Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Paramount was developing a new version of Dune a few years ago. It quietly just went away. This is something that happens about once a decade.
I love the first book, think the second book did a good job of dismantling the hero's journey of the first, but think that was let down by a third book that wandered off in to a story that just doesn't appeal to me. I got through the fourth book, but basically I didn't really want to read a logic puzzle about how a world with premonition would work, and I'm kind of surprised so many other people did. I understand things get stranger from there.
Yodhrin wrote: As you like. Personally I'll take a faithful adaptation with a lower budget over a lavish vanity project any day.
It isn't about budget, but about art. The tv series was certainly faithful, but there are basic things that work on the page that don't work on the screen. While the production of the miniseries was bad, it was really the script that let it down.
I mean, sure, the original movie is bad in many ways. To someone who doesn't know Dune it's almost completely incomprehensible, it somehow changes enough and too little so that all at once it fails to make sense as work in its own right, and perhaps makes even less sense to someone with a knowledge of the books. But in the production, the visuals and the music there are wonderful elements. It is certainly a failed effort, but it still manages to add to Dune. You can play the soundtrack and read the books and it works.
However, if you want a really faithful version of the books that moves along at the speed of a book... just re-read the books
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Love the David Lynch Version, and i recently watched Jodorowsky's Dune and he would have gone further of the rails, beautiful designs by Gieger and Paul Giraud though.
I think Kapittel Dune is the last one i read.
I also wonder if they ever make a movie out off Dan Simmons Hyperion
That's one of my favorite book series of all time, and as much as I'd love to see it (and isn't Bradley Cooper doing book one on Syfy?), I really don't think anyone will be able to do it right/justice...
sebster wrote: Paramount was developing a new version of Dune a few years ago. It quietly just went away. This is something that happens about once a decade.
I love the first book, think the second book did a good job of dismantling the hero's journey of the first, but think that was let down by a third book that wandered off in to a story that just doesn't appeal to me. I got through the fourth book, but basically I didn't really want to read a logic puzzle about how a world with premonition would work, and I'm kind of surprised so many other people did. I understand things get stranger from there.
Yodhrin wrote: As you like. Personally I'll take a faithful adaptation with a lower budget over a lavish vanity project any day.
It isn't about budget, but about art. The tv series was certainly faithful, but there are basic things that work on the page that don't work on the screen. While the production of the miniseries was bad, it was really the script that let it down.
I mean, sure, the original movie is bad in many ways. To someone who doesn't know Dune it's almost completely incomprehensible, it somehow changes enough and too little so that all at once it fails to make sense as work in its own right, and perhaps makes even less sense to someone with a knowledge of the books. But in the production, the visuals and the music there are wonderful elements. It is certainly a failed effort, but it still manages to add to Dune. You can play the soundtrack and read the books and it works.
However, if you want a really faithful version of the books that moves along at the speed of a book... just re-read the books
Ah yes, "art", the word that means whatever people want it to mean.
I don't agree, obviously. The Sci-fi show was essentially the books rewritten as a play, and it's perfectly well executed. You can dislike that style, but I don't see how filming it and adding flavour with CGI scenes suddenly makes the script worse than it would have been if performed on a stage in front of an audience. Personally I think it's better for it - I quite like the style and structure of plays, but actually going to see them is nightmarish, everything I hate about the cinema with a worse view.
As for the film, if you like it you like it, no judgement, but I don't see how an adaptation can meaningfully "add to" the original when it so little resembles it. To my eye it was a Dune version of "Spaceballs", with the humour exchanged for avant garde pretention.
EDIT: To clarify where I'm coming from, for my money, the point of an adaptation is to allow people to experience a story they otherwise wouldn't have, or to re-experience a story they enjoyed, in a medium they prefer. The "art" in an adaptation is in finding ways to translate the work into that different "language" without losing any of the meaning, themes and so on of the original work - it doesn't have to be a rote retelling if that wouldn't work in the new medium, but the whole point of adapting a work from one medium to another is that it remain as recognisable as possible for what it was.
Lynch's Dune is the very opposite of that ethos, it makes arbitrary and needless changes to the source material, it changes core themes and motivations, and for my money that shows either a casual disregard for the source material or genuinely rampant ego. Charitably, I'd call it an homage with branding issues.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/09/03 01:45:42
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Well, you did know that Dakka is not a safe space. You only have yourself to blame. Yeah, I know, saying that is a microagression. My privilege made me do it
Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion are interesting. I have yet to read the other two. I have no idea if it could be a good movie.
Stillsuits would cook their wearers in short order. Nobody could survive on a desert world anyway. Nothing to fix oxygen. So, no air to breathe. Nonetheless...
Dune is a Masterpiece. It suffers from some serious refrigerator logic, mind you, but still, what a great read. I never bothered with the rest of the books. Dune is complete unto itself, IMHO.
Frank Herbert liked Lynch's movie. Make of that what you will. IIRC, Lynch did not want "Kung Fu in the desert" so he changed weirding way into the weirding module.
