Film Dune

Mike Smalling said:
I still need an explanation for how they manage to a) Get a bunch of people on the same worm, including those palaquins, and b) How they manage to safely dismount.

But hey, it's a sci-fi movie. They are allowed some wiggle room.
Click to expand...


One person gets on a worm, they steer it so that all the others can hook on.

As for getting off, once they unhook their thingys, the worms sulks off back underground and they kinda slide/jump off as it's going back underground.

It's basic worm science.
 
duffer said:
One person gets on a worm, they steer it so that all the others can hook on.

As for getting off, once they unhook their thingys, the worms sulks off back underground and they kinda slide/jump off as it's going back underground.

It's basic worm science.
Click to expand...

Easy peasy, lemon squeezy. Silly of me to even question it.
 
Mike Smalling said:
I still need an explanation for how they manage to a) Get a bunch of people on the same worm, including those palaquins, and b) How they manage to safely dismount.

But hey, it's a sci-fi movie. They are allowed some wiggle room.
Click to expand...
With dismounting they usually ride the worm until it's tired out and stops, at which point they climb down with their hooks. They can do it when it's moving but it's a bit hairier. They do it since they're kids so I guess it's second nature.

Rewatched the first yesterday in prep for seeing the second today, there's one bit that's annoyed me from first watch when Jessica is first talking to Mapes, who asks her why the chrysknife is special. In the book, you see Jessica figure it out through etymology and bene gesserit stuff, but in the film you just get the literal "it's a maker..." before Mapes screams. I get that they don't want to include inner thoughts, but doing it literally and without context seems silly. Only a minor quibble, but I think Jessica suffers from that kind of stuff in the first film at least.
 
Even better the second time around. Everything after
Paul drinks the worm stuff is really fecking good. The scene where he wins over all the Fremen is chilling. Definitely on the Chalamet hype train.
 
Swedish_Plumber said:
Even better the second time around. Everything after
Paul drinks the worm stuff is really fecking good. The scene where he wins over all the Fremen is chilling. Definitely on the Chalamet hype train.
Click to expand...

Agree. Watched it for the second time yesterday as well, and that part is awesome.

There’s also something really satisfying about him telling the Reverend Mother to shut the feck up.
 
Mike Smalling said:
Agree. Watched it for the second time yesterday as well, and that part is awesome.

There’s also something really satisfying about him telling the Reverend Mother to shut the feck up.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was waiting for him to scream at her for a good portion of the film. It was really satisfying seeing her terrified.
 
Mike Smalling said:
Agree. Watched it for the second time yesterday as well, and that part is awesome.

There’s also something really satisfying about him telling the Reverend Mother to shut the feck up.
Click to expand...
Yes! That was a great moment, and felt like his coming off age moment as Jesus/Neo/Anakin
 
Swedish_Plumber said:
Even better the second time around. Everything after
Paul drinks the worm stuff is really fecking good. The scene where he wins over all the Fremen is chilling. Definitely on the Chalamet hype train.
Click to expand...
I was very impressed by Chalamet’s performance. I generally haven’t been convinced by him outside of his indie comfort zone (Bones and All, Call Me By Your Name etc.) but he was really good here.
 
And I also watched the first one last week to refresh my memory, they do briefly mention shields attracting and enraging worms. No word about the laser/shield interaction though
 
Mike Smalling said:
I still need an explanation for how they manage to a) Get a bunch of people on the same worm, including those palaquins, and b) How they manage to safely dismount.

But hey, it's a sci-fi movie. They are allowed some wiggle room.
Click to expand...

I just assumed if they can steer them they can stop them. Like riding a horse. Pull left rein to turn left, right rein to turn right, both reins to stop. The tricky bit is getting the rider on, after that they’re in control.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I just assumed if they can steer them they can stop them. Like riding a horse. Pull left rein to turn left, right rein to turn right, both reins to stop.
Click to expand...
Only way to stop them is tire them out. They need several worms to travel to 'the south', so basically tiring out/killing the first and jumping on the next until they reach their destination
 
hellhunter said:
Only way to stop them is tire them out. They need several worms to travel to 'the south', so basically tiring out/killing the first and jumping on the next until they reach their destination
Click to expand...

Surely they wouldn’t kill the Shai-Hulud? Blasphemy!

