New Dune Movie Confirmed

bowman9991 writes "Peter Berg will be directing a new big-budget Dune movie from Paramount. SFFMedia reports that 'although there were some doubts that they were going to get it,' the producers have secured the rights to the Dune novel from Frank Herbert's estate and are looking for writers to provide a screenplay that is true to the original text. Can't wait!"

Comments

multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Anonymous Coward]

they've already ruined the dune series- lets hope the trend reverses like Batman Begins did for Batman.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[ichthyoboy]

This isn't even a sequel...it's a remake of the first novel of the series. Have there even been movies made from any of the other Dune novels?

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[vecctor]

They made Children of Dune in a tv mini-series sequel to Dune on the sci-fi channel.

Not technically a movie, but only because of length and presentation format. It had the production values easily - so it was pretty much a 4-5 hour long movie (and was sold on DVD that way).

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Firethorn]

Let's see, I remember the movie and the TV series. I'll have to find Children of Dune.

The movie I enjoyed, but had a number of parts I didn't understand until I read the book. The mini-series, having many more times the length, was MUCH better. Improved production values helped as well. On the whole, I prefer the series.

Given the scope of Herbert's books, it'll be interesting to see how well they can do being restricted to a 2hr or so format, rather than something that you'd need an old style intermission if you showed it in the theaters.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Z00L00K]

I personally liked the old one directed by David Lynch. That movie did leave sections out, which unfortunately made it a bit thin compared to the book.

But I still think that any new movie has to be measured against this. As I have understood it that movie was cut down quite a bit. I heard that there was 8 hours cut out of the original filming. But I suspect that some of it were bad scenes and duplicates and that the remaining parts have been destroyed by now so a "full version" or anything else may be lost to the void.

But another question is - Why redo that book again? Let us see some other of the well-known authors filmed. Asimov's "Nightfall", Gordon Dickson's "Way of the Pilgrim", Frederick Pohl's "Gateway", Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" (which gave us the word "Grok") or "Citizen of the Galaxy", Keith Laumer's "Galactic Odyssey", Jack Vance's "The Demon Princes", Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination", Jack McDevitt's "A Talent for War", Brian Aldiss epic "Helliconia", Christopher Anvil's "Pandora's Planet", Steven Gould's "Helm", Alfred Elton van Vogt's "The Empire of Isher".

There are also books that are better suited for TV series of course. Gordon Dickson's Dorsai books and the many Sector General stories from James White.

And there are books/authors that has produced enough material to allow creation of an epic series that sure could take on Star Wars (but sure be very different) like Iain M Banks Culture novels, the "Hope" series of David Feintuch, Asimov's foundation books, Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game" and following books.

But maybe this just indicates that Hollywood needs to play it safe - but I think that they play it too safe in this case. One movie that's available on DVD still and the mini-series that was released a few years ago must surely have blunted the market for a third movie on the same story.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Belial6]

The thing that surprised me was the that the Children of Dune mini-series was better than the Dune movie. It was clear that Dune and a bigger budget, as there were a some 'this looks like CGI' moments in Children of Dune. Nothing as bad as the Hulk, but they were there. The acting, flow, pacing and everything else seemed to be noticeably better in Children of dune.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[tuxgeek]

I thought the re-make Scf Fi series movie gave them the time frame to expound on the story line better that the original movie. The follow up to that the Children of Dune is also a must see/must have. Several times a year I find the need to sit down to a 6 disk marathon, just because it's there. I view, therefore I am.

On thread, I would rather see someone do an extended mini-series over a season or two on the Dune books. Give it a go on the Sci Fi channel or *cough-choke-gag* Fox network, and see what happens. If it goes the way of Firefly, then sell the series plus all un-aired episodes on DVD. What would they have to lose? It would be a hell of a lot better than that "reality show" garbage polluting the tubes year after year.

Just my 2 cents

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[icebrain]

I'd love to see Starship Troopers done correctly; without twisting around the whole point of the book... and with powered armor and real drops. The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress would also be an awesome movie... but getting the 1/6th gravity correct would be a big technical challenge. Might need to be an animated one for now, though. Clarke's Against the Fall of Night would be awesome too.

A serious, non-Disney 20,000 Leagues would be interesting.

The Mote in God's Eye (Niven and Pournelle) would be good as a miniseries, as would the stories of Falkenberg's legions.

I'm sure I could think of others if I wasn't so tired today...

