Ask Lemmy

I just wanna say I agree with your critique and I think it's overrated. I haven't seen the second one tho

I loved the original book. I just think it’s unfilmable. A lot of it is about getting inside peoples heads to hear their thoughts and machinations.

I found the art direction, costuming, and casting of Lynch’s movies brilliant. Even the soundtrack was a nice surprise.

But the new movies seem very sterile, slow, and dull. I’ve also never understood people’s fascination with Chalmet. I find his performances to be just fair.

The movies have made money, so they are talking about making more of them from the second and third books. I think this is a mistake because the story in the sequels really goes off the rails. I do look forward to laughing at Chalmet playing Mr. Worm Dude.

I think the Bene Gesserit tv show they’re making sounds like a far better plan. The “fill in the blanks” backstories in the Dune universe are interesting, and leave more room for original storytelling.

It’s a mystery.

No, I'm in the exact same boat.

It's an absolutely stellar production of a completely mid story set in an amazing world, which is ignored in favor of the blandest character-drama-chosen-one-lovers-of-destiny drivel.

I can't stand it. I went back to Trigun for my desert sci-fi fix.

Some people are able to enjoy just the cinematography and world building, with the story and characters serving as mere excuses to explore those other things. And they are done exceptionally well here, which I think is impressing a lot of people.

And a lot of people really never think past surface level aspects when it comes to writing. Anyone can tell when the acting or CG is bad, but a lot of people can only tell that the writing is bad, when it goes from good to bad within the same production (Game of Thrones). If it's bad from the start, most people don't care. If something is cool, loud, pretty, dramatic, or shiny enough, it is able to entertain.

And I'm not even saying that's wrong. Different things are important to different people, both creators and readers/watchers etc.

We all have that one thing we enjoy for all the wrong reasons. In the same way some things can be widely popular, and still not hit home for some of us for all the wrong reasons.

Your description of the issues sounds just like the book. Which I also hated.

I think it's because he knows how to put his own spin on a story while respecting previous works in that space.

The "cookie cutter" parts of dune are only that because everyone has copied dune since the books came out.

That's like saying Houdinis' tricks were cookie cutter traps.

I read Dune years ago now and have only seen part 1. I may misremember the book some and that may be affecting my personal feelings of it but I'll give my input nonetheless.

Pretty much, I feel Villeneuve and his team have done the most faithful depiction of the first part of the book to date, in terms of matching mood and description of the spaces, as well as the behaviors exhibited by characters. the scenes that really drove this home for me were the hunter seeker in Paul's chamber and Jessica's interaction with Shadout Mapes. Unfortunately much of the relevant exposition which explains the details of the situation are missing, since they're internal monologues of Paul and Jessica.

I can't blame Chalamet for his acting here. Paul shows Jack shit in the books and you mostly get what he's thinking and feeling, once again, from his thoughts. In this case, Chalamet is being pretty faithful to Paul's demeanor in the books - whether he means to or not. I do remember him being alittle more expressive in the second part of the book, so it'll be interesting for me to see if that comes across in part 2.