Stillsuits would cook their wearers in short order. Nobody could survive on a desert world anyway. Nothing to fix oxygen.
Sandworms fart oxygen. That got added in a later book, supposedly after Herbert got sick of people asking him about it at conventions.
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
Yodhrin wrote: Ah yes, "art", the word that means whatever people want it to mean.
Much like porn, there is plenty of subjectivity but there is also a reality where we know it when we see it
As for the film, if you like it you like it, no judgement, but I don't see how an adaptation can meaningfully "add to" the original when it so little resembles it. To my eye it was a Dune version of "Spaceballs", with the humour exchanged for avant garde pretention.
Yeah, as I said above the Dune film is a failure in many ways. The script is more like an edited highlights reel of the first book, plus some random changes, it certaintly isn't a coherent narrative in its own sense. And there are certainly avant garde elements to it, though it is interesting to note how little feels experimental today - Lynch's new techniques became standard.
But there are still excellent elements in there. There is imagery and cinematography that is just wonderful. And there's that preposterous, glorious Toto soundtrack.
In comparison, the miniseries succeeds in being faithful, but that is all it succeeds in. I don't think anybody ever reading the book will stop and think 'this is great but I really wish I could have WIlliam Hurt reading it to me on a tiny soundstage with a CGI background'
The "art" in an adaptation is in finding ways to translate the work into that different "language" without losing any of the meaning, themes and so on of the original work - it doesn't have to be a rote retelling if that wouldn't work in the new medium, but the whole point of adapting a work from one medium to another is that it remain as recognisable as possible for what it was.
I completely disagree with that view, that's probably why we disagree on Lynch's move I think the purpose of any creation, whether it is based on another property, is to create something that has quality in and of itself. It isn't good because it is faithful to an earlier work, and it isn't bad because it doesn't.
Lynch's film failed because it doesn't stand alone as a good movie. It has good elements, but that isn't enough. It doesn't fail
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/06 01:49:37
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Well, you did know that Dakka is not a safe space. You only have yourself to blame. Yeah, I know, saying that is a microagression. My privilege made me do it
Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion are interesting. I have yet to read the other two. I have no idea if it could be a good movie.
Stillsuits would cook their wearers in short order. Nobody could survive on a desert world anyway. Nothing to fix oxygen. So, no air to breathe. Nonetheless...
Dune is a Masterpiece. It suffers from some serious refrigerator logic, mind you, but still, what a great read. I never bothered with the rest of the books. Dune is complete unto itself, IMHO.
Frank Herbert liked Lynch's movie. Make of that what you will. IIRC, Lynch did not want "Kung Fu in the desert" so he changed weirding way into the weirding module.
Why would the stillsuits cook their users, especially if so much fluid would pass them, theoretically it would be possible, But dune plays far in the future, they use materials we don't yet have the technology for to make.
Also as far as i remember, it is the worm or the little makers that produce the air on Arrakis.
McNeice's Baron -- while still a scenery-chewer -- is a FAR better portrayal of Vladimir than Kenneth McMillan's. It's a recurring theme in the Lynch film that the essence of things gets lost behind distracting details. In this case, you lose most sense of what a brilliant House leader the Baron is in the movie, thanks to things like boils and the zany freakshow going on around him. Well, that and the apparent lack of smarts. TV Baron comes across as a competent individual.
Regarding Herbert and his stated feelings about the movie, it's important to note that Frank was much more of a gracious gentleman than, say, Alan Moore regarding adaptation of his work. It's likely that he permitted any personal negativity about the film to pass over him and through him. IIRC, he thanked Lynch for showing him how to write a screenplay, and he probably did quite well financially with the film's release. I don't think we should take any of this to mean that he thought Lynch's film was an ideal adaptation of his book.
Regarding "kung fu in the desert"...that kind of action (or any big-scale action, really) isn't Lynch's thing. I'm sure rayguns just made it easier for him to shoot. But what was truly lost in the film wasn't the martial arts, but the sense of ferocity from the Fremen, this incredible powderkeg that Paul and Jessica exploit and set off.
The other reason behind inventing the guns for Lynch's movie was to make it easier for the audience to understand why the Emperor turned against the Atreides (he even says as much at the beginning of the movie) rather than go with confusing political exposition. It's also an easy way to explain how the Fremen win against a superior force. Basically, the guns were just the easy way out, at least that's how I always thought of it.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
gorgon wrote: Regarding Herbert and his stated feelings about the movie, it's important to note that Frank was much more of a gracious gentleman than, say, Alan Moore regarding adaptation of his work. It's likely that he permitted any personal negativity about the film to pass over him and through him. IIRC, he thanked Lynch for showing him how to write a screenplay, and he probably did quite well financially with the film's release. I don't think we should take any of this to mean that he thought Lynch's film was an ideal adaptation of his book.
I don't think there's really any merit in all in finding out whether an author likes the film version or not. As you say their comment is often financially motivated as much as anything - writers who sell their works directly and ensure a healthy cut of the gross rarely come out and say the movie sucks, unsurprisingly. Meanwhile. negative comments about a film are as often as not more a product of the author being shut out of production, generally because the publisher retained control of film rights.