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[spikedvodka]

"Nightfall" I've poked at turning it into a stage-play. It's short enough to turn it into a decent play...

maybe I should pick up that project again

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[bishiraver]

I didn't have problems with a lot of the "this is cgi" parts. I had problems with the fact that nighttime scenes were just daytime scenes with a fucking blue filter. Oh, yeah, and the fremen walked around without their fucking stillsuits on. (or the mouthpieces)

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[gerrytucker]

Your point about the Fremen I believe is intentional. When reading the novels, there is much talk about how Fremen have been corrupted with power and have lost their desert ways. This is the time frame where this decline starts.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[virgil_disgr4ce]

It had the production values easily Hm, I know we all have different standards but... what production values? I couldn't help but think that it looked way too much like a flat, made-for-tv-movie (which is what it was) instead of the epic cinematic experience that the story demands. This is specifically why I've always enjoyed David Lynch's version--despite the bizarre and completely absurd elements of it and huge changes, what it did right is the scale and scope of the story, something truly huge and epic, something that really astounds the viewer the way the book astounds the reader. --Ted

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Mr. Bad Example]

> Let us see some other of the well-known authors filmed. Asimov's "Nightfall" [...]

Let's not.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[virgil_disgr4ce]

I'm glad that someone else here shares my opinion for David Lynch's version (and you can get the full-length director's cut, I'm surprised you hadn't seen it). And I also agree that there's not really any call to redo it (except possibly from the producer's money-driven perspective), and that it'd be great to film some other sci-fi classics.

HOWEVER, ultimately what we really need is new blood writing beautiful, brilliant stories specifically for the screen. Sci-fi film has a completely stereotyped reputation, far more than even sci-fi literature. The latter case has lots of examples of works that don't fit into any easy genre or description, and have a distinctly literate quality that not all of their pulp brethren share (I'm thinking Sam Delaney's Dhalgren). It seems like science fiction films and tv shows end up never being as inspired and unique as good sci-fi writing, and I'm not sure why that is. At least part of it is simply business; for some kinds of sci-fi stories to be done right they might honestly need a pretty epic budget, and I don't blame producers for being wary of paying that back. I do blame them for being spineless and heartless without a lick of creativity or vision.

Luckily, a good science fiction story doesn't *need* a big budget necessarily. "Stranger in a Strange Land" is a fantastic example. It's science-fiction because it presupposes the existence of "martians" and takes place in the future, but it's a story about humans and a human who grew up with martians, and what we learn from him and what he learns from us. And it was one of the most incredible, influential and heartbreaking stories I've experienced ("read" is just not a strong enough word). With a thoughtful, insightful director and screenwriter, with people who understand the story and understand how people experience the story, it could be a historic piece of film, in my opinion.

But my point here is that we need to get away from adaptations and write new sci-fi stories for this specific medium, with its different potentials and limitations. If "Back to the Future" was a pulp paperback, I could imagine seeing it shelved in Sci-Fi, and yet I imagine most people would not call the movie "sci-fi." Why? Because it was written to be an adventure about people and the interactions of people, and it was written *for the screen*. Sure, it involves sci-fi tropes, like the mad-but-lovable scientist, improbable and ingenious technology, etc., but it's not *about* the technology. "Donnie Darko" is also an interesting example. Sci-fi or not sci-fi? It doesn't matter.

I can only hope that somehow we'll see more original screenplays that tackle the ideas and ideals that we look to science fiction for, because those ideas and the hopeful, optimistic energy behind them have always been really exhilarating to me.

--Ted

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[zymano]

Peter Berg??? Who the fu**. Dude is a FU**ING ACTOR!!!!!!! He must do drugs with Paramount producers.

You know the big budget is for big name overrated actors.

Expect Leo, Johansen, Cameron Diaz, Adam Sandler, Will Smith and other cute adorable media favorites which hope to lure in women and blacks too. Bank on it!

Thats the only way this movie will get funded.

This movie will suck.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Gilmoure]

Niven's Ringworld would make a great movie. The plot is simple enough for regular folks (and even movie execs) to get (explorers crash land, need to escape), the visuals would be killer (floating buildings, fly cycles, the Ring, Kzinti) and Louis Wu would be a fun character to interpret. While many people may hate this, I see Bruce Willis (with a shave) as a possible candidate.

So, how would ya'll cast Ringworld, the Movie?

