) it's just gonna be, hilariously, Chalamet vs Bautista. Hopefully I'm wrong, Feyd is supposed be Paul's twisted reflection, who Paul(ina) would have married if Jessica delivered a girl. He's important to showing how badly Jessica threw off the Bene Gesserit's plans. But I just can't see it happening, seeing how much other stuff was cut out of Part 1 in the service of the barest essentials of Paul's story. stratdax fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Oct 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:41
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/_c_perez/status/1452055361880535042?t=L4E3f_qwAfAItuxSwEniXg&s=19
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 04:54
|
|
|
I don't normally agree with Richard Brody but I'm in full agreement here. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/review-a-dune-sanded-to-dullness "It’s surprising how cheesy the new “Dune” looks. Directed by Denis Villeneuve, the adaptation of Frank Herbert’s 1965 novel seems less like a C.G.I. spectacle than a production still waiting for its backgrounds to be digitally filled in or its sets to be built. David Lynch’s version of “Dune,” from 1984, was a profuse film, teeming with sets and costumes as intricate as they were overwhelming, making extended and startling use of optical effects, and, in general, displaying an urgent will to turn the fantasy worlds of the story, which is set in the year 10191, into physical and visceral experiences. Villeneuve’s interests appear to lie elsewhere. He puts the drama and plot first, avoiding details that could be distractions and appearances that aren’t explained (or explained away) in dialogue or action. The bareness with which he depicts the story doesn’t resemble the shoestring production values of nineteen-fifties sci-fi cheapies, but it instead suggests merely a failure of imagination, an inability to go beyond the ironclad dictates of a script and share with viewers the wonders and terrors of impossible worlds. Like most fantasies and futuristic science-fiction movies, “Dune” requires a large amount of exposition to set up the rules of its universe. Lynch, in his “Dune,” hardly distinguishes exposition from drama, because he’s as interested in the what as in the why. His film establishes a phantasmagorical and nearly fetishistic relationship to the material world, to even apparently trivial objects as well as to gestures, phrases, inflections. He unifies his cinematic field, lavishing as much attention to detail—and as much time—on relatively undramatic scenes and background elements as on scenes of great moment. By contrast, Villeneuve (who wrote the film with Jon Spaihts and Eric Roth) appears embarrassed by the lengthy exposition that the story requires. Rather than revelling in it, he dispatches the necessary information hastily and dutifully, because he knows all too well where the film is going and why it’s going there. There’s a nexus of planets under the reign of a shadowy emperor, whose realm runs on a mineral known as spice. Both a hallucinogen and an energy source, spice is mined in the deserts of the planet Arrakis, which has been colonized for that purpose and, at the emperor’s orders, run by the evil House Harkonnen. But the emperor removes the Harkonnens from governing Arrakis and dispatches the benevolent House Atreides and its leader, Duke Leto Atreides (Oscar Isaac), to take their place—along with his consort, Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), and their son, Paul (Timothée Chalamet). But the Harkonnens and their cruel leader, Baron Vladimir (Stellan Skarsgård), aren’t giving up so easily, and this seems to be all according to the emperor’s plan to lure the House Atreides to its destruction. Arrakis is no empty desert. It’s inhabited by the Fremen, a people who have endured the spice colonies and survived by living underground in elaborate warrens, constructing advanced technology to sustain themselves in difficult conditions. The Harkonnens are ready to exterminate them, whereas the Atreidae want to make common cause with the Fremen and help them. Paul, young and untested, comes to believe that he is the Messiah, the so-called Kwisatz Haderach, whom a religious order of Atreides women, known as the Bene Gesserit, have been trying to breed, from generation to generation, and who will be the savior for both the House Atreides and for the Fremen. What’s more, Paul’s dreams conveniently include, as a special enticement, anticipation of a Fremen woman named Chani (Zendaya), whom he will love. Some films were made to be broadcast in several parts but nonetheless play seamlessly as a feature—Bruno Dumont’s “Li’l Quinquin,” for instance, which was made for French TV. The new “Dune,” which runs for two and a half hours, is a single film that