From what I remember, 1984’s Dune is basically the book condensed down into the highlights. If you’ve read the book, fine but otherwise, it must be quite confusing.
Have you watched the Sci-fi channel miniseries? I think that one (especially since it also has Messiah and Children) is the best. Not the best graphics, or filming, or acting, but the best as a whole.
James McAvoy as Leto II when he was an unknown actor and an incredible soundtrack are both good reasons to watch the miniseries, particularly the second one.
Jodorowsky brags about not knowing how to make movies and still makes them. He does brings about interesting imagery but the intentionally naive cinematographic style gets stale and boring pretty quickly.
I’d say Denis’ is waaaaaaay worse, they ruined Chani and added some nonsense subplot in part two as well… it’s just prettier. 😤
I loved Arrival though, and I do feel like most disruptive changes in his Dunes were studio notes because it would be more relatable to “modern audiences”.
If anything he made Chani less of rug to be walked all over and gave her a personality outside of “wife to the messiah”. If you were going to bitch about anyone in the Dune movies I’d think it’d be The Lady Jessica because she is an entirely different character in the movies. I don’t think that’s a criticism because she serves the plot well, but that one is a more grounded argument
Lady Jessica’s character in the new films pissed me off. She was one of my favorite characters in the books, and one of the first examples of a powerful, nuanced woman I’d read in my life.
She’s supposed to have so much self control she can literally alter poison with her body, decide the sex of her own baby and hypnotize people with her tone of voice, and yet she’s freaking out and crying in the movie. She went from a brilliant woman trying to survive and save her son to an over-emotional and manipulative dark mother trope.
Zendaya just plays an immature, “rebel without a cause” New Yorker instead of Chani, a strong and intelligent Fremen young lady who falls in love with and follows her Muad’dib, not just because of his prophetic abilities but also/mostly because of his character. But, in the current Western cultural understanding, that just wouldn’t fly as strong means selfish and reactive and intelligent means rebellious and lippy. She’s awed by Paul, as would be anyone surrounding him (to Paul’s chagrin when it changes those around him to more “robotic” beings as it does with Stilgar), but also understands him deeply and is his emotional pillar, while Paul’s the pillar to his entire community. They just wanted a “girl boss” and that’s what we had in Denis’ Dunes. 😔
I get where you’re coming from, and I do feel like Chani really suffered from the adaptation, but I felt like it was more due to screentime and not having internal thoughts than changes made. I felt her being skeptical at the beginning was both a great change to her character (it feels like she falls in love with the Muad’dib Paul becomes, not the Atreides he was) and a really good way to carry themes of anti-messianism into the movie where the book relied on philosophical asides. It also provides a natural foil to Stilgar’s zeal and Jessica’s manipulation, presenting Chani as more aligned with Paul himself.
It was unnecessary and disruptive (and what was that “Chani is a leader of an internal rebellion in the Fremen” all about in Dune Part 2?!), Chani served her purpose in Dune like pretty much other characters did besides the protagonists Paul and Leto II, who simply take more of the stage because, as prophetic beings infused with semi-omniscient knowledge, have more depth to them. The rest are mostly just people, and we all know people, but Dune was never about the characters… and maybe that’s why it cannot be adapted for the masses. I mean, even events like a jihad that kills billions and the death of Paul’s first child (was this even in the movie?! But sludge covered Baron Harkonnen was front and center, lol, without even mentioning his pedophilia!) are just brushed off, written in some sentences tops. The meat and potatoes of Dune are the philosophical explorations, in particular “how would anyone handle excess knowledge?”, and as such Chani played her role as much as Leto and Jessica did, you change the characters and you just muddle something clear. I didn’t even mind when they genderswapped Paul’s short-lived mentor in Arrakis, cause it really doesn’t matter much, but they replaced Chani with just Zendaya. They also put way more action scenes in it but didn’t show the very important dinner scene, didn’t properly explain why it was important to have a “male Bene Gesserit” (again, modern sensibilities), didn’t properly explain Paul’s visions and left it very inconsistent/inconclusive, but these long (beautiful, certainly) shots with empty silences were there, because that’s what matters in fricking DUNE…
For those who don’t care about the depth of Dune and the points Herbert tried to make, the movies are lovely. And for the ones who do, we’ll always have the books, so whatever, I guess. But I got my COVID shots quickly just to watch Dune Part One and I’m still a little bit salty, lol, that’s all.