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Darinbob]

Yes, the mini-series was pretty good I thought.

The problem with the first movie however was that it was just a random collection of favorite scenes. If you tried to watch it without knowing the book, it was confusing gibberish. The scenes were well made and and fun to watch if you knew what was going on.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[crakbone]

Starship Troopers done right would be great, then my wife would be able to stop hearing me grip about the abortion they did to the book.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[PReDiToR]

I'm holding on to life in the hope that I live to see the Foundation Series turned into a set of movies.

Anyone who takes that on will be under as much scrutiny as Peter Jackson was for Lord Of The Rings, and will have real trouble with deciding how many movies to make.

On the financial side of producing Foundation, there are countless opportunities for shitty TV series spin-off shows featuring characters from the films. But let RealityTV morons pay with their eyeballs, I just want the movies.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[CodeBuster]

It would be a hell of a lot better than that "reality show" garbage polluting the tubes year after year. Albeit higher risk, higher cost, and lower margin from the bean-counter's point of view (and FOX is run by the bean counters).

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Tetsujin]

But another question is - Why redo that book again? Let us see some other of the well-known authors filmed. Asimov's "Nightfall", Gordon Dickson's "Way of the Pilgrim", Frederick Pohl's "Gateway", Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" (which gave us the word "Grok") Well, in the mean time, we've got movies of Asimov's "I, Robot" and Heinlein's "Starship Troopers". :D

"Stranger in a Strange Land" was good stuff - but one thing that really didn't stand up well to re-reading, for me at least, was Jubal's life lessons. Like, please, do tell us what to think Jubal. Impart upon us the wisdom of Heinlein. How about that scene where Jubal and Duke(?) were discussing the merits and morality and history of cannibalism...?

That thing went ON and ON and ON, man... "Yeah, but cannibalism is icky!" "Yeah, cannibalism is icky. But that's just your prejudice and societal conditioning." "Yeah, but it's icky gross!" "Well, you're icky gross, too. But some people just do things differently." "Icky icky icky!!! GROOOOSSSSSS!"...

Starship Troopers had whole chapters of this... Hey everybody, Juan Rico's reminiscing about History and Moral Philosophy class again! Oh, and now he's gone to OCS for even more History and Moral Philosophy...

Of course, all that crap would get cut from any movie adaptation... With the right treatment I think "Stranger" could be a cool movie, though...

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Omestes]

I know, at least, it will be better than the Lynch / DeLaurentiis version. Its odd, I love Lynch and own all his moves, and I think DeLaurentiis' campy sci-fi movies (Barbarella, Flash Gordon, Conan..) are fun, but I refuse to buy Dune, and actively try not to watch it. It was that bad.

It had nothing to do with the novels, the only thing it had going for it was casting, which was awesome, when I read the books I still picture Sting as Feyd, and Kyle MacLachlan as Paul. Though Patrick Steward as Gurney is a stretch, he was nominated as the sexiest man alive playing a character called "a wretched hump of a man" in the novel.

The mini-series wasn't bad in the sense it followed the books rather well. But the acting and effects were rather bad, like all Sci-Fi channel productions.

I still marvel at how such an awesome Director/Producer combo could make such an atrocious movie, its like neither of them actually read the book (take the navigators for example, they are pretty well described in the book, and look nothing like cuttle fish).

Perhaps they will do a LoTR take, and do the first three, which could be a self contained trilogy if I remember right.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[CodeBuster]

and you can get the full-length director's cut, I'm surprised you hadn't seen it Except that it wasn't really the "director's cut" since Lynch disowned it (and it actually is a really bad hack job for the most part...only a couple of the added scenes were any good), hence direction by Alan Smithee and screenplay by "Judas Booth" (in reference of course to the apostle Judas Iscariot who betrayed Christ and John Wilkes Booth who assassinated President Lincoln).

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[lexDysic]

But another question is - Why redo that book again?
Because Dune is quite obviously an allegory for the politics of the Middle East. And people care more (and understand more) about that today then they did in the 80s.

Dune is about as topical as sci-fi gets, these days. In the hands of talented director it should have very broad appeal.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[virgil_disgr4ce]

Oh, hm, I knew about the Smithee version but I thought it was for a TV cut or something.

