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.

So the movie has wrapped up filming several days ago. Now it'll spend a long time in post production.

Also in other news:

https://www.themix.net/2019/07/exclusive-denis-villenueves-dune-film-to-gender-swap-liet-kynes/

Based on what i've seen this is a real possibility. She's likely either playing Kynes or Mapes, but I always got the vibe Mapes was older like an old house maid with grey hair. I don't think gender swapping Kynes is that problematic in the overall picture, but i'm not sure what the point of that would be, other than to be inclusive or something.

Or she was the best choice at the audition. It’s not like it matters.

Mind you, I can’t see why “to be inclusive” would be a negative.

Wrong thread!

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Or she was the best choice at the audition. It’s not like it matters.

Mind you, I can’t see why “to be inclusive” would be a negative.

According to the linked story the "leaked" casting call specifically mentions a female character, so it's hardly surprising that a woman would be the best choice from those auditions...

As to "why does it matter/what's wrong with inclusivity" etc - if it doesn't matter, why do it? Especially when there doesn't appear to be any reason for it - the article indicates Kynes' role, outside of the swapped gender, remains the same. So if you're not going to turn it into some big subversive Thing, why make a pointless change from the source material in an ostensibly serious/faithful adaptation? And if your concern is inclusivity, deciding to make an adaptation of a work that focuses on several explicitly regressive and openly patriarchal societies seems odd.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Or she was the best choice at the audition. It’s not like it matters.

Mind you, I can’t see why “to be inclusive” would be a negative.

According to the linked story the "leaked" casting call specifically mentions a female character, so it's hardly surprising that a woman would be the best choice from those auditions...

As to "why does it matter/what's wrong with inclusivity" etc - if it doesn't matter, why do it? Especially when there doesn't appear to be any reason for it - the article indicates Kynes' role, outside of the swapped gender, remains the same. So if you're not going to turn it into some big subversive Thing, why make a pointless change from the source material in an ostensibly serious/faithful adaptation? And if your concern is inclusivity, deciding to make an adaptation of a work that focuses on several explicitly regressive and openly patriarchal societies seems odd.

How many women have notable roles in Dune, though? Jessica, Chani, the old Sayyadina...Helen Gaius? Princess Irulan? The doctor's dead wife? The genetic dead end Guy's wife? If you want the film to be less of a sausage fest you may as well gender swap a character whose gender had nothing to do with the plot. Liet Kynes was not born into the Fremen hierarchy (well, the second Liet was, but that will probably be streamlined for the movie), and gained all his importance through the power of environmentalism.

I mean, I guess they could gender swap Piter or Thufir, too, and it wouldn't change too much, but some of the creepy, catty undertones would be lost.

Oh, I don’t know, a female Piter could be just as sadistic and cruel. Of course he’s supposed to have been trained by the Bene Tlielax, so a female version might be awkward if you wanted to get into the expanded universe in a sequel...

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Or she was the best choice at the audition. It’s not like it matters.

Mind you, I can’t see why “to be inclusive” would be a negative.

According to the linked story the "leaked" casting call specifically mentions a female character, so it's hardly surprising that a woman would be the best choice from those auditions...

As to "why does it matter/what's wrong with inclusivity" etc - if it doesn't matter, why do it? Especially when there doesn't appear to be any reason for it - the article indicates Kynes' role, outside of the swapped gender, remains the same. So if you're not going to turn it into some big subversive Thing, why make a pointless change from the source material in an ostensibly serious/faithful adaptation? And if your concern is inclusivity, deciding to make an adaptation of a work that focuses on several explicitly regressive and openly patriarchal societies seems odd.

How many women have notable roles in Dune, though? Jessica, Chani, the old Sayyadina...Helen Gaius? Princess Irulan? The doctor's dead wife? The genetic dead end Guy's wife? If you want the film to be less of a sausage fest you may as well gender swap a character whose gender had nothing to do with the plot. Liet Kynes was not born into the Fremen hierarchy (well, the second Liet was, but that will probably be streamlined for the movie), and gained all his importance through the power of environmentalism.

