![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dune Spoiler free review
Please note: This is a very subjective review. ;)
Question:Star Wars or Star Trek?
My answer: Dune.
So, me being me, I have done various little sub-headings, trying to organise my thoughts...
Me and my criteria for adaptations
I have known and loved Dune since I stumbled across it in the library as a teenager. And - in case anyone comes across this who does not know me and my foibles - I am a purist when it comes to adaptations. For example I have never watched Disney's The Jungle Book - I am well aware that it's a beloved animated movie, but I grew up with and absolutely adore Kipling's Jungle Books and, knowing the ways in which the animated story diverges from the original stories, I quite simply can't do it. <- Please don't try to convince me, it won't work.) Anyway, that's the level I operate at when it comes to adaptations. The more I care about the original, the more critical I am of adaptions. So no, I have never watched any other Dune adaptations, quite the opposite. (I saw one picture of Sting as Feyd-Rautha and have tried to bleach my brain ever since. *shudders*)
My viewing experience
Now Dune isn't just a book I love, I also re-read it regularly, to the point where my viewing experience was a constant comparison to the book, analysing the choices the film makers made and what scenes had been cut/condensed/edited/changed/added. And when I at times couldn't quite hear what the characters were saying I could fill it in from memory. I don't know how someone unfamiliar with the story would respond to the movie, hence the subjective state of this review...
Thoughts/observations
- Much like the LotR movies, this adaptation feels right; the look, the scale, the texture, the tone, the casting (ye gods, the casting is impeccable!) - Denis Villeneuve has said that he tried to recreate what he saw in his mind when he first read it as a teenager, to translate the whole world onto the screen, and I'd say he has succeeded.
- There is zero hand holding. The viewer is thrown into the Dune universe with barely any explanations of how things work. There are very very few of those scenes that often plague sci-fi/fantasy stories where the characters stop and explain everyday objects or concepts to each other - overall the creators just expect you to be able to follow/work it out for yourself. When there are explanations, a lot them fall on the show-don't-tell side, or it's someone having something new explained to them for the first time. Everyday things are just there. If you're a book fan it's thrilling to see how everything has been translated to the screen (shields, ornithopters, glowglobes etc etc), if you are new to the world I think it's easy enough to follow? There might be world building questions, but then you just need to go read the book! (Or you can ask me! I am an encyclopedia.) The downside is that there is a lack of context for a lot of things that hit hard when you know what's going on/the significance of the characters/situation or what's going on in their heads. I don't know how it comes across, since it difficult to define an absence that you can't see (that is, viewers unfamiliar with the book won't know what they don't know.) However the main story line is easy enough to follow and the plot unfolds in a pretty straightforward manner.
- Should you watch in the cinema? IMHO: Yes. It was created specifically for IMAX (both the cinematography and the music), and it's BIG. I would however like to watch it again on a smaller screen, because it's pretty overwhelming. I remember seeing the very first trailer - whenever it came out - and deciding there and then that this was a movie I was willing to go see in the cinema, even if I had to wear a hazmat suit. (YMMV of course... I realise that not everyone loves it as much as I do/does not want to risk going to the cinema/does not care about ~the experience~ to that extent.) But the sheer scale is amazing and worth the big screen.
- This is serious sci-fi. I'm not sure how else to put it... There are no weird aliens or funny robots or comedy side-kicks, and no quippy dialogue or 'magic' re-set buttons. It takes itself seriously, and does not poke fun at itself or the events that are happening. That is not to say that the characters don't know what kind of story is unfolding (being trapped by The Story is one of the main motifs of the book) and - to a certain extent - help shape it.
What's it actually about?
This is the question that stumps me every time and why I have never written about it, despite loving it so much.
So, have a few attempts at summing up:
"Dune is all about...pushing the limits of what humanity could be." This is quite possibly the best, most apt description of what Dune is, that I've ever heard. Well said.
A youtube comment to the trailer
Now despite being very accurate, it's not a very accessible description (without going into the world building etc etc), so here is a meme I came across the other day, and WELL:
That third tile down does a wonderful job of listing most of the major themes/story strands, whilst the meme itself is also HILARIOUS. (It might only be hilarious when you know the book, but trust me, it is very funny.)