Huh ... it's a shame; I don't know why there isn't real director's cut that would have met Lynch's approval.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[bangthegong]

The De Laurentiis "Dune" movie was cool, and if you get the DVD they have a longer cut of it, which helps fill in a lot of the perceived "gaps" in the original release. However, I think a lot of SF fans are too literal in how they want to see these stories on a big screen exactly how the book looked in their mind's eye when they read it. I thought that the original Dune movie left enough "whitespace" that there was something to think about afterwards, just like with "2001". It was more fun to think about who those big hulking beasts that breathe spice were, versus having the whole history of the guilds and folding space as 30 minutes of exposition.

The alternate cut does this, and I think it's less effective as a movie this way, unless the goal of the movie is to tell you everything important in the book. (Analogy in music: the rests are as important as the notes.) There are other examples of this. I thought the "I, Robot" movie was a fun re-imagining of the original Asimov story. Not true to the original, but a good movie if you can mentally separate the movie from the book and look at each on its own merits.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[bangthegong]

Another example of a good SF book that was turned into a crap movie: Carl Sagan's "Contact".

With CGI capabilities of today, I'd love to see someone tackle Arthur C. Clarke's "Rendezvous with Rama" series. Or someone else mentioned Asimov's "Foundation", you would have like 200 hours of movie from the foundation series!

These are character-driven stories, so the essence of the movie has to be the characters. Fans get hung up on the mechanics of the action. I think you have to look at Hari Seldon like Frodo in that regard. The evolution of Muad'dib is more important than exposition on what the wierding way really is. My 2 cents....

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[CodeBuster]

I don't know why there isn't real director's cut that would have met Lynch's approval. How many of his other films have "directors cuts"? I am not certain, but probably few or none. By all accounts Lynch is very single minded about his films and how they are presented. Take the following excerpt from his wikipedia article, which sums up how he feels about such things quite nicely IMHO...

"Lynch tends to keep his personal life private and rarely comments on his films. However, he does attend public events and film festivals when he or his films are nominated/awarded. He is known to be notoriously evasive and cagey in interviews, and refuses to discuss the plot details and "true meanings" of his films, preferring viewers to come away with their own interpretations. None of his films released on DVD have director commentary tracks, and some (as per his request) do not even have chapter selections. This is due, at least in part, to his belief that a film should be viewed from beginning to end without interruption or distraction."

He is one of those directors, in the Kubrick sort of mold, who wants viewers to see his film precisely as he intended it to be viewed OR not at all. This worked well for Kubrick, but frankly, Lynch is not Kubrick.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[MichaelSmith]

Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" (which gave us the word "Grok") or "Citizen of the Galaxy"

All good suggestions but I would like to see Friday made into a movie. It is more relevant now than when it was written, while a lot of the classics from the 1950's and 60's are just too dated for me.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[bangthegong]

Forgot one - Bio of a Space Tyrant series by Piers Anthony! I always thought those books would make excellent movies...

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[niktemadur]

> Let us see some other of the well-known authors filmed. Asimov's "Nightfall" [...]

Let's not. And again, not.
A long time ago, I had the misfortune of watching this late 1980's travesty, done in a late 1970's Playboy Channel style, with the corresponding production values to boot, and some sort of sensuality cult where women dance naked to bland instrumental synth music, lost to the outside world in their "groovy" trip.
Having read both Asimov's original novella and the Asimov-Silverberg full novel, I thought "I've never heard of the movie, so it sank like a stone when it was released, but it's a great story, surely it can't be that bad, can it?" To my complete astonishment, it was that bad, and then some.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Anonymous Psychopath]

While the Foundation series is a good read (I'm reading one of them again right now), I can't think of anything with more potential to be mind-numbingly boring as a movie or TV series.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[vecctor]

I guess it didn't have the "cheap" feeling to me that I get from most TV movies.

I'm certainly not poo-pooing a new, better movie if they can it. But I thought the sci-fi one did a good job.

Just MHO though :)

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[HuguesT]

Starship trooper, the movie, was a satire of western society. As such it works extremely well.

Starship troopers, the book, is a to me a horrible, militaristic piece of drivel.