I mean, I guess they could gender swap Piter or Thufir, too, and it wouldn't change too much, but some of the creepy, catty undertones would be lost.

But that's exactly my point - why does it matter if the film is a "sausage fest"? That's the story that they're ostensibly interested in telling. And what's the point of gender-swapping a character if you're not going to use that to make some kind of point about something?

There are, broadly, two kinds of adaptations: faithful to the source, and reinterpreting the source to make some kind of point. If the goal here was to make the Dune equivalent of Verheoven's Starship Troopers then sure, go nuts, change whatever you like. But, ostensibly, this is supposed to be the first of the two, in which case it should only be making changes if they're actually required by the medium.

It matters because Hollywood is unbalanced towards white men for no good reason. You seem happy for that situation to carry on, but it seems reasonable to me that we make strides to eliminate such biases - conscious or unconscious- where possible. If it doesn’t matter, why _not_ change it?

Anything more is going to result in a lock, so that’s all I’ll say n the matter.

Having enjoyed Prelude to Dune and Liet's story in that trilogy - in which he is clearly written as a male character - I'm a bit sad at this news. As a young man(when I first read the novels) I related to living in the shadow of one's father and being unwittingly ignored by that father, and "getting what you want" at the cost of a fellow male friend is a hard pill to swallow. Changing the gender of Liet is like dismissing important events for that character.

Thats not to say I won't appreciate the forthcoming movies for what they will be but I feel its an unnecessary change, especially when there are already enough strong female characters in the film, which likewise tell the hardships of a woman's life within a sisterhood and the duty it demands and will inevitably cause conflict for personal desires.

In a more positive view, there is a film version of The Tempest that stars Helen Mirren in the role of Prospero who is renamed Prospera. Its a mixed bag, but Prospera was a high note for the film, and would give an idea of how this could work.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Or she was the best choice at the audition. It’s not like it matters.

Mind you, I can’t see why “to be inclusive” would be a negative.

According to the linked story the "leaked" casting call specifically mentions a female character, so it's hardly surprising that a woman would be the best choice from those auditions...

As to "why does it matter/what's wrong with inclusivity" etc - if it doesn't matter, why do it? Especially when there doesn't appear to be any reason for it - the article indicates Kynes' role, outside of the swapped gender, remains the same. So if you're not going to turn it into some big subversive Thing, why make a pointless change from the source material in an ostensibly serious/faithful adaptation? And if your concern is inclusivity, deciding to make an adaptation of a work that focuses on several explicitly regressive and openly patriarchal societies seems odd.

How many women have notable roles in Dune, though? Jessica, Chani, the old Sayyadina...Helen Gaius? Princess Irulan? The doctor's dead wife? The genetic dead end Guy's wife? If you want the film to be less of a sausage fest you may as well gender swap a character whose gender had nothing to do with the plot. Liet Kynes was not born into the Fremen hierarchy (well, the second Liet was, but that will probably be streamlined for the movie), and gained all his importance through the power of environmentalism.

I mean, I guess they could gender swap Piter or Thufir, too, and it wouldn't change too much, but some of the creepy, catty undertones would be lost.

But that's exactly my point - why does it matter if the film is a "sausage fest"? That's the story that they're ostensibly interested in telling. And what's the point of gender-swapping a character if you're not going to use that to make some kind of point about something?

There are, broadly, two kinds of adaptations: faithful to the source, and reinterpreting the source to make some kind of point. If the goal here was to make the Dune equivalent of Verheoven's Starship Troopers then sure, go nuts, change whatever you like. But, ostensibly, this is supposed to be the first of the two, in which case it should only be making changes if they're actually required by the medium.