Except the babies for that sweet sweet worm juice.
 
duffer said:
I've re-watched the early 2000s Sci Fi channel mini-series in the last few days.

It's absolutely terrible. I can forgive the crappy CGI special effects but the acting and casting is shockingly bad.

The bloke playing Paul looks older than the woman playing his mum. The bloke playing the Baron is camper than Christmas, the Emperor has a thick Italian accent and the guy playing Feyd-Rautha is as menacing as a labradoodle puppy.

Also the costume choices are utterly mental.

Click to expand...


Watched Jodorowsky’s Dune again the other day, and came to the conclusion that albeit obviously fascinating, it would’ve undoubtedly been an absolute mess had it ever been made.

Aside from the fact that his ‘interpretation’ was diametrically opposite to the theme of the book - making the whole messiah thing even more explicitly text than Lynch’s (and in a really silly way) or that all contemporary evidence points to his stunt cast (+ his own son as Paul) delivering shocking performances, but also because whilst everyone rightly focuses on the incredible spaceship designs, the actual costumes all looked ludicrously naff and would’ve dated it spectacularly.
They look okay as cartoons but once you try to imagine them as real things in the 1970s it becomes pure camp. I mean granted it’s not quite as bad as the Karate Kid here, but it’s not far off.

Lynch’s version actually had mostly better art direction - with the exception of the Giger/Harkonnen stuff. But then Alien is a much, much better thing to have come out of all that shit if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
Something I’m a bit confused about though is guns. In the first movie they make a big deal about having special armour that stops bullets but gets pierced by blades. Hence they all fight with swords and knives.

In this movie there’s a bunch of inconsistencies

In the first scene of this movie a load of Harkonnen get sniped. Why doesn’t their armour protect them?

When the Freimen ambush a spice mining vehicle a load of them get wasted by a machine gun in a helicopter. So they obviously don’t have the special armour. In which case, why don’t the Harkonnen/emperor’s troops line up for the final battle with a shitload of those machine guns?

When bald Elvis is fighting in the colloseum his armour does protect him against a blade. He has to turn it off to make it a fair fight. What’s that all about?
Click to expand...
The shields do attract worms, but the potential explosion in reaction to energy weapons is the big issue. I remember the commander shouting "No shields!", presumably to stop a massive explosion killing them all, just before he got shot in the head. They were on the rock then, so worms an irrelevance. Pretty sure I'm not imagining the shout.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
The shields do attract worms, but the potential explosion in reaction to energy weapons is the big issue. I remember the commander shouting "No shields!", presumably to stop a massive explosion killing them all, just before he got shot in the head. They were on the rock then, so worms an irrelevance. Pretty sure I'm not imagining the shout.
Click to expand...

Hard to work out what they were being shot with. Was it supposed to be lasers?

It is annoying when movies don’t explain stuff like that. I know they want to keep exposition to a minimum but it just takes a line or two to avoid obvious plot holes (to people who haven’t read the books).
 
Vidyoyo said:
Just a thought about the thing which happens at the end of movie with Paul and the big fat fella.

Paul killing Baron Harkonnen and revealing his lineage is probably Villeneuve's decision to assert the idea he's now taking ownership of that house too. Jessica should technically inherit the role given her lineage precedes Paul's but I think it's heavily implied she won't be doing it. Doing it this way means that House Atreides and Harkonnen are subsumed into each other.

In the novel Alia is alive and it's her who kills him Baron Harkonnen. That's a pretty big change so I assume it was written this way for a reason.
Click to expand...

I think so too.

Knowing that Vladimir Harkonnen dies at the hand of Alia's Gom Jabbar in the book, I was surprised at first that Denis Villeneuve changed that part so Paul would be the hand of the Atreides' vengeance. I guess that you're right about the symbolic meaning of Paul taking ownership of the entire House Harkonnen while revealing his lineage to the Baron.

Nevertheless, it's a bit of a shame that we will have to wait longer until we see what Alia is actually capable of since she is not even born yet in the events of the Part Two.

That being said, I'm glad that Villeneuve removed the part where Feyd-Rautha was attempting to cheat with a poison blade during the ritual knife fight. The fight as it is in Part Two shows how much of a ruthless danger Feyd-Rautha was as a warrior and that it took everything for Paul to surive that fight.

duffer said:
They deffo used Stilgar as a little comic relief in the film (which wasnt present in the books at all).