Each to their own :-)

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[WillDraven]

Just to add on to that list something that I'm finishing up now and have immensely enjoyed, Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. If done right it could be an awesome movie trilogy, or even a multi-season tv series. If one tried to cram the entire thing into a single movie however way too much would be lost.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[evilninjax]

But another question is - Why redo that book again? Let us see some other of the well-known authors filmed. Asimov's "Nightfall", Gordon Dickson's "Way of the Pilgrim", Frederick Pohl's "Gateway", Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" (which gave us the word "Grok") or "Citizen of the Galaxy", Keith Laumer's "Galactic Odyssey", Jack Vance's "The Demon Princes", Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination", Jack McDevitt's "A Talent for War", Brian Aldiss epic "Helliconia", Christopher Anvil's "Pandora's Planet", Steven Gould's "Helm", Alfred Elton van Vogt's "The Empire of Isher".

There are also books that are better suited for TV series of course. Gordon Dickson's Dorsai books and the many Sector General stories from James White.

And there are books/authors that has produced enough material to allow creation of an epic series that sure could take on Star Wars (but sure be very different) like Iain M Banks Culture novels, the "Hope" series of David Feintuch, Asimov's foundation books, Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game" and following books.

NIGHTFALL was made.

STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND was in pre-production but went into turnaround.

ENDER'S GAME is in development Hell.

Dan Simmons' HYPERION is apparently beginning the process of being made.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[delong]

take the navigators for example, they are pretty well described in the book, and look nothing like cuttle fish

They do in the later books, however. Herbert evolved many of his creations over the course of the series. The Tleilaxu, for example.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Firethorn]

It had nothing to do with the novels, the only thing it had going for it was casting, which was awesome, when I read the books I still picture Sting as Feyd, and Kyle MacLachlan as Paul. Though Patrick Steward as Gurney is a stretch, he was nominated as the sexiest man alive playing a character called "a wretched hump of a man" in the novel.

Same with me. I watch the movie while I was still a young teenager, it wasn't until years later that I found the book. I remember reading the book and going 'oh THAT was what was going on!'

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[dwywit]

The last thing I heard (some years ago, now) was that Quincy Jones held the movie option on Ringworld, and that Chow-Yun Fat was being considered for Louis Wu. An excellent choice IMO. Bruce Willis? Not so much. I don't think it's so much an action book - more of a "how the hell do we get out of here" puzzle with some actiony adventures along the way. A role for someone a little more cerebral than ol' Bruce. Now for Teela - a tall, dark-haired, clumsy, innocent young thing - any takers?

spoilers ahead

I wonder if the option has expired yet? I'd like to take it on. Imagine - Ringworld as a movie, then Ringworld Engineers (imagine the CGI as the Hindmost fires the sun as a laser!), Ringworld Throne (lose the first half of that one - who cares about the vampire nest - I want to see the battle on the rim transport system) and Ringworld's Children - I can feel a nerdgasm coming on....

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Provocateur]

The scenes were well made and and fun to watch if you knew what was going on.

Even if you *didn't* know what was going on, I definitely went to watch, as the visuals were different from anything I had ever seen. For a more-sci-fi-and-less-sword-and-sorcery fan, it was awesome.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[bark]

just another perspective... http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd add David Brin's "Uplift" series, too. (Maybe "Earth" as well).

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Atario]

Another example of a good SF book that was turned into a crap movie: Carl Sagan's "Contact".

I dare you to defend such slander, sir. Contact was a great movie.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[malaprohibita]

I would just like to thank you for adding books to my reading list.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[Gilmoure]

For Teela, the actress who played the engineer on Firefly comes to mind.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[icebrain]

See the link in the other reply.

But even if you dislike the book, you have to agree that the movie took it and completely changed the entire premise. Taking someone's characters, plot, title, and everything else, then completely twisting around his message, just isn't right. It's like the train wreck that was I, Robot (with Will Smith), which was like pissing on Asimov's grave. Or, let's let Maddox explain.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[jwo7777777]

Jewel Staite, who is presently doing Stargate Atlantis things.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[mink]

"I thought the "I, Robot" movie was a fun re-imagining of the original Asimov story. "

How so? It was a screenplay that was completely unrelated at the start and all I can tell they did was shoehorn in the names and some basic concepts like the three laws and the positronic brains.
From what I remember (and is have been a decade or two) when I last read it, the book was a collection of short stories each one exploring a way that the three laws could fail, not work as intended and morality involving sentient machines.

I saw little of them in the film, which I though was good, but the original film title would have worked just fine.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well

[bangthegong]

Agreed - the movie could have been called anything, but the title at minimum just let people know that it was based in Asimov's world of the 3 laws. The book as a collection of short stories was more similar to the movie they made of Bicentennial Man. So you could almost say they already made that movie, in a sense. And the I, Robot movie did incorporate more of the last story in the book. If they want to make movies that are more easily adaptable from the robot series of books, the Caves of Steel and it's sequels could be a good source of material IMO.

