|
Dune
Mar 4, 2008 12:32:03 GMT 1
Post by mrgrotey on Mar 4, 2008 12:32:03 GMT 1
I am the first one to complain about all the poinltess remakes of films that annoyingly seem to be the fashion these days, and I see a lot of them as just easy money making schemes rather than something that really needs doing, but there would be an exception to the rule, Dune, I think is in dire need of a remake. The two films Ive seen of it are both, lets face it, awful, cheesy hand painted desert sandscapes and dodgy effects, (although the sand worms in one of them were quite well done).
Dune is a fantastic story (so good George Lucas pretty much shamelessly ripped it off by creating Star Wars) and really needs an udate to bring it into the modern day.
Anyone agree?
|
|
|
Dune
Mar 4, 2008 13:33:19 GMT 1
Post by richardburton on Mar 4, 2008 13:33:19 GMT 1
Now despite short comings I think both adaptions were very good in their own ways. The made for TV series with William Hurt was far more faithful to the book, but was a bit cheap looking in places and Lynch's film version is just a fantastic surreal journey.
|
|
|
Dune
Mar 4, 2008 13:39:16 GMT 1
Post by mrgrotey on Mar 4, 2008 13:39:16 GMT 1
Oh yeah one was the made-for-tv series, thats right, havent seen them in ages I just feel not enough people know the story and having a modern update will open lots of peoples eyes to it.
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 25, 2008 10:29:46 GMT 1
Post by Lensman on Apr 25, 2008 10:29:46 GMT 1
Sorry, I have to disagree. The Lynch version was a travesty; the fremen in their stillsuits looked completely wrong, the star pilots looked nothing even *remotely* like anything which could have evolved from human. Far too much of the movie was over the top, like the bizarre portrayal of the Baron. And possibly worst of all, they had it rain at the end of the movie! My girlfriend at the time said, stunned, "They just killed every sandworm on Arrakis!" Yah, the sandworms were well done, but one good special effect does *not* save a bad movie.
OTOH I really, really liked the TV mini-series which was shown on the Sci-Fi Channel. In fact I bought the DVD set. Yes, it's obvious the production had a limited budget, and likewise the FX had limitations, but aside from that they did a great job. I thought their uses of costumes and sets was fabulous, especially considering the obviously limited budget. And while the FX were often obviously just that, I still thought they used them imaginatively, and with a few exceptions I thought they used them pretty well.
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 25, 2008 10:35:35 GMT 1
Post by richardburton on Apr 25, 2008 10:35:35 GMT 1
I agree that the Lynch version was very different from the book but if you look at it just as a film I think it stands up as a damn good one. The TV series is definitely far more faithful.
|
|
FALLINGSTAR
Been Here a while!
Zippy, George, Geoff and Bungle....Hey everyone...it's RAINBOW!
Posts: 222
|
Dune
Apr 26, 2008 4:25:37 GMT 1
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Apr 26, 2008 4:25:37 GMT 1
I don't know if anyone's aware but Dune IS being remade.
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 26, 2008 10:19:20 GMT 1
Post by mrgrotey on Apr 26, 2008 10:19:20 GMT 1
so it would seem still in early planning so it'll probably come out 2016 or something
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 26, 2008 15:59:59 GMT 1
Post by thedonal on Apr 26, 2008 15:59:59 GMT 1
I STILL haven't seen the TV adaptions of the first 3 books, so I can't comment on them.
I DO really like the David Lynch film. The general plot doesn't deviate far from the book- just some variations- ie the weirding way (modules in the film with sound manipulation- apparently, Lynch didn't want to have huge martial arts battles in the film), the deaths of Kynes and Idaho and the rain at the end (the Golden Path come early? You can never tell what the weather's going to do, eh?!).
It has a great cast, but does suffer from being a bit 80's- even the Toto score (which I love).
However, it was very atmospheric and suitably epic. If only the missing footage was availably for a proper restoration- rather than the extended TV version of the movie with the awful narration and drawings, instead of Irulan's voice. No wonder Lynch took his name off that version.
If there were less omissions from the book, the film would have been far more coherent.
I think that it won't take as long to get the new film together- Peter Berg (or whoever gets it in the end) can look at previous imaginings for guidance of what to and what not to do and the technology is there to more faithfully recreate the epic scale of the story.
Or they could just completely balls it up!! snot been the first time. And there's a lot to cover in a film that should really be about 4 hours plus!
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 27, 2008 22:32:19 GMT 1
Post by RustiSwordz on Apr 27, 2008 22:32:19 GMT 1
I like the TV versions and yes they are fundamentally different to the Lynch Movie (which is one of my faves the costume and set design was and is awesome.)
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 28, 2008 8:16:00 GMT 1
Post by Lensman on Apr 28, 2008 8:16:00 GMT 1
Despite the limited budget, the aristocrats' costumes on the miniseries were elaborate, beautiful, and often stunning. Many of the sets were, too. I don't remember the Lynch version that well, but from what I remember, the miniseries' costumes put the Lynch version to shame. And in the miniseries, the Fremens' costumes actually *looked* like they were worn by desert-dwellers; a far cry from the laughably bad Fremens' costumes in the Lynch version.
|
|
|
Dune
Apr 30, 2008 9:30:47 GMT 1
Post by thedonal on Apr 30, 2008 9:30:47 GMT 1
Aww- that's Lynch, though- isn't it? All rubber and leather wierdness.
They were alright- just not very accurate to the book...
The sets in the Lynch film are fantastic, imo
|
|