In this case the director and principal cast are quite honest about how bad the movie was, so why go looking for opinions beyond that? I remember one quote from Sean Young in the home movie she shot while the film was in production, she says that Lynch was very difficult to work with, but she understands why - he had never made a bad movie before, and now he was stuck in the middle of a very bad movie.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/07 03:12:01
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Finished Dune Messiah a few weeks ago. I enjoyed it and want to see what's going to happen next. Often when I read something I think about how it could be filmed but I think Dune is unfilmable. About half the words on the page are just things going on in people's heads. The novel is the perfect format for Dune and that's why it hasn't really broken though in in other medium.
Sorry for a bit of threadromancy but I figured this thread has already picked up all of Dakka's Dune fans in one convenient place anyway. I had some questions about the best reading order of the series. I've finished Children of Dune but I'm interested in some of the prequels like Legends
of Dune. The Butlerian Jihad seems like something I'd want to read about. So I guess my question is is it best to just press on with Frank Herbert's original work and read God Emperor of Dune next? I know the non-Frank Dunes are divisive.
I'm also interested in the Jihad after the original Dune which is apparently covered in "Paul of Dune". Has anyone read that and simialarily is that worth checking out before carrying on with God Emperor?
Finally, I know Dune "7 & 8" are not by Frank Herbert but his son and Anderson and they wrote Prelude to
Dune trilogy first. Should I read those before Hunters of Dune?
Personally I'd move onto the next trilogy -- God Emperor/Heretics/Chapterhouse -- and follow Frank's vision (new vision? extended vision?) rather than interrupt it. Be prepared that the second trilogy is...different. After that is where it gets complicated IMO.
You're going to *want* to read Hunters after Chapterhouse, I can guarantee you that right now. However, the tricky part with Hunters and Sandworms is that your understanding of those books will be helped by reading the 'prelude' and 'legends' series. That's the best way I can describe it that avoids spoilers. This obviously wasn't an issue for those of us who read them as they were released, but it's a 'thing' now.
And it's weird, since Hunters and Sandworms were supposedly based on Frank's notes. Perhaps Frank had a different plan to get from point A to point B, and Brian and Kevin Anderson changed some things. I've never tried to track down an explanation for that and don't know if one even exists. *shrug*
So if you're really feeling up to it, I'd say tackle the 'prelude' and 'legends' stuff after Chapterhouse. They aren't brain food like Frank's books were, but they're decent brain candy. If you're not up for it, just skip to Hunters after Chapterhouse and be prepared for some things that won't seem familiar.
I'd save the "heroes" and "schools" series for the very end if you're still interested. They're the least compelling of Brian and KA's stuff IMO.
Ok, thanks Gorgon. Sounds like you're basically recommending publication order. I know that God Emperor is set thousands of years later than what I've read so that's why I figured it might be a good time to try some of the other stuff before the time jump but I've also heard they may contain some spoilers so maybe publication order is better than chronological.
Has anyone thought that maybe Dune is set before the Warhammer 40k franchise and that the "men of iron" were Erasmus and Omnius? In reality though, the comparisons between the foldspace and warp are pretty damn close, just no chaos gods. But either way, if you want a dune fix buy all the new books and just read through those. Don't read sisterfood, mentats, or navigators though, so damn confusing. Not even because of plot, just that Norma Cenva pokes so many plotholes, and the entire storyline is poorly thought out.
lliu wrote: Has anyone thought that maybe Dune is set before the Warhammer 40k franchise and that the "men of iron" were Erasmus and Omnius? In reality though, the comparisons between the foldspace and warp are pretty damn close, just no chaos gods. But either way, if you want a dune fix buy all the new books and just read through those. Don't read sisterfood, mentats, or navigators though, so damn confusing. Not even because of plot, just that Norma Cenva pokes so many plotholes, and the entire storyline is poorly thought out.
It's more that it is just that 40K rips off a lot from Dune. I was shocked when first read it. It even has lasguns even though they're quite different. The Navigators are totally lifted from Dune too. The way 40K treats technology is also totally from Dune. The Men of Iron and all that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/13 16:00:50
I picked up a Mega CD emulator for my tablet the other day I now have the original Dune adventure game running on it. The FMV intro is a bit choppy but the game plays well.
I played the Amiga version first time round so was surprised to find that all the character interaction is actual speech on the Mega CD version.
George Spiggott wrote: I picked up a Mega CD emulator for my tablet the other day I now have the original Dune adventure game running on it. The FMV intro is a bit choppy but the game plays well.
I played the Amiga version first time round so was surprised to find that all the character interaction is actual speech on the Mega CD version.
There a Dune RTS called Dune 2000. Never played it but wouldn't mind trying it out.
I actually really liked the trilogy set in the war against the machines. Between Erasmus and the Titans, all three books had some really horrifying bad guys.
"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."
TV Baron comes across as a competent individual.