ETA: I realised that I somehow missed off the MAIN thing. Go me and my million thoughts. The main story strand, and what the movie focusses on, is Paul Atreides, who is quite literally The Chosen One. It's difficult to explain further without spoiling plot points, but we get to see all him trying to deal with this, because how do you cope with it? What does that do to a person? What choices does he have in dealing with it? It is by far my favourite Chosen One story, because it's so complex. As to whether it's a White Saviour Story: Yes. Very much so. But one that interrogates whether this is actually a good thing... In one of the Appendices of the book (the one about the ecology) it's laid out how the Fremen are busy saving themselves until they become 'afflicted' with a hero...
Going back to the quote at the top, then Star Wars is basically a fairy tale (I think TLJ is the only film that properly tries to dig into other things, which is probably why it's my favourite) and Star Trek is very Utopian in its view of humanity. Dune on the other hand deals with all the complexities listed above and more, but takes them to extremes in the way only sci-fi can, digging into everything in great depth. The book has been called 'unfilmable' and to some extent that is very true - so much of it happens inside people's heads that getting it on screen is a fool's errand. But, this is a very very good try. It cuts off a lot details in order to focus on the main story, but then I'm not sure it could be done any other way, except for making a VERY long TV series. And a TV show wouldn't have the scale...
*hands*
I think the best way to put it is that this movie is a version of this story, and - although not perfect - it's doing a very good job.
Going back to what it's about then I think this is a story that has become more relevant than it was when it was written. The climate emergency/pollution is something Frank Herbert was very concerned about 56 years ago, and look where we are now! Ditto the way media frames people, the way information is used (and misused) to create narratives for very specific and subjective purposes, the way the 1st world treats the resources of the 3rd world, the way certain leaders marry politics and religion...
Basically, it's a story that deals with multiple different things all at the same time, which is not easy to translate onto the screen. So I will leave you with this from Dave Bautista:
“[The] world that [Villeneuve has] created is so far over my head. It’s so beautiful and different, and a lot of times dark and strange. But it’s something I never could have imagined. I just don’t have that mind. When I think about things, and when I think about directing, it’s all very contained, based on simple stories, a lot of times very simple and inspiring stories. And for someone to see something and create a world this big, a galaxy, a universe this big, it’s something that doesn’t comprehend, doesn’t compute in my brain. But it’s weird that he can do both. [Denis Villeneuve] can create these huge epic worlds and scenes, but at the same time just focus on the most simple things about a performance. He’s just a special guy, he’s got a special focus, and man, he’s a brilliant storyteller. Dune is special. I think people are going to be blown away. It’s going to be one of the most beautiful films that people have ever seen. But I think that people who are just diehard fans of Dune, of the novels, they’re going to be blown away. Because they don’t have anything, really, to reference in relation to the books. Now they will. They’ll have that visual reference. He took these characters, he took this world, and he’s taken them off the page and put them on screen. It’s epic”
- Dave Bautista (Rabban Harkonnen)
'They'll have that visual reference' is exactly right. That's what it is. <3
~~
Finally have an interview (basically spoiler free):
And the first trailer:
Accurate youtube comments:
Me: "You've revealed too much in the trailer."
My roommate: "What the hell is going on?"
Casual Viewers: Why is the kid so blank faced and emotionless?
Book Readers: Why is the kid showing too much emotion?
Of course I had to re-watch the trailer and now my entire brain is just going 'EPIC EPIC EPIC OMG I LOVE IT SO MUCH!!!' *flail*
They took what I saw in my head and put it on screen.
PS. There will be a Spoiler FULL review also, where I'll dig into things a lot more, oh yes. But that will take longer...
Question:Star Wars or Star Trek?
My answer: Dune.
So, me being me, I have done various little sub-headings, trying to organise my thoughts...