Chani was totally supportive in the books. I think the change in the films is for the better, especially to show that Paul is not really a hero of the story.

As a big fan of the books, I am fine with the Stilgar change and think the Chani change is an improvement (but will be interesting to see what they do when they make the next film, if she and Paul are not together, there's going to be even more changes).
Click to expand...

This will be very intriguing to say the least indeed, but I trust Villeneuve as he never failed in creating the right dose of drama and he never leaves loose ends.

Paul will have to work really hard to win Chani back at least before the events of Dune: Messiah, but it makes plenty of sense in setting up Paul to be exactly that anti-hero. Personally, I enjoyed the change to Chani's character is great considering that she witnessed Paul's growth as one of the Fremen and that she heard everything about his nightmares. It is perfectly understandable that she would hate to see her man become the very same thing that he himself admitted he was afraid to become, especially since she hates the fanatism of too many Fremen regarding the Lisan al Gaib.
 
Last edited:
Anyone else just randomly shout LISAN AL GAIB!!! at random points in the day?

No? Just me then...
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Anyone else just randomly shout LISAN AL GAIB!!! at random points in the day?

No? Just me then...
Click to expand...

Just watched today. And I do.

As for the film, it's an experience in IMAX. Anything else for the first watch just won't do. Some of the most epic scenes I have ever seen.

Weakest part was Chani, for me. Way too forced, to the point of being annoying. Absolutely nothing to do with the book counterpart.
 
Really good overall, more changes than the first but they all seemed okay within the story. 4* again for Denny.
 
Mockney said:
Watched Jodorowsky’s Dune again the other day, and came to the conclusion that albeit obviously fascinating, it would’ve undoubtedly been an absolute mess had it ever been made.

Aside from the fact that his ‘interpretation’ was diametrically opposite to the theme of the book - making the whole messiah thing even more explicitly text than Lynch’s (and in a really silly way) or that all contemporary evidence points to his stunt cast (+ his own son as Paul) delivering shocking performances, but also because whilst everyone rightly focuses on the incredible spaceship designs, the actual costumes all looked ludicrously naff and would’ve dated it spectacularly.
They look okay as cartoons but once you try to imagine them as real things in the 1970s it becomes pure camp. I mean granted it’s not quite as bad as the Karate Kid here, but it’s not far off.

Lynch’s version actually had mostly better art direction - with the exception of the Giger/Harkonnen stuff. But then Alien is a much, much better thing to have come out of all that shit if you ask me.
Click to expand...
There was a shot of the Baron during the gladiator fight that looked influenced by one of those Giger pieces. For the most part I found the design choices quite dull but as you say, possibly prevents it getting so dated in time.
 
Mockney said:
Watched Jodorowsky’s Dune again the other day, and came to the conclusion that albeit obviously fascinating, it would’ve undoubtedly been an absolute mess had it ever been made.

Aside from the fact that his ‘interpretation’ was diametrically opposite to the theme of the book - making the whole messiah thing even more explicitly text than Lynch’s (and in a really silly way) or that all contemporary evidence points to his stunt cast (+ his own son as Paul) delivering shocking performances, but also because whilst everyone rightly focuses on the incredible spaceship designs, the actual costumes all looked ludicrously naff and would’ve dated it spectacularly.
They look okay as cartoons but once you try to imagine them as real things in the 1970s it becomes pure camp. I mean granted it’s not quite as bad as the Karate Kid here, but it’s not far off.

Lynch’s version actually had mostly better art direction - with the exception of the Giger/Harkonnen stuff. But then Alien is a much, much better thing to have come out of all that shit if you ask me.
Click to expand...

This is mentioned in the documentary, but Jodorowsky did a comic called The Metabarons that is basically his loose adaptation of Dune mixed with Greek mythology, and it is incredible.
 
Loved it. One of my favourite cinema experiences in a while.
#teamChani
 
Really intrigued to see where Chani's story goes from here and its a interesting diversion from the book.
 