The last few years there have been some high profile studies that suggest movies are more financially successful if they appeal to more groups with representation. Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Black Panther, and other movies have solidified the new conventional wisdom that a film that doesn't have sufficient representation is leaving money on the table.

I could see your point if the gender of Liet Kynes were important in the first place, but it really isn't. The fundamental story of two concubines and the incredibly special young man they discuss won't be changed at all by casting this supporting character with an actor of a different ethnicity* or gender.

*Speaking of ethnicity, I'm fairly sure that many of the characters in Dune were not intended to be white. The Duke, the Emperor, and the sort-of related Sardaukar and Fremen are described as having olive skin, hawk noses, wooly hair and the like, and Stilgar has a dark face.

Well... the Duke was presented fairly clearly as having Greek roots. Atreides is an Iliad reference.

Both the Fremen and Tleilaxu have very obvious Arabic roots.

Changing the gender of the character is just another symptom of the rampant SJW bullcrap that seems to be pervading our whole society right now. It really needs to stop. I can see no real reason for the change except because "diversity". Forcing it like that just cheapens the whole thing, including the diversity message itself.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
Changing the gender of the character is just another symptom of the rampant SJW bullcrap that seems to be pervading our whole society right now. It really needs to stop. I can see no real reason for the change except because "diversity". Forcing it like that just cheapens the whole thing, including the diversity message itself.

Blocked, reported, moving on, and I optimistically hope everyone else will do the same rather than drag this thread down and get it locked bacause the mods seem to prefer shutting down whole threads even when it was clearly just one guy who turned them into a bonfire.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
It matters because Hollywood is unbalanced towards white men for no good reason. You seem happy for that situation to carry on, but it seems reasonable to me that we make strides to eliminate such biases - conscious or unconscious- where possible. If it doesn’t matter, why _not_ change it?

Anything more is going to result in a lock, so that’s all I’ll say n the matter.

No no, you don't get to drop a big reekin' fart like that and then just walk away.

I'm not even remotely happy for "that situation" to carry on. I welcome any films that address that balance, so long as it doesn't require changing characters and stories that are already established as having certain qualities as part of what are ostensibly faithful adaptations.

Non-faithful adaptations changing sex/gender/race? Fine.

Purposefully-subversive adaptations changing sex/gender/race? Fine.

Going against a commonly held perception of a character's qualities when said qualities weren't actually specified in the original work being adapted? Fine.

Whole new stories, or stories with new characters told in existing settings, which make a point of including characters of various backgrounds? Wonderful.

I'm in favour of literally every form of increasing diversity in media, except the one we're discussing here - making arbitrary changes in a supposedly faithful adaptation. If a filmmaker or studio believes that an existing story is too much of a "sausagefest" for modern audiences, either A; make a purposefully non-faithful adaptation of/semi-original homage to the work, or B; don't adapt the work. My position is entirely logically consistent regardless of what "variable" we're discussing - if you think Star Trek is too dull and intellectual for modern audiences, then don't change it, just don't adapt it. If you think Star Wars is too much an uncritical heroes journey and you want to make something more "subversive", don't change it, do something else.

My objection is that they are selling this as a faithful adaptation, but are making changes that are not required by the medium. Not everyone is motivated purely by Culture War nonsense.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Not everyone is motivated purely by Culture War nonsense.

Given how your posting history shows you reliably show up in every relevant thread to talk about how you're "Not Against Representation But", the culture war seems highly important to you.

Change is fine. I don't see how they make this a film. Its not enuogh time to tell the story. A miniseries is a perfect format , as the Sci Fi chanel did (which I thought was excellent).

 Elemental wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Not everyone is motivated purely by Culture War nonsense.

Given how your posting history shows you reliably show up in every relevant thread to talk about how you're "Not Against Representation But", the culture war seems highly important to you.

I mean, OK, firstly it's pretty creepy that you're trawling my post history, but whatever floats your boat. As for your interpretation of what I said, you're free to think whatever you like, but given I stated my precise thoughts literally right there in the post you -snipped- to take a potshot, I'm comfortable in saying your interpretation is wrong. Thoroughly so.

Cool, now, that said - care to address the actual point?

So, Yodhrin, are you saying your main concern then is that such a change makes the adaptation less accurate to the novel, and that you would not have a problem if the adaptation were not aiming for accuracy?


Perhaps that is our difference. I simply do not expect this movie to be perfectly accurate or even to try to be perfectly accurate. I expect DV to aim for thematic and tonal accuracy, while finding more innovative ways to convey all of the inner monologues and subtle intrigues that convey the weight of the novel, I.e. the unfilmable stuff.

So, I expect a Dune more accurate than Lynch's version, but less accurate (thoughmore lively and creative) than the Syfy version.


PS: Again, I'll point out that increased diversity correlates with increased profits, where profits are the reason any movie or adaptation gets made at all. Perhaps it will appeal more if we spell it with cynical dollar signs? Diver$$$ity!

 Frazzled wrote:
Change is fine. I don't see how they make this a film. Its not enuogh time to tell the story. A miniseries is a perfect format , as the Sci Fi chanel did (which I thought was excellent).

If I remember correctly this is going to be split over two movies.

For laughs, go check out eBay to look at what that RPG mentioned earlier is selling at - or at least attempting to sell at!

SamusDrake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Change is fine. I don't see how they make this a film. Its not enuogh time to tell the story. A miniseries is a perfect format , as the Sci Fi chanel did (which I thought was excellent).

If I remember correctly this is going to be split over two movies.

Ah thanks! I did not know that.

Having just finished my reread of Dune, I really hope the film ends with that last line of dialog and then immediately cuts to black. I want to hear a whole theater full of people say, "Huh?"

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Having just finished my reread of Dune, I really hope the film ends with that last line of dialog and then immediately cuts to black. I want to hear a whole theater full of people say, "Huh?"

Have to say, the ending is rather underwhelming. Its important if they go on to do the following two books, but somehow its reads like "...and then Irulan farted. And nobody knew. The End."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Change is fine. I don't see how they make this a film. Its not enuogh time to tell the story. A miniseries is a perfect format , as the Sci Fi chanel did (which I thought was excellent).

If I remember correctly this is going to be split over two movies.

Ah thanks! I did not know that.

You're welcome.

I think the tv series was roughly the same length as two modern movies, so I think we should be alright.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/cl6wmj/first_glimpse_of_an_ornithopter_dune_2020/?st=jyugt0r4&sh=0ea032c0

This is a leaked image of what is likely an ornithopter. Might want to sneak a peak at it before it gets removed. First leak of any significance to come out of the production.

I’m a a pretty devoted Dune fan, and changing Liet-Kynes’ gender is about as low on the WTF scale for a gender swap that I can think of. The story could use more female representation, and this one wouldn’t turn anything on its head.

 gorgon wrote:
The story could use more female representation

Good Lord, there's a whole Sisterhood in that book!

Change the Baron to female. Give the role to Dame Judy Dench. Watch nerdling heads explode.

Alternaitvely change Paul to Paulette. Give it to Emily Blunt. The Sleeper Has Awakened!

 Frazzled wrote:
Change the Baron to female. Give the role to Dame Judy Dench.

Now THAT I would pay to see!

SamusDrake wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
The story could use more female representation

Good Lord, there's a whole Sisterhood in that book!

who like almost everyone else totally fail in their objectives (yes technically Jessica is to blame but she's one of them), so its a kind of equality of foob ups all round

Am kind of interested in the new movie although have a faint feeling that'll it'll suffer from the John Carter effect of having inspired so much the less read of the masses will see it as a knockoff of x,y and of course 40k

So the movie has now been delayed a month, will release december 18 2020. That is a bummer....it's like they're thinking it could be some christmas holiday blockbuster, hmm...so long as it makes enough money to greenlight the second half of the book then whatever.