In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
I think it's great that people are pumped for the new DUNE movie, but the reference point is now, and for the rest of our lives shall be, Lynch's beautiful train wreck of a film. In the same way that Dracula (1931) put an iconic stamp on the story, so has the '84 film. In a way, it is now the source material (especially visually) for the story.
Thus, what we see have seen, and will see, is a replication, amplification, modification, or inversion of Lynch. This is true in the sense of the actual genetic influence of the film (i.e., filmmakers working from it as a reference point for invention) and also in the sense of its evaluation (i.e., the critical and popular reception of the film). The 1984 film, for example, features a Guild agent stating "The Spice must flow" as an imperative in an expository "secret report." This line would be featured in EON's 1991 dance track The Spice (on the Void Dweller album). This was a sort of "call." The Sci-Fi network would offer a response in the high school theater-quality production of DUNE with Paul Atriedes announcing "The Spice will NOT flow" to the Guild and the Emperor in the mini-series in the year 2000 (when we all had flying cars! I mean ornithopters!). If Villeneuve's careful, respectful treatment of Blade Runner indicates anything it is that we can expect his DUNE to be different, but in a manner that is a response to Lynch. If anything, I think Blade Runner 2049 failed because it failed to cut its own trail. And I suspect that the new film will likely fail for the same reason. |
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
Good OP, Corax. Even though I read Dune before I seen the movie and then I read all of Frank Herbert's Dune series novels, in my mind Dune is the world that David Lynch showed us...It's ingrained in my mind and I doubt any other vision of Dune can (to me) look like anything but a knock off. It's like two strikes against the new Dune before it even gets viewed. I'm not even excited for it, but still I hope it does something special enough to warrant the Dune brand label.
|
I agree with the basic premise, but I'll never consider BR49 a failure. Not many sequels can perfectly capture the essence of the original. That's something Villeneuve even beat Cameron at concerning Scott sequels.
|
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
Do you consider "Children of Dune" to be better than the lynch version?
I'm also excited about "the many saints of newark", i might see that in theatres... |
Originally Posted by CringeFest (Post 2236426)
Do you consider "Children of Dune" to be better than the lynch version?
I'm also excited about "the many saints of newark", i might see that in theatres... That stated, the Lynch film seemed to come out of nowhere. And as much as it confused and disappointed original theater audiences, it made an indelible mark. We were transported into this very weird universe. It wasn't just "Truckers in Space" (ALIEN) or "Swashbucklers in Space" (Star Wars). There was a depth to the original film, especially in those magnificent sets and costumes, that made those bizarre lines people were saying seem "real." It was, in its own way, iconic. |
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2236421)
Good OP, Corax. Even though I read Dune before I seen the movie and then I read all of Frank Herbert's Dune series novels, in my mind Dune is the world that David Lynch showed us...It's ingrained in my mind and I doubt any other vision of Dune can (to me) look like anything but a knock off. It's like two strikes against the new Dune before it even gets viewed. I'm not even excited for it, but still I hope it does something special enough to warrant the Dune brand label.
I also hope that the new film surprises (in a good way). People spent decades claiming that it was unfilmable (Jodorowsky's Dune surely was), but I think that HBO could make a good miniseries of the original book. |
When will someone finally adapt the best book in the series, God Emperor?
|
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
I've grown to really like Lynch's Dune. There's so much about it that clicks aesthetically that the fact that it's silly and hard to follow (although less so on a rewatch) is easy to look past.
|
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
An Example: "Call and Response"
In 1984 we get a grotesque depiction of the Baron reveling in covering himself in dark fluid https://external-content.duckduckgo....6pid%3DApi&f=1 The 20201 trailer teases a similar image. The only difference is that the Baron is submerged rather than taking pleasure in having equipment drip all over him. https://external-content.duckduckgo....6pid%3DApi&f=1 There is no mention in the original book of the Baron enjoying basking in motor oil. We're in the orbit of Lynch's vision here. |
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
Sting in speedos!
|
Originally Posted by KeyserCorleone (Post 2236786)
Sting in speedos!
An amusing story. You likely already know it, but I cannot help but share it. https://youtu.be/Fb_LO7gJo-4 |
Originally Posted by Corax (Post 2236783)
In 1984 we get a grotesque depiction of the Baron reveling in covering himself in dark fluid
https://external-content.duckduckgo....6pid%3DApi&f=1 I loved the visual style though - that's something that comes across in any version. |
Originally Posted by PHOENIX74 (Post 2237285)
I'm glad you posted that. The 180 minute version of Dune I've just watched doesn't include that scene (it just cuts straight away when the black fluid starts to pour.) This seems to be one of those films that exists in many different forms. The longer version also has a 5 minute prologue that not only details the universe Dune exists in, but then goes on to describe the plot of the first two-thirds of the film itself - which is unusual to say the least.
I loved the visual style though - that's something that comes across in any version.
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 1635727)
Yes Dune is worth watching...but only the original theatrical release which is 137 minutes. Avoid the longer extended version which adds in some boring long scenes, while cutting out the more potent David Lynch scenes.
|
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2237291)
From another Dune thread...
Yes Dune is worth watching...but only the original theatrical release which is 137 minutes. |
Originally Posted by Corax (Post 2236793)
An amusing story. You likely already know it, but I cannot help but share it.
https://youtu.be/Fb_LO7gJo-4 |
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
I also only can recommend the original Lynch theatrical version. The other version is a hack job, even if it does impart more back story and information to a new Dune viewer.
The sleeper has awakened! |
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
Spice Driver Edit in 4K. Too crisp not to share. This is the cut of DUNE we didn't get in '84.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faHQA_0d9Mo |
Re: In the Shadow of DUNE (1984)
Thanks for posting that link to Dune Spice Driver Edit in 4K. Have you watched it? If so, are scene sequences re-edited in a different order? About the extra material have you viewed that? I'm wondering where they would get access to that? Probably from a Dune (1984) BluRay extra features?
|
Originally Posted by Corax (Post 2426604)
Spice Driver Edit in 4K. Too crisp not to share. This is the cut of DUNE we didn't get in '84.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faHQA_0d9Mo |
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2426667)
Thanks for posting that link to Dune Spice Driver Edit in 4K. Have you watched it? If so, are scene sequences re-edited in a different order? About the extra material have you viewed that? I'm wondering where they would get access to that? Probably from a Dune (1984) BluRay extra features?
|
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 06:35 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums