Dune remake (2020)
 

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5...-worm-580.jpeg

I gotta say, it's really getting a hell of a cast. The only oddball of the bunch is Jason Momoa as Duncan Idaho. He is pretty far from the "cat-like" character described in the novel. He is literally there because Aquaman made a billion dollars and no other reason... but I get it.

So far...

Timothee Chalamet as Paul Atreides
Josh Brolin as Gurney Halleck
Zendaya as Chani
Oscar Isaac as Duke Leto Atreides
Javier Bardem as Stilgar
Stellan Skarsgard as Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica Atreides
Dave Bautista as Glossu "The Beast" Rabban
Charlotte Rampling as the Reverend Mother Gaius Mohiam
David Dastmalchian as Peter De Vries

Only "big" roles left to cast are Emperor Shaddam IV and Princess Irulan. It'd be nice to see a Jonathan Pryce-style Shaddam. Maybe the chick from Split and Glass as Irulan...

Yeah, this is awesome. I am a huge Dune fan, and I had pretty high expectations for the project ever since it was first announced. It’s kind of surreal that it’s even being made, because usually films like these stay in development hell forever until they are inadvertently canned and then picked up again, only for the same thing to happen again. So, yay, I’m genuinely excited and happy at the prospect of a good Dune movie treated with the respect and porportion the series deserves, and you can tell just from the cast that Villenueve is putting true care into the project.

I’m a little concerned at how they’ll fit everything into one movie, because splitting it into two parts- while a good idea to cover everything- will potentially lose the general audience because not a lot happens in the first half of Dune. It’s basically small amounts of worldbuilding and general palace-f*ckery. It’s just this up to page 200 before anything remotely exciting happens. I enjoy it, and it works as a novel, but in a film perspective you’re going to bore people unless you massively chop down those first 200 pages into just the basics, but then the rest of the book lacks weight and would just make the audience question why they should care about these characters or the strange things happening to them. You’re essentially running into the same problems the Lynch film had. The best way to do Dune in my opinion is a TV series.

Regardless, I’m still optamistic for the film- just a little concerned as to how it’ll be pulled off. I’m surprised we haven’t heard the Doctor Yueh casting yet. He’s a central part of the first half of the story.

Denis Villeneuve had a lot of momentum behind him when it came to financing time... luckily, I don't think Blade Runner 2's box office had been tallied just yet. If this tanks he'll be firmly locked up for a few years in director's prison, though.

Yeah, I'm huge into Dune. I read the novel first when I was like 10, my parents got me Dune bedsheets, and I loved the Dune computer games. The movie was good for what it was and so were the two Sci-Fi mini-series... but both of those iterations seemed to fall short in different ways. That said, I don't know that I'm SUPER excited to see a third adaptation of the first book. I want the other books.

Splitting Dune into two movies is pretty haphazard for sure. And what, if the first half doesn't sell, we don't even get the second? Let alone adaptions of the other books.

Dune just doesn't seem to lend itself well to the big screen, unless it truly had a Lord of the Rings-style production behind it. i.e., film everything at once -- maybe the first three books -- and release one every year afterward. Regroup, then do the next 3. It just seems to me this would do so much better as an HBO series. Like, season 1 is the first book, season 2 is the second, etc..

Damn, I want Dune bedsheets.

The fanboy part of my brain is telling me that it’ll make a billion at the box office because of the visual spectacle, cast, and recent lack of good Sci-Fi as well as a series for all of the former Star Wars fans to move on to. The realistic part of my brain knows that this movie is going to flop, or at most “underperform” because of ridiculous studio expectations and a sequel or second part will never be made. Look at Alita: Battle Angel- James Cameron producing, good word of mouth, visually cool, should theoretically have a wide appeal and be successful, but it’s flopping because audiences only want to go to the movies for something they’re familiar with. The reason theaters are dying isn’t because of Netflix or streaming services, it’s because for a lot of people, why spend upwards of $20 to take a risk and see something new that has the potential to be “bad” when you can spend the same amount of see the new Disney/Marvel/comic book movie you’re familiar with and know you’ll enjoy? The current movie environment basically gives Dune zero chance of succeeding. I hope I’m wrong, and the movie is lighting in a bottle that reignites interest in big budget sci-fi, but how many times has this happened in the past couple years? Valerian, Jupiter Ascending, Blade Runner 2099, Alita, and soon to be Dune.