plays like a collection of episodes in a series—which, in a way, it is, insofar as the movie ends with a cliffhanger, when Paul meets the Fremen and Chani says (more to the audience than to Paul), “This is only the beginning.” The film includes very short scenes of terse dialogue that slot the story together piece by piece while hardly allowing for dramatic development, let alone the characters’ full perspective on the action. Lynch’s version includes “inner voices”—internal monologues, in voice-over, that, despite being brief, are vastly texture-enriching and deftly add a haunting dimension of subjectivity. Unsurprisingly, Lynch also makes ample and frenzied use of Paul’s dreams and other internal visions. In the new film, these visions are mere snippets and flashes, hints and approximations. Paul is put to a terrifying and mortal test by a Reverend Mother of the Bene Gesserit (played in Lynch’s film by Siân Phillips and in Villeneuve’s by Charlotte Rampling). But, whereas Lynch draws out both the agony of Paul (Kyle MacLachlan) and the specific details of the tortures that he endures, Villeneuve hastily dispatches the same scene and merely winks at Paul’s afflictions. Villeneuve makes “Dune” as if he were his own showrunner, following not the dictates of a domineering producer but his own mandate—to deliver a simplified coming-of-age story and emphasize the cautionary aspect of destructive colonial rapacity and even more destructive Messianic delusion. His images are as rigid and hermetic as the illustrations in a graphic novel. His point of view is without a second level, without physicality, without visceral impact, without an unconscious. The movie’s stripped-down material world correlates with a stripped-down emotional one—narrow, facile, and unambiguous. The prime terror of life on Arrakis is the threat of attack from gigantic sandworms, which are said to grow up to four hundred and fifty metres long, and can swallow a huge harvesting rig in a single gulp. In Lynch’s film, their arrival is heralded by the eerie spectacle of short bolts of lightning sparking up from the sand. Villeneuve’s conception is monotonously literal—the sand bulges, and the maws of the creatures are shown in quick, devouring motion that’s closer to a disaster scene than to one of gargantuan body horror. What’s most startling in this “Dune” is where the sense of directorial passion—of effort, of personal commitment—does go. What Villeneuve appears to savor most is knife duels, fiery explosions, knowing gazes (between Paul and his mother, between Paul and Chani), and the pats on the shoulder that the young Paul gets from his father and his mentor, a warrior named Duncan (Jason Momoa). “Dune” ’s cautionary tale of a would-be savior reflects strangely back on the movie’s directorial psychology. Far from the excess, the hectic cruelty, and the extravagance of Lynch’s vision, Villeneuve’s is spare, austere, and almost savior-like in its commitment to a coherent and worthy set of principles. Perhaps the film’s very dullness, its withholding of visual and even dramatic pleasure, is Villeneuve’s version of virtue signalling. The prime victims of this austerity are the movie’s actors. Villeneuve has assembled a terrific cast of more and less familiar performers, but he’s given them little time and little leeway. Because the pieces of the movie are calculated to fit together in unambiguous arrangements, the performances are reduced to ciphers. Chalamet, whose theatrical specificity is both an art and a liability, is onscreen for much of the film and yet reduced to a mask of his own appearance. Stuck with a script that denies his character variety and complexity, he delivers a performance that never gets to take shape. What he can do with the role in a second installment may be the biggest cliffhanger of all."
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:06
|
|
|
Filthy Hans posted:They can introduce Feyd in the media hype before part 2 comes out, in the books the only thing he does in time line of part 1 is sit around sulkily learning how the Baron goes about his business. He's around the same age as Paul and his coming-of-age moment his 17th birthday when he manufactures an artificial assassination plot in the gladiatorial arena to make himself look heroic would be happening around the time Paul's learning to live like the Fremen. They could have teased him at the end of the first movie but maybe they're just holding him back because that's their publicity strategy or maybe they have had casting issues. they’re going to introduce feyd in an exclusive fortnite event during the marketing lead up to part 2
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:08
|
|
|
Filthy Hans posted:They can introduce Feyd in the media hype before part 2 comes out what...