You’re feigning ignorance then if you actually recall the books. Zendaya’s/Denis’ Chani and Herbert’s Chani are like night and day. And, again, what exactly was ‘misogynistic’ about my comment? And do I have to start copypasting passages of Dune and Messiah and make a comparative analysis with Denis’ Dune? It’s past midnight over here, my guy.
To be completely honest, Herbert’s Chani was pretty forgettable. Admittedly, it’s been a very long time since I’ve read anything Dune, but I truly cannot remember anything memorable about Chani in the books…
I think it can still recover, but I felt the same way after leaving the theater for part 2. I was confused why they decided to change it that much. It’s supposed to make her seem intelligent and independent or something, but honestly it just make her seem nieve. They discuss Paul needing to do something like this, and she knows his mother’s position was the same, but was still his father’s only love.
It’s bad enough that they cut out an entire portion of their lives where they have a son together, and lose that son to the Harkonnen. Then they do what they did at the end and it’s just wrong.
It’s definitely the easiest to watch though, and I don’t know that it’s less accurate than 1984’s (Paul calls in rain after he wins the battle?). The miniseries is most accurate though.
Shortenning the timeframe of the first book from a few years to a few months definitely had some weird effects, like Paul and Chani’s relationship not being as solid yet. When I watched Part 2 the first time I kept wondering where they were going to put the timeskip before I realized they just weren’t going to have one.
Most of David Lynch’s Dune.
From what I remember, 1984’s Dune is basically the book condensed down into the highlights. If you’ve read the book, fine but otherwise, it must be quite confusing.
1984 Dune is a very mixed bag despite the pedigree of the folks making it
It’s still my favorite version. Though, I still wonder if Jowarsky’s Dune would have been better.
Have you watched the Sci-fi channel miniseries? I think that one (especially since it also has Messiah and Children) is the best. Not the best graphics, or filming, or acting, but the best as a whole.
James McAvoy as Leto II when he was an unknown actor and an incredible soundtrack are both good reasons to watch the miniseries, particularly the second one.
Based on his comics I’m going to say it would be a classic, but mostly in a “can’t believe they filmed that” sense.
Jodorowsky you mean?
Yeah. That guy.
cough weirding modules cough
“Fine” might be overselling it a little bit.
I would say its ‘comprehensible’ if you’ve read the book, but its still not great.
Still better than whatever garbage Jodorowsky was going to put out. That’s right, I said it.
Dude didn’t even read Dune, and bragged about it. Could have made an awesome sci-fi film, but instead had to co-opt a classic novel
Jodorowsky brags about not knowing how to make movies and still makes them. He does brings about interesting imagery but the intentionally naive cinematographic style gets stale and boring pretty quickly.
I’d say Denis’ is waaaaaaay worse, they ruined Chani and added some nonsense subplot in part two as well… it’s just prettier. 😤
I loved Arrival though, and I do feel like most disruptive changes in his Dunes were studio notes because it would be more relatable to “modern audiences”.
Denis’s is great.
How do you feel that they ruined Chani?
If anything he made Chani less of rug to be walked all over and gave her a personality outside of “wife to the messiah”. If you were going to bitch about anyone in the Dune movies I’d think it’d be The Lady Jessica because she is an entirely different character in the movies. I don’t think that’s a criticism because she serves the plot well, but that one is a more grounded argument
Lady Jessica’s character in the new films pissed me off. She was one of my favorite characters in the books, and one of the first examples of a powerful, nuanced woman I’d read in my life.
She’s supposed to have so much self control she can literally alter poison with her body, decide the sex of her own baby and hypnotize people with her tone of voice, and yet she’s freaking out and crying in the movie. She went from a brilliant woman trying to survive and save her son to an over-emotional and manipulative dark mother trope.
She’s no “rug”, but I can see why she “needed” to be changed in a ‘modern’ adaptation with a big budget and larger financial expectations.