Me and my criteria for adaptations
I have known and loved Dune since I stumbled across it in the library as a teenager. And - in case anyone comes across this who does not know me and my foibles - I am a purist when it comes to adaptations. For example I have never watched Disney's The Jungle Book - I am well aware that it's a beloved animated movie, but I grew up with and absolutely adore Kipling's Jungle Books and, knowing the ways in which the animated story diverges from the original stories, I quite simply can't do it. <- Please don't try to convince me, it won't work.) Anyway, that's the level I operate at when it comes to adaptations. The more I care about the original, the more critical I am of adaptions. So no, I have never watched any other Dune adaptations, quite the opposite. (I saw one picture of Sting as Feyd-Rautha and have tried to bleach my brain ever since. *shudders*)
My viewing experience
Now Dune isn't just a book I love, I also re-read it regularly, to the point where my viewing experience was a constant comparison to the book, analysing the choices the film makers made and what scenes had been cut/condensed/edited/changed/added. And when I at times couldn't quite hear what the characters were saying I could fill it in from memory. I don't know how someone unfamiliar with the story would respond to the movie, hence the subjective state of this review...
Thoughts/observations
- Much like the LotR movies, this adaptation feels right; the look, the scale, the texture, the tone, the casting (ye gods, the casting is impeccable!) - Denis Villeneuve has said that he tried to recreate what he saw in his mind when he first read it as a teenager, to translate the whole world onto the screen, and I'd say he has succeeded.
- There is zero hand holding. The viewer is thrown into the Dune universe with barely any explanations of how things work. There are very very few of those scenes that often plague sci-fi/fantasy stories where the characters stop and explain everyday objects or concepts to each other - overall the creators just expect you to be able to follow/work it out for yourself. When there are explanations, a lot them fall on the show-don't-tell side, or it's someone having something new explained to them for the first time. Everyday things are just there. If you're a book fan it's thrilling to see how everything has been translated to the screen (shields, ornithopters, glowglobes etc etc), if you are new to the world I think it's easy enough to follow? There might be world building questions, but then you just need to go read the book! (Or you can ask me! I am an encyclopedia.) The downside is that there is a lack of context for a lot of things that hit hard when you know what's going on/the significance of the characters/situation or what's going on in their heads. I don't know how it comes across, since it difficult to define an absence that you can't see (that is, viewers unfamiliar with the book won't know what they don't know.) However the main story line is easy enough to follow and the plot unfolds in a pretty straightforward manner.
- Should you watch in the cinema? IMHO: Yes. It was created specifically for IMAX (both the cinematography and the music), and it's BIG. I would however like to watch it again on a smaller screen, because it's pretty overwhelming. I remember seeing the very first trailer - whenever it came out - and deciding there and then that this was a movie I was willing to go see in the cinema, even if I had to wear a hazmat suit. (YMMV of course... I realise that not everyone loves it as much as I do/does not want to risk going to the cinema/does not care about ~the experience~ to that extent.) But the sheer scale is amazing and worth the big screen.
- This is serious sci-fi. I'm not sure how else to put it... There are no weird aliens or funny robots or comedy side-kicks, and no quippy dialogue or 'magic' re-set buttons. It takes itself seriously, and does not poke fun at itself or the events that are happening. That is not to say that the characters don't know what kind of story is unfolding (being trapped by The Story is one of the main motifs of the book) and - to a certain extent - help shape it.
What's it actually about?
This is the question that stumps me every time and why I have never written about it, despite loving it so much.
So, have a few attempts at summing up:
"Dune is all about...pushing the limits of what humanity could be." This is quite possibly the best, most apt description of what Dune is, that I've ever heard. Well said.
A youtube comment to the trailer
Now despite being very accurate, it's not a very accessible description (without going into the world building etc etc), so here is a meme I came across the other day, and WELL:
That third tile down does a wonderful job of listing most of the major themes/story strands, whilst the meme itself is also HILARIOUS. (It might only be hilarious when you know the book, but trust me, it is very funny.)
ETA: I realised that I somehow missed off the MAIN thing. Go me and my million thoughts. The main story strand, and what the movie focusses on, is Paul Atreides, who is quite literally The Chosen One. It's difficult to explain further without spoiling plot points, but we get to see all him trying to deal with this, because how do you cope with it? What does that do to a person? What choices does he have in dealing with it? It is by far my favourite Chosen One story, because it's so complex. As to whether it's a White Saviour Story: Yes. Very much so. But one that interrogates whether this is actually a good thing... In one of the Appendices of the book (the one about the ecology) it's laid out how the Fremen are busy saving themselves until they become 'afflicted' with a hero...
Going back to the quote at the top, then Star Wars is basically a fairy tale (I think TLJ is the only film that properly tries to dig into other things, which is probably why it's my favourite) and Star Trek is very Utopian in its view of humanity. Dune on the other hand deals with all the complexities listed above and more, but takes them to extremes in the way only sci-fi can, digging into everything in great depth. The book has been called 'unfilmable' and to some extent that is very true - so much of it happens inside people's heads that getting it on screen is a fool's errand. But, this is a very very good try. It cuts off a lot details in order to focus on the main story, but then I'm not sure it could be done any other way, except for making a VERY long TV series. And a TV show wouldn't have the scale...
*hands*
I think the best way to put it is that this movie is a version of this story, and - although not perfect - it's doing a very good job.
Going back to what it's about then I think this is a story that has become more relevant than it was when it was written. The climate emergency/pollution is something Frank Herbert was very concerned about 56 years ago, and look where we are now! Ditto the way media frames people, the way information is used (and misused) to create narratives for very specific and subjective purposes, the way the 1st world treats the resources of the 3rd world, the way certain leaders marry politics and religion...
Basically, it's a story that deals with multiple different things all at the same time, which is not easy to translate onto the screen. So I will leave you with this from Dave Bautista:
“[The] world that [Villeneuve has] created is so far over my head. It’s so beautiful and different, and a lot of times dark and strange. But it’s something I never could have imagined. I just don’t have that mind. When I think about things, and when I think about directing, it’s all very contained, based on simple stories, a lot of times very simple and inspiring stories. And for someone to see something and create a world this big, a galaxy, a universe this big, it’s something that doesn’t comprehend, doesn’t compute in my brain. But it’s weird that he can do both. [Denis Villeneuve] can create these huge epic worlds and scenes, but at the same time just focus on the most simple things about a performance. He’s just a special guy, he’s got a special focus, and man, he’s a brilliant storyteller. Dune is special. I think people are going to be blown away. It’s going to be one of the most beautiful films that people have ever seen. But I think that people who are just diehard fans of Dune, of the novels, they’re going to be blown away. Because they don’t have anything, really, to reference in relation to the books. Now they will. They’ll have that visual reference. He took these characters, he took this world, and he’s taken them off the page and put them on screen. It’s epic”
- Dave Bautista (Rabban Harkonnen)
'They'll have that visual reference' is exactly right. That's what it is. <3
~~
Finally have an interview (basically spoiler free):
And the first trailer:
Accurate youtube comments:
Me: "You've revealed too much in the trailer."
My roommate: "What the hell is going on?"
Casual Viewers: Why is the kid so blank faced and emotionless?
Book Readers: Why is the kid showing too much emotion?
Of course I had to re-watch the trailer and now my entire brain is just going 'EPIC EPIC EPIC OMG I LOVE IT SO MUCH!!!' *flail*
They took what I saw in my head and put it on screen.
PS. There will be a Spoiler FULL review also, where I'll dig into things a lot more, oh yes. But that will take longer...
no subject
no subject
ME TOO! It would be my one criticism. She was better trained than that! (I mean, in the book she does cry in the tent, but it's a deliberate letting herself go...)
I wish Part Two were coming out next year!
Yeah, me too. But I like having things to look forward to. :)
no subject
Agreed. Visually and as far as atmosphere goes, it's a triumph.
If you're a book fan it's thrilling to see how everything has been translated to the screen (shields, ornithopters, glowglobes etc etc)
Yes! That stuff was so fun!
so much of it happens inside people's heads that getting it on screen is a fool's errand.
Yeah. I think that's why I'm ultimately not as thrilled with it as you are, but I also know that it would be impossible to satisfy me on that front! It's not the filmmakers' fault!