It’s sad, because if this came out in the early 2000s or at least right after LotR finished I feel it would’ve done amazing box office-wise and we’d probably have all 7 books made by now.

I would never consider a new movie based on Herbert's movie to be a "remake" of the Lynch film from 1984 or the mini-series but a new adaptation.

whenever who makes a film based on the novel Moby Dick is not "remaking" John Huston's film. They're making a new film based on the same literary source material. That's what the new IT films are and Dune movies, a separate adaptation of the book and not a remake of the earlier film.

For example i don't consider John Carpenter's The Thing to be a remake of The Thing From Another World because they are 2 completely different films. They use the same source material, which comes from a book by John Campbell, but the movies take different directions with that material and are nothing alike because of it. I would consider Carpenter's version to be a remake if he had tried to reinvent the 1951 film and borrowed aspects from it, but he did not.

A remake to me is the Hills Have Eyes 1977 and Hills have Eyes 2006 because it uses the same plot, takes aspects from it, including being based on the motion picture produced earlier plus the screenplay written earlier even credits the screenplay and what not. Carpenter didn't do that. He made his own movie according to him and his own independent adaptation. They are 2 separate completely different adaptations of the novella, Hawk's adaptation was a terrible travesty of an adaptation that completely ignored it (the location/the characters and background/the monster/the discover and origin of the spaceship/nature with methods of the alien as Hawk's film was a creature who didn't imitate anyone like the creature from Campbell's book as it had only one form being a vampiric vegetable humanoid who can reproduce itself but wasn't a shapeshifting imitating being) but still a damned good 1951 film despite being one of the worst book to film adaptations of all time like Running Man or Lawnmower Man or whatever. Carpenter's adaptation is a standalone film that is true to the book as it's an excellent adaptation of the original source material.

It would be like saying every Dracula film is a "remake" of the 1931 film or the silent classic Nosferatu, NO they are all separate and different adaptation of the same source material. Another example is the films Last Man on Earth, Omega Man and I Am Legend which are all separate and completely different adaptations of the original source material which have nothing to do with each other..

There is a difference between a remake and an adaptation.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Thing, Stephen King's The Shining, Lord of the Rings, Dracula, Frankenstein, any film based on I Am Legend, The Dark Knight Trilogy, A Christmas Carol, IT, War of the Worlds, the upcoming Crow film etc. are adaptations of source material being books, novellas and comics. Including being separate adaptations.

Night of the Living Dead, The Fog, Halloween, Maniac, Hills Have eyes, A nightmare on Elm Street, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, House on Haunted Hill, Ocean's 11, King Kong, Father of the Bride, The Nutty Professor etc. those are remakes in every sense of the word and based on the original screenplays even credits the screenplays and their writers saying "based on the motion picture and screenplay by".

Nevetheless, i'm excited for this because for 25 years since i was 12 i've been a fan of the Dune novels and i saw the movie on video and MY GOD it blew badly and i also dislike the mini-series as well as i believe it's hard to adapt such a unique and magical sci-fi fantasy novel on film but seeing the idea of a 2 part film on the big screen from the director of Arrival/Blade Runner 2049 gives me hope, i mean i love those 2 films even his other films as he's such a promising director.

I mean the book is such an influential work as it was one of the many inspirations to James Cameron's Avatar as well to Stargate to Star Wars. This book deserves another chance on big screen as a guy like myself who detested both film versions like the Lynch monstrosity and the mini-series as i'm optimistic about this next year from such a great director and this could be the Lord of the Rings/Game of Thrones of Sci-fi.

Shesus. Delayed from December of this year all the way to October 1st, 2021.

https://collider.com/dune-movie-new-...-delayed-2021/

-oof- Reciprocating causation.

1) Hollywood delays movies - basically out of greed so that they don't see a diminished box office.

2) Box off diminishes due to lack of product.

3) Theater's go out of business but Hollywood still delays out of greed.

4) Hollywood releases movies to diminished box office because there's fewer places to screen them after 7 fiscal quarters of greed delays, of which maybe the first 2 or so quarters were actually necessary to public health.

I love, love, love Blade Runner 2049 by the way. I'm not a big fan of Dune as an I.P. but I will find a way to see this if only for the goodwill that Villeneuve instilled by the masterpiece that was Blade Runner 2049.