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:15
|
|
|
sigher posted:Outside of that there are no character arcs, everyone is the same as they were at the beginning except the dead characters who's deaths had no impact or bearing on anything. Paul Verhoeven's Dune would probably be more overt about the Bene Gesserit's dumb poo poo but I love that posts like this exist and we get to read them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:I don't think Feyd will be in part 2. His character is pretty meaningless and serves no purpose other than to get clowned by paul, which is telegraphed from his very first scenes. I can't imagine they're going to waste screen time developing him in part 2. counterpoint: they do feyd-rautha from jodorowsky https://twitter.com/ldrinkh20/status/1308102389883441153 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:25
|
|
|
It’s true, it’s very austere and in that weird way, low intensity. Visually compelling while being anti-spectacle. BR2049 had a lot of the same energy. It’s fine, it’s part of the appeal in a way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:34
|
|
|
I do feel like it would be a challenge to take feyd's design in an interesting direction while sticking with the (bad) denis harkonnen style. If I wanted a generic callow pale goth guy, I would simply <insert your own end of the joke here>
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
What's up with Giedi Prime? It looked like a solid metal/artificial planet in the brief shot from space.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
Gonz posted:Put Sting in Part 2. Okay but I don’t know what good it’ll do 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:36
|
|
|
GORDON posted:They drink spit coffee though. That and Spider-Gimp were the best
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:39
|
|
|
Giedi prime sucked. These are the richest guys in the universe and they fuckin love to party, surely they would live inside a hr giger colon
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:41
|
|
|
fadam posted:What’s the reason behind cutting Feyd? I can’t remember if he factors in much in the first part of Dune feyd was the weird crawly thing the reverend mother made leave the room
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 05:47
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:here let me help. you like weed right? wouldn’t you be upset if all the weed came from one planet and the new duke of that planet was messing it up and you couldn’t get your weed anymore? Nope, I don't like weed that much. lol Josh Lyman posted:Did you watch this at home and not give the film your undivided attention, possibly by using your phone or doing other things? Because it sounds like that was your viewing experience. I was in a theater with 20 others. stratdax posted:nah you're right, that's the movie. Being familiar with the book didn't enhance the movie, it only made me frustrated at all the rich texture the book had that was "streamlined" for the movie just leaving it feeling completely austere. Will do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 06:22
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Also that the very idea of him being the chosen one has been deliberately planted on presumably multiple planets by a shadowy illuminati conspiracy and he knows that they expect him to fail
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 06:29
|
|
|
sigher posted:Nope, I don't like weed that much. lol This explains a lot
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 06:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:It’s true, it’s very austere and in that weird way, low intensity. Visually compelling while being anti-spectacle. Well said. This version is obsessed with the textures of natural materials - wood, stone, sand. Everything feels appropriately ancient. stratdax posted:"Lynch’s version includes “inner voices”—internal monologues, in voice-over, that, despite being brief, are vastly texture-enriching and deftly add a haunting dimension of subjectivity." Is this dude trolling, the Lynch voice overs are embarrassing 100% of the time. An admission of cinematic failure; we can't adequately show, or even tell via dialogue, so we'll tell via directly hearing character thoughts. quote:"Paul is put to a terrifying and mortal test by a Reverend Mother of the Bene Gesserit (played in Lynch’s film by Siân Phillips and in Villeneuve’s by Charlotte Rampling). But, whereas Lynch draws out both the agony of Paul (Kyle MacLachlan) and the specific details of the tortures that he endures, Villeneuve hastily dispatches the same scene and merely winks at Paul’s afflictions." Again, seriously? The Lynch version is like a student film in comparison - it exists because it's in the book, but nothing really happens story-wise for any of the characters. We just run through the beats (and slavishly book accurate dialogue) in rote fashion. In Villeneuve Paul actually masters the pain, turns the tables on Mohiam, and she falters, wondering what she's awakened. Literally every aspect of the new version is superior - performance, set design, cinematography, script, communicating Paul's pain, his relationship with his mother. And it actually serves a story purpose in Paul and Jessica (and Mohiam's!) journeys. Here, watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrW_8M3xJow Prolonged Panorama fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Oct 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2021 06:30
|
|