I preferred the first film. I thought the Harkonnen were much freakier and more compelling. Wasn't a fan of the new villain - felt really underbaked and a missed opportunity. First one also had Oscar Isaac who is obviously great and he gave it heart. Somehow didn't connect to Dune 2 the same. Great spectacle, mind.
 
redcucumber said:
I preferred the first film. I thought the Harkonnen were much freakier and more compelling. Wasn't a fan of the new villain - felt really underbaked and a missed opportunity. First one also had Oscar Isaac who is obviously great and he gave it heart. Somehow didn't connect to Dune 2 the same. Great spectacle, mind.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with all of this.
 
It's probably been mentioned but it's interesting that Michel Seydoux worked for years to get Dune produced with Jodorowsky and he's the grand-uncle of Lea Seydoux.

I learned this earlier watching Jodorowsky's Dune.
 
Count me as another who preferred the first one.

The biggest issue for me was that the bad guys were just beyond pathetic and ineffectual, they seemed to carry a lot more menace in the first. I think Dave Batista's character arc for this whole movie was shout a bit, run away, lick a boot, get killed like a farm animal.

Likewise the big battle scene felt more like a victory parade than an actual contest. You got the impression that any random Fremen dude could kill most of the Sardaukar with one hand tied behind his back. There was more jeopardy, suspense and sense of triumph in the fecking worm riding scene than the pitched battle to decide the fate of the planet.

Still a very good movie, but I could have done with quite a bit less pissing around in the desert with the Fremen and giving the Harkonnens a bit more to do. However, I've not read the books, so maybe that would all miss the point entirely.
 
Saw it, loved it. Some of the best Sci-Fi put to screen. Denis is head and shoulders above the rest of the directing dross that still get insane funding these days.

But I 100% agree with Denis wanting to stop at Messiah. His approach to movies, the realism, the grounded reality of the world/universe just cannot put the other books to film. They are bat-shit wild. People will laugh them out the theatre. His style of world building and story development made Part 1 and 2 seems almost docu-series in it's approach. It all feels real.

I think dune as a book series works for a lot of Sci-Fi nerds because written text is interpreted in the brain, we visualise it internally, it's not shown to us. Children, God Emperor, Heretics, Chapterhouse are niche scifi. I think the messages from the series would be fantastic to see on Sci-Fi cinema, but say Denis was to take ownership of that interpretation onto the screen. He would have to fundamentally change so much of the series to keep in-line with his directing style and approachable to the general masses. Stopping at Messiah and then introducing the masses to the books as a whole is a win in my eyes.
 
Last edited:
Ubik said:
There was a shot of the Baron during the gladiator fight that looked influenced by one of those Giger pieces. For the most part I found the design choices quite dull but as you say, possibly prevents it getting so dated in time.
Click to expand...

I actually agree that Villeneuve has gone too far the other way. His aesthetic is a bit earthy Apple Store. With the exception of the Harkonnen stuff it was all pretty safe. Also not a massive fan of how washed out all the Arrakis stuff looked. I know it was a choice, but for all the talk of this revitalising proper cinema, it’s not doing much for those of us who think films should have actual colours in them occasionally. At least the lighting was suitably dynamic.

But yeah, Jodo’s would’ve dated far more like Flash Gordon than Star Wars (I’m not a fan of SW, but the production design is a huuuge reason why it’s lasted)

Iker Quesadillas said:
This is mentioned in the documentary, but Jodorowsky did a comic called The Metabarons that is basically his loose adaptation of Dune mixed with Greek mythology, and it is incredible.
Click to expand...

I’m sure it would look better in a comic than draped over a drunk slurring Welles or a stoned Dali and Jagger. Plus Moebius is a comics artist, so it’s the right medium really. The interesting thing about Dune thorough is that it’s a critique of the hero’s journey (and religion) It’s not just a standard chosen one parable. That’s the entire point of the Bene Gesserit. Otherwise they’re just… teleporting nuns?

I don’t see how you make a good adaptation that doubles down on the spiritual messiah stuff. However many cool spaceship drawings you do. It might as well just BE Star Wars, but with more inebriated actors and sillier hats.

This one does the actual thematic stuff really well, despite somehow having a lot less stuff from the book in it than Lynch’s version. Also all the acting is near universally great - (though I’d agree with those saying Zendaya is a notch below the rest, even if I did like what they did with her character)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.