Casual Viewers: Why is the kid so blank faced and emotionless?
Book Readers: Why is the kid showing too much emotion?
LOL! YES! (I really like Rebecca Ferguson as Jessica, but I also feel like she was waaaaaay too emotional, even more so than Paul. I don't know how you would fix that on film though!)
You have really inspired me to do a reread. I haven't read it in at least a decade, and I'm a completely different person now with a completely different view of the world, so I think it's time to revisit.
no subject
I look forward to many many beautiful vids.
Yes! That stuff was so fun!
So clever, a lot of thought went into it.
Yeah. I think that's why I'm ultimately not as thrilled with it as you are, but I also know that it would be impossible to satisfy me on that front! It's not the filmmakers' fault!
It's like... I'll take what they give me. I could list three million things I would add/change etc... like I said, comparing EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME - 'Oh, you chose to emphasise THAT part of the conversation, interesting. I always thought the point of it was [insert whatever]'. But it basically does as much as it can, and I have the rest in my head anyway.
LOL! YES! (I really like Rebecca Ferguson as Jessica, but I also feel like she was waaaaaay too emotional, even more so than Paul. I don't know how you would fix that on film though!)
THIS. This is possibly my only main problem with the acting/directing. I have no idea why they made her so emotional, it's WEIRD. Surely they could have shown that in another way? She's one of the most badass characters in the whole thing, and trained to shield her emotions, so IDK.
You have really inspired me to do a reread. I haven't read it in at least a decade, and I'm a completely different person now with a completely different view of the world, so I think it's time to revisit.
YAY! *claps* It's funny, because clearly some things have not aged well, but the homophobia is thankfully not really central to the story. ;)
no subject
And I absolutely believe Ferguson could have played it different and done great with it. I really do think it was the writing/direction and not her skills. But it was the wrong choice imo.
When I do find time to reread it, I will definitely post many thoughts about it, I'm sure!
no subject
Agreed. Once I write up my proper/spoilery thoughts I'll delve much deeper into all the issues & choices - I think the thing I am wondering the most about (apart from Jessica, but that's a different issue) is leaving out the mentat side entirely. Are they 'saving' it for Part 2, did they think that the visions/near mythical mental abilities was enough to be dealing with, without introducing a different thing again? Were they quite simply not able to find a way to show it on screen? Are they just implying it, and if the viewer knows about it they can fill it in for themselves? ... I can understand any of these, but the 'human computer' side of it seems pretty important. (SO MANY THOUGHTS. This was one reason I kept this very positive, because once I go down that rabbit hole I won't come out again, and goodness knows this is long enough already.)
When I do find time to reread it, I will definitely post many thoughts about it, I'm sure!
Looking forward. :)
no subject
no subject
no subject
*HUGS*
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(Also like you, I've read the books so many times I have huge chunks of it memorized and I am dying to hear from my friends who've never read the series what they thought because I was able to fill in so much in my head)
no subject
*claps* Yay, I'm so glad someone else saw it the same way I did.
(Also like you, I've read the books so many times I have huge chunks of it memorized and I am dying to hear from my friends who've never read the series what they thought because I was able to fill in so much in my head)
I worry that if I start talking I'll never stop... Also you might be able to help me! I know the first book off by heart, but (way back when) read the 2nd and didn't like it, so never carried on. Should I? Everyone seems to be having different opinions. What are your two cents?
no subject
The series is actually about the planet, not Paul or even the Atreides family, so a lot of people I know tapped out after the 2nd book when (spoiler alert) Paul dies. But the rest of the series is just as weird and wonderful and does such a great job with the larger socio-politics of that universe.
no subject
I can cope with weird!
But the rest of the series is just as weird and wonderful and does such a great job with the larger socio-politics of that universe.