Why not do another book in the series

[Chrisq]

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.

The first Dune movie sucked. Maybe you never read the books, but it didn't capture much of anything good from the book. The made for TV mini series was amazing. That's how to do Dune.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Ctrl-Z]

I suspect that if the film does well enough at the box office that the studio would be interested in creating sequels. They need to create interest from somewhere, and Dune is a great place to (re)start.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[stevew]

I tend to agree - the first Dune movie was horrible. The mini-series was GREAT - very much like the book. You understood a pretty complex story line (unlike the first movie which felt like it was on fast forward IF you had read the book.)

There are so many other good yarns in this story - why go to the first one a third time?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[totallyarb]

Fair point, but nobody's going to turn up to a film with Kyle MacLachlan in the lead, surely?

If they wanted to continue the series, it would have meant doing a made-for-TV God Emperor. Actually, I'm suprised they didn't, since accordind to TFA it's the same producer as the Sci-Fi miniseries.

Given the choice between a small-screen God Emperor and a big-screen Dune, I know what I prefer...

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[JesusPGT]

It may not have been incredibly faithful in terms of storyline, but its visual style is just on a completely higher level of awesomeness compared to the sci-fi miniseries. If they can make the story more like the book, but try to keep at least some of the design elements of the Lynch version, I will be happy.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[halivar]

The first Dune movie is some of the finest cinema ever made, IMHO. It may miss the book at many significant points, but it does capture the tone and atmosphere of it. The costumes, set design, and dialog were all very true to the book. I also loved the Toto soundtrack. My only real beef is the removal of lasguns and the addition of "wierding modules." This is not enough to make me hate the movie, however.

I don't need another remake of the first book, anyway. I'd much rather they made a movie on the second or third books.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[residieu]

The Sci-Fi network got through Children of Dune, after that the books get less interesting. (Though I'd like to see how they'd make Leto the worm look, I don't see how you could make a movie out of God Emporer)

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[MBGMorden]

I'd much rather they made a movie on the second or third books. Actually the "Children of Dune" mini-series is of the second and third books combined. Personally, I'd rather have a proper version of books 4 through 6 :).

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cerelib]

The current Dune is a great film anyway. You didn't read the book, did you? Many people liked the Dune movie because it had great visuals, but they look past the fact that there are huge gaps in the story. If you read the book, it at least make sense to you, but if you didn't than the story really doesn't work. For example, in the movie, in no time at all and for no apparent reason Chani falls in love with Paul. There is no explanation, it just needed to happen, so it did. Dune is one of those books that completely transcends the format of a 2-4 hour movie. A mini-series can work, but you can't quite portray the many "feint within a feint" aspects of Dune in such a short time.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[SatanicPuppy]

The book is near-impossible to transfer accurately to film; there is waaaay too much internal dialogue and extremely dry politic-ing.

Any movie that is actually going to be worth watching is going to have to hack out big chunks of that stuff.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[dslauson]

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.

The first movie was pretty cool if viewed as a David Lynch movie (with a hilariously dated Toto soundtrack). I own it on DVD and still bust it out from time to time. My wife hates it because she doesn't know the story, finds it boring and difficult to follow, and hates all the corny internal monologue. All valid criticism, but I still love it in that same weird way I love the rest of Lynch's catalogue.

Still, as a whole, it's totally clear to me that there's room for another movie. One that's more cohesive and sticks to the original source better than the Lynch version, and with a bigger budget, and better acting and effects than the miniseries. If done well, a Dune movie could be epic.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[SatanicPuppy]

Having actually read the entire series, I can't imagine that any movie studio would be interested in making the whole thing...As you get farther and farther in, things get more and more abstruse.

I can imagine some of the later books made into movies, but I can't imagine actually wanting to watch them.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[pla]

My only real beef is the removal of lasguns and the addition of "wierding modules." This is not enough to make me hate the movie, however.

I would agree with you in that I much prefer Lynch's version. However, the addition of the weirding modules (and the complete avoidance of the lasgun/shield interaction problem) almost ceompletely undermined Herbert's intended mockery of religion...

In the book, Paul (and Jessica) basically exploit the natives' superstitions to use them as pawns in a mostly-political game (although in fairness they do eventually "go native"). Lynch makes it out as more of a tune-in-turn-on-drop-out messianic fairy-tale.