Zendaya just plays an immature, “rebel without a cause” New Yorker instead of Chani, a strong and intelligent Fremen young lady who falls in love with and follows her Muad’dib, not just because of his prophetic abilities but also/mostly because of his character. But, in the current Western cultural understanding, that just wouldn’t fly as strong means selfish and reactive and intelligent means rebellious and lippy. She’s awed by Paul, as would be anyone surrounding him (to Paul’s chagrin when it changes those around him to more “robotic” beings as it does with Stilgar), but also understands him deeply and is his emotional pillar, while Paul’s the pillar to his entire community. They just wanted a “girl boss” and that’s what we had in Denis’ Dunes. 😔
I get where you’re coming from, and I do feel like Chani really suffered from the adaptation, but I felt like it was more due to screentime and not having internal thoughts than changes made. I felt her being skeptical at the beginning was both a great change to her character (it feels like she falls in love with the Muad’dib Paul becomes, not the Atreides he was) and a really good way to carry themes of anti-messianism into the movie where the book relied on philosophical asides. It also provides a natural foil to Stilgar’s zeal and Jessica’s manipulation, presenting Chani as more aligned with Paul himself.
It was unnecessary and disruptive (and what was that “Chani is a leader of an internal rebellion in the Fremen” all about in Dune Part 2?!), Chani served her purpose in Dune like pretty much other characters did besides the protagonists Paul and Leto II, who simply take more of the stage because, as prophetic beings infused with semi-omniscient knowledge, have more depth to them. The rest are mostly just people, and we all know people, but Dune was never about the characters… and maybe that’s why it cannot be adapted for the masses. I mean, even events like a jihad that kills billions and the death of Paul’s first child (was this even in the movie?! But sludge covered Baron Harkonnen was front and center, lol, without even mentioning his pedophilia!) are just brushed off, written in some sentences tops. The meat and potatoes of Dune are the philosophical explorations, in particular “how would anyone handle excess knowledge?”, and as such Chani played her role as much as Leto and Jessica did, you change the characters and you just muddle something clear. I didn’t even mind when they genderswapped Paul’s short-lived mentor in Arrakis, cause it really doesn’t matter much, but they replaced Chani with just Zendaya. They also put way more action scenes in it but didn’t show the very important dinner scene, didn’t properly explain why it was important to have a “male Bene Gesserit” (again, modern sensibilities), didn’t properly explain Paul’s visions and left it very inconsistent/inconclusive, but these long (beautiful, certainly) shots with empty silences were there, because that’s what matters in fricking DUNE…
For those who don’t care about the depth of Dune and the points Herbert tried to make, the movies are lovely. And for the ones who do, we’ll always have the books, so whatever, I guess. But I got my COVID shots quickly just to watch Dune Part One and I’m still a little bit salty, lol, that’s all.
Calling Zendaya’s Chani a girl boss New Yorker seems incredibly misogynistic to me.
I don’t understand what “woman hating subtext” you read from my comment but, if you read the books, it will just seem appropriate.
I’ve read all of them after Foundation it’s my favorite science fiction series.
You’re feigning ignorance then if you actually recall the books. Zendaya’s/Denis’ Chani and Herbert’s Chani are like night and day. And, again, what exactly was ‘misogynistic’ about my comment? And do I have to start copypasting passages of Dune and Messiah and make a comparative analysis with Denis’ Dune? It’s past midnight over here, my guy.
To be completely honest, Herbert’s Chani was pretty forgettable. Admittedly, it’s been a very long time since I’ve read anything Dune, but I truly cannot remember anything memorable about Chani in the books…
Honestly it feels like you dislike the actor and are projecting it on to the character.
I think it can still recover, but I felt the same way after leaving the theater for part 2. I was confused why they decided to change it that much. It’s supposed to make her seem intelligent and independent or something, but honestly it just make her seem nieve. They discuss Paul needing to do something like this, and she knows his mother’s position was the same, but was still his father’s only love.
It’s bad enough that they cut out an entire portion of their lives where they have a son together, and lose that son to the Harkonnen. Then they do what they did at the end and it’s just wrong.
It’s definitely the easiest to watch though, and I don’t know that it’s less accurate than 1984’s (Paul calls in rain after he wins the battle?). The miniseries is most accurate though.
Shortenning the timeframe of the first book from a few years to a few months definitely had some weird effects, like Paul and Chani’s relationship not being as solid yet. When I watched Part 2 the first time I kept wondering where they were going to put the timeskip before I realized they just weren’t going to have one.