That is very helpful, thank you. :)
no subject
Brief summary of my thoughts (as someone who hasn't read the books or seen the previous attempt to adapt it): the world is really well created and the movie is beautifully shot. The cast are very good. I did get tired of all the shots of Zendaya looking beautiful and ethereal in the desert. Yes, Denis, I get that Zendaya is important, please get on with the story. Pacing has never been Villeneuve's strong point and that's an issue with this film, too (Peter Jackson excels at pacing). The scene of Paul just watching the desert rodent was great and there should have been a few more scenes like that. I also thought that it was weird to end the story where they did: Paul and his mother escaping by the skin of their teeth was a natural ending and I was emotionally exhausted by the film continuing beyond that point and putting them in yet MORE peril, and having Paul fight for his life (again). I think that should have been kept for the beginning of the second film. But I am glad I saw it in the cinema and I am interested about Part Two.
no subject
Thank you!! I am 100% incapable of being objective.
I did get tired of all the shots of Zendaya looking beautiful and ethereal in the desert. Yes, Denis, I get that Zendaya is important, please get on with the story.
LOL. It's funny because I almost had the opposite reaction. Well, it's possible there were too many shots, but when Chani finally appeared it had a much bigger impact - she stepped out from the visions and became an actual Person, if that makes sense. But then I was of course already invested in her. :)
Pacing has never been Villeneuve's strong point and that's an issue with this film, too
Mmmm, not disagreeing. But then I am also visualising all the scenes that WEREN'T in the movie, which is distracting.
The scene of Paul just watching the desert rodent was great and there should have been a few more scenes like that.
Slide 6. :D :D :D
I also thought that it was weird to end the story where they did: Paul and his mother escaping by the skin of their teeth was a natural ending and I was emotionally exhausted by the film continuing beyond that point and putting them in yet MORE peril, and having Paul fight for his life (again). I think that should have been kept for the beginning of the second film.
Iiiinteresting. I can see why they did it the way they did, because placing Paul and Jessica with the Fremen is a good 'holding place' as it were, so if a 2nd movie was not green-lit at least they had found sanctuary and a new life. It also makes sense with where I presume they will start the 2nd movie. That is not to say that it's not a LONG and draining story. (Oh Lord, they cut so much!)
But I am glad I saw it in the cinema and I am interested about Part Two.
YAY! Now read the book. /subtle influencing
no subject
Haha yes, I loved that line! I whispered "In another universe, you were! XD"
I can see why they did it the way they did, because placing Paul and Jessica with the Fremen is a good 'holding place' as it were, so if a 2nd movie was not green-lit at least they had found sanctuary and a new life.
Yes, my friend who has read the book said that it made sense to end it there in case they didn't make enough money to get Part 2 made. And I do get what you're saying. But using the LOTR comparison, it would be like Fellowship going past Frodo and Sam heading towards Mordor, showing their first meeting with Gollum and then going "that's it, stay tuned for Part Two!"
Also I need to ask, the scene where they're rescuing the crew from the spice harvester and Paul goes outside without his mask on (like an idiot) and immediately gets high on Spice and is just... kneeling there... is that in the book? I couldn't believe he was getting high while a ginormous carnivore was barrelling towards him.
no subject
<3 Although obvs the one with the mouse is the one I relate to the most. :)
But using the LOTR comparison, it would be like Fellowship going past Frodo and Sam heading towards Mordor, showing their first meeting with Gollum and then going "that's it, stay tuned for Part Two!"
Mmm, no. I can explain more? Not really spoilery.
Also I need to ask, the scene where they're rescuing the crew from the spice harvester and Paul goes outside without his mask on (like an idiot) and immediately gets high on Spice and is just... kneeling there... is that in the book? I couldn't believe he was getting high while a ginormous carnivore was barrelling towards him.
Well, the general scene - going to see the spice harvester, having to rescue the crew - is in the book, but that particular moment is not there. I'm guessing they added it because they wanted to show how the spice affects him (which is difficult to convey - in the book it's him reflecting on it). In the book the purpose of the whole thing is very different - it's mostly from Dr Kynes perspective, trying to gauge what the new rulers are like and assessing them. Something which wasn't really possible in the same way, so I can see why they changed it to showcase something else.
no subject
I see! Thank you for explaining!
no subject
Which isn't a bad thing, but it's not easy to explain.
no subject
no subject