Fewer places? I can't fathom how there would even be 1 anywhere by that point. Beyond some kind of bailout that nobody is even talking about, if you own a theater how could you possibly afford to keep it with no new movies for like 2 years? It's impossible. A lot of them were struggling even before all of this nonsense.

Yep. That's why my boss shut the gym down.

Landlord "generously" offered him a 1-year lease instead of the standard 5. This was in June.

Rent on the facility was $5000. That's BEFORE expenses such as heat, AC, electricity, TV and internet, etc. etc. So... round up and and assume maybe eight to ten grand a month to keep the place.

Owner said "We've made $0 revenue since March 15th but we're still on the hook for these bills. It's now June, and we have absolutely no idea when we might be allowed to open again."

Thus, he had no choice but to decline the "generous" offer to keep paying over 5 grand a month for the next year on $0 income. So instead he sold the equipment the next day. Our entire strip mall - a gym, a tanning salon, a Subway, a nail salon, and a physical therapy place - is now just an empty parking lot. These were well-established businesses that were doing well and each of them had been in operation at that location for well over ten years. Everything was Fine. Now....

This Is Reality.

Nobody's talking bailout and nobody's talking amnesty on not paying rent. Nor can they reasonably do so.

Time to end the shutdown. Way past overdue. This is madness.

Wait, what? The HBO Max/theaters co-launch is still undecided?

https://www.darkhorizons.com/dune-hb...nch-undecided/

I could've sworn I read months ago that Denis Villeneuve fought and won his argument to keep it strictly in theaters.

Here's the new Trailer, Its way better then the 1st trailer.

I'm really looking forward to seeing this one. Arrival was very well done and BR 2049 is possibly my favorite movie of all-time at this point.

I probably have the unpopular viewpoint that BR2049 is better than the original.

I think a lot of people feel that way, but the older fans of the original have a grip on that argument so many people just don't go there. Blade Runner was fantastic and 2049 took everything that made it that way and made it better. There's nothing wrong with 2049 being better. Besides, in a rare turn of events, it was pure Hollywood that made that franchise great. Dick's DADOES is not a good book.

Let's see how they 'woke' this one up.

I can't say I am big fan of original Blade Runner, but, IMO, it was better than sequel, which made me just bored, due to predictable plot twists and completely unlikable and uncharismatic protagonist / actor.

I can't see Villanueve doing it.... he's too focused on his movie and the core of things to let woke $#!( creep in there as an agenda. Dune will give you an organically compelling cast, a solid story and great eyecandy.

Beyond the gender and race swapping purely on the casting level (that I doubt Villanueve even had any strong feelings on beyond, "Meh, I want to get this made... fine, whatever, Liet can be a chick," etc.) I'm not too concerned.

So it's already, eh, available for download. I can't imagine how this might hurt the box office...

I'm waiting to hear what David Lynch thinks of it. :lol::lol::lol:

I'd love to hear it. But he doesn't even really talk much about his own experience on Dune so I doubt he'll say much, if anything. Maybe if someone really, presses him.

I imagine he'd be positive, or at least well-wishing.

I can't remember a single time I've heard him ever be overly negative about anyone or anything. Like he obviously didn't have a good time making the original, but the few things I've read where he talked about it he tried to be as vague and broad as possible and not put too much heat on anyone or any specific thing.

He just seems like an all-around really positive fella. Just a swell guy.

So yeah. I'm worried about this movie. I may have glanced at the first hour. It's sort of boring with only establishing shot type stuff that's new and interesting.

Also the classic line about "cattle and women" in regard to "being in the mood to fight" is omitted. Hmmf.

Pumped to see this tonight.

WB seems to be talking a big game about Part II actually happening. I’ve been worried we’d never get the second part when they decided not to film them back-to-back.

David Lynch should direct the sequel. :lol:

C'mon, everybody loves a good redemption story. :trazz:

From what I was reading, it seems like the only reason the director relented and is OK about Part 1 seeing a HBO Max/theatrical simultaneous release and isn't trying to sue the crap out of them is because they've assured him that no matter what, as long as he sits quiet like a good company man then he'll get to do Part 2.

It's an awesome movie. Loved it.
Only warnings I'd give is that it's not an action-packed film and that it certainly feels like part of a bigger story, rather than a complete story.

