|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 12, 2021 - 9:29 AM
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
Nevertheless, it still covers the same ground as the Lynch version and I continue to wonder if it was really necessary. Well, of course it covers the same ground as the Lynch version, just like Jackson's Lord of the Rings version covers the same ground as the Bakshi version. But the Lynch version was awful, so I have rather high hopes for the Villeneuve version. DUNE is a very interesting novel (read it years ago in the 1980s) and I Villeneuve's other movies so far. I thought ARRIVAL was great, and SICARIO a masterpiece, for me the best cop thriller since HEAT and therefore of the century. A lot of Dune nerds still like the 84, I cannot explain it, nor can I explain why Herbert himself loved the film. But he did. The Achilles-heal of D.V is the heavy handed slathering of self importance that his films do not really merit, and his growing inability to cut his pictures down to what they should be instead of the meandering 2-3 hour bore fests. And whenever this is stated his defenders have to say, yeah, "but his films are so pretty". Yeah, okay, maybe, if he does not pick the guy that shot Arrival, which was do badly lit you cannot see 50% of the movie. And even when they are 'pretty' like 2049, his films work hard at making you not care half way into the film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 23, 2021 - 12:27 AM
|
|
|
By: |
Ian J.
(Member)
|
Interesting this is turning into a 'Marmite' movie with such differing opinions. I rewatched the David Lynch movie recently, and I came very quickly to the realisation that there is virtually no conversation between characters, and it's mostly a sequence of statements edited together to try and provide an exposition of the plot in the fastest way possible. I found that very unsatisfying, despite my fondness for the film. Villeneuve's effort manages to evade that kind of approach for the most part. As far as I can tell, he took the 'headlines' approach, where the writing takes the major events of a book, and then rebuilds the lesser intermediate events in a way that works for a cinematic story telling environment, only bringing back something directly from the book if it is viable to do so. Some scenes played out in a similar way to the Lynch version due to that, but still felt better acted. I've read (here) that some feel that there was too much of Paul's dreams of Chani, but IIRC, that's a feature of the book so I can't see why that's so contentious. For sake of completeness, I need to say I haven't seen the TV mini-series so can't comment on how that interpretation worked (or didn't). Ultimately, I feel the film was a good interpretation of the book. I don't feel any book can truly survive word-for-word transition to the screen, as so much in a book is in the narrative. Short of having a narrator speak the narrative (which kills drama stone dead most times it's been attempted) all book to screen transitions are interpretations. Some will be tighter than others, but all will have a personal take on the way the material is presented. As for me, I like Villeneuve's work that I've seen so far (Arrival, BR 2049, Dune Part 1) and have no problem with his style.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 24, 2021 - 7:35 AM
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
I liked Arrival, but I also in my life had never walked out of a movie till BR2049. Think I'll pass on this one. Arrival bored me to death. The characters were dull and lifeless. Always whispering. Seen the same concept done much better before. Ive heard BR2049 was visually stunning, I gave up after 20 or 30 minutes into that film. BR didn't grab me at all. Ive heard the same of Dune, lots of long shots of nothing going on, the second half drags on. No character development. The music is intrusive and jarring. I like some artsy fartsy films but I don't think this is for me. Denis makes mostly pretty, well designed films that are very distancing and un-relatable. They are more like art exhibits than films with relatable characters or engaging stories. Arrival was a critical sweetheart that year. That film is so off putting and cold and uninteresting, and once you get to the end, it makes you feel like, 'what was the point of that'? The more money he gets to spend on films the more boring his films get. Dune is exactly the same, and it is interesting that even in reviews that say they like the film, they often say things similar to what I am saying, or like, "gee it is really a grind, but I like slamming my head in a very pretty door."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 24, 2021 - 7:51 AM
|
|
|
By: |
Solium
(Member)
|
I liked Arrival, but I also in my life had never walked out of a movie till BR2049. Think I'll pass on this one. Arrival bored me to death. The characters were dull and lifeless. Always whispering. Seen the same concept done much better before. Ive heard BR2049 was visually stunning, I gave up after 20 or 30 minutes into that film. BR didn't grab me at all. Ive heard the same of Dune, lots of long shots of nothing going on, the second half drags on. No character development. The music is intrusive and jarring. I like some artsy fartsy films but I don't think this is for me. Denis makes mostly pretty, well designed films that are very distancing and un-relatable. They are more like art exhibits than films with relatable characters or engaging stories. Arrival was a critical sweetheart that year. That film is so off putting and cold and uninteresting, and once you get to the end, it makes you feel like, 'what was the point of that'? The more money he gets to spend on films the more boring his films get. Dune is exactly the same, and it is interesting that even in reviews that say they like the film, they often say things similar to what I am saying, or like, "gee it is really a grind, but I like slamming my head in a very pretty door." Yeah, I don't know whats up. Is he the darling of Hollywood? Critics seem to be go out of their way to praise his films even when they are average at best. I understand not every film needs to be a crowd pleaser but a film still needs to have something going for it. Slow, stale and slumbering are not signs of artistic brilliance. If Lucas or Bay made the same films they'd be trashing the director.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|