I'm reading a lot of good feedback on this from people who know the franchise really well, so I'm honestly getting more curious to see it. I don't know jack sh*t about anything "Dune", though, and I hear that it's like a really dense mythology. Like, I see tons of people saying stuff like, "I tried to read the first book, got three pages in and decided that reading the phone book was less dry and more engaging." But some of them thought this movie was okay.

All I know is there were books, the Lynch movie fell apart for multiple reasons, that SyFy did a mini-series back in the day that was supposedly pretty good, and that in this new one most people seem to like almost everything except Jason Mamoa.

Should I bother?

Furthermore, should I bother with the Lynch movie just for the heck of it, to complete my Lynch collection? So far I've thoroughly enjoyed every movie of his I've ever seen. I know he's disowned it, and that nobody actually "loves" it, but more and more often I'm seeing people defend it, especially just lately. Like I haven't seen anyone saying it's anywhere near as good as this new one but I have seen more and more people saying that it's heavily flawed, but enjoyable as its own thing.

I'unno, just curious. Some of you seem to know your "Dune" so I figured I'd ask.

As someone whose never read the novels, I thought it was a well-made movie. It's not one of the best movies that I've watched but it was fine. I second what Aqua said on the info warnings in the film. I literally had to look up Wiki to see if there's more to the story.:lol:

Right?

When the title screen comes up at the start, it says in fairly small font "Dune....part 1."

I wouldn't be surprised if they catch some flak for that, because nothing I saw in the marketing indicated that this is a part 1 and it certainly is.

Personally, I'm not upset. I knew it was part of a larger story. I feel satisfied because there was so much I enjoyed and I'm looking forward to part 2. I do think it feels a little devious from a marketing perspective.

I'm more familiar with my own taint than I am with "Dune", but even I knew just from cultural osmosis that ANY movie about it was automatically only going to be a "Part 1". Aren't there like six books? And everything I've ever heard about the first book was, "It's just not possible to do it in a single two-hour movie."

They maybe didn't wanna seem overconfident by labeling it "Part 1"? Or maybe they were afraid if they did that, some people would think Part 1 was all preamble, and wait for Part 2 since sequels are always more action-heavy?

I'unno. I know nothing about Dune, but it seems like those who do already knew - without being told - that this was only ever Part 1. I guess the studio could've been more transparent about it but I can also see why they weren't.

Some basic bullets:

* They only did about less than half of the first book.

* Again, the only reason the director isn't banging a torch about "Why is my movie on HBO Max when I want maximum box office potential and I didn't sign up for this!" (which he did until he suddenly didn't) is because he's already been assured he'll get to do "part 2" (AKA: the second half of the novel) if he just sits there, even if this first one somehow loses money. Which it might. But it's looking good right now.

* It's a pretty good update of Dune vs. the Lynch movie and the mini, all things considered. I'm probably hung up on some choice omissions that probably will bug exactly no one else... and I know why they did them and it's stupid.

Blade Runner 2049 is one of my favorite movies of all-time. And then after that I watched "Arrival" and realized that I might actually be a fan of Villeneuve.

Planning on seeing this one tonight....

I thought the movie was pretty good, and better then the 1984 movie, However I noticed one omission that I hope they add in part 2.

There was the one Navigator that came to see the Baron in that black box with the tube behind it. We just didn't get to see what's inside.

So in Dune Part 2 we'll get to see the Navigators, the Emperor, and Feyd.

I was hoping to see the one that's in that giant container like in the 1984 film, There was an article from 2020 that had one of the concept artist talking about the Spacing Guild Navigator, He did a concept art for the director, But he said he can't promise if it will be in the movie, Sure enough it wasn't.
https://nerdbot.com/2020/09/19/daily...ators-in-film/

Is there anything more to that creature we see in the Baron's home? The spider-like one. Had an interesting design.

Saw it last night. It was terrific. Absolute must-see in the theater. The sound mix was terrific too...

Rainy day so I’m playing guitar and watching it again on HBO Max. I love being able to do this.

I have to say, I’m even more excited for The Batman after seeing the cinematography of this film. Same guy working on both. We’re about to see the most gorgeously shot Batman movie ever.

Dune is Warner's biggest success this year with the theatrical/HBO Max release model

https://deadline.com/2021/10/dune-we...ce-1234860683/