Both have their merits, but I'd hardly even call them the same story.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[eean]

Don't forget about book 7 and 8 written by his son from notes. They were OK books, and would certainly make for epic movies.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

WIsh that Peter Jackson would do something other than the Hobbit. Can't he stretch his muscles with something like SNow Crash to be this generation's Kubrick?

I say, if it's been mocked by Jay and Silent Bob, that's the end of it; move along to other things.

Dune is been there, done that, bring us other worlds. There's much from sci-fi lit to choose from.

You know what you guys are doing? You're forcing me to read some more.

Did they show Dunshine here? or Cypher?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

The "recently" released extended version has some of the internal dialogue. It extends the story but is very boring to watch indeed, no wonder it was cut from the theatrical release.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[skuzzlebutt]

It had its moments, but I'm just curious to see if Slimer from Ghostbusters is asked to come back and reprise his role as a Guild Navigator.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Plugh]

I wish someone would pick up on Herbert's other work. The Dosadi Experiment, for example, is IMO a much better story than anything in the Dune saga.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[theshowmecanuck]

Personally I was a little disappointed the way Jackson turned Frodo into such a pussy. It kind of soured the movies for me.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[ukdmbfan]

It's not even so much the removal of large portions of the book, which is basically necessary in any such transfer from book to film for a book of this kind, it's just that such massive artistic changes were made. It is, for all intents and purposes, a children's film.

One of the most iconic moments in the book is when Leto tries to kill the Baron, and in narrowly avoiding his death he becomes incredibly agitated, but manages once leaving the room to control and calm himself in the corridor away from the sight of everyone under him, and technically and strategically assess the situation. In the film, this was represented by him leaving the room and proceeding to chuckle violently whilst flying into the air. That for me negated any positive points the film ever had. That's a huge stylistic and artistic change in the fundamental characteristics of arguably the second most important character in the book.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[gad_zuki!]

Unfortunately its very hip right now to hate this movie, so the film community just focuses on its negative parts and the hard-core sci-fi fans are always pissed about even the slightest deviation from the book.

That said, its a stunning movie. I've watched it many times and am always noticing something new. The design of the objects, sets, and costumes is extremely original and creative. It builds this dark alien sci-fi mood that no other movie has, perhaps with the exception of bladerunner. Its really an incredible piece of filmmaking and I hope the generation that associates Dune with the sci-fi channel should give it a chance.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Sethus]

Mod parent the heck up. Dune is far too deep and detail oriented to be accurately transported to movie format. There's just so much stuff that needs to be explained. Ex. Kanley.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[halivar]

I didn't take it as mockery, per se. Rather, it seemed consistent with the overall theme that, in politics, everything is a tool. Religion, sex, family, war; nothing is sacred in the Dune universe, and there are no clean hands. Everything is pragmatically engineered for maximum exploitation.

It is rather cynical, but not mocking.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

The made for TV mini series sucked. Maybe you never read the books, but it didn't capture much of anything good from the book. The first Dune movie was amazing. That's how to do Dune.

There, fixed it for you.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[wikdwarlock]

See my comments below re: Sci-Fi's terrible mini-series.

Short version: "Dune, desert planet." means the Fremen should freaking wear their stillsuits, and use them to actually keep their water. How any film maker can miss that FUNDAMENTAL aspect of the Dune story is beyond explanation.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Faluzeer]

Hmmm

The original film was visually stunning, but it did not really appeal to me because of all the changes that had been made, the mini-series on the other hand really did appeal, shame some of the acting was so poor.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Khyber]

I'm surprised nobody's bothered tagging this 'beatingadeadhorse'

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[shawn(at)fsu]

Funny enough I liked the David Lynch version more than the miniseries. While it wasn't as true to the story, teh budget had to have been higher. The fact that desert screens were actually in a desert was nice. The Scifi series was way to much sound stage and green screen.

Overall I liked the actors better from the David Lynch movie. Jürgen Prochnow was a much more convincing Duke Leto than William Hurt. Barron Vladimir Harkonen was also more convincing IMHO oh and you had Sting. Because of that I was willing to put up with all the liberties they took with the story.

Either way I'm looking forward to this new take on it.

Just my $.02

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Dread_ed]

Two words: Honored Matres.

Who the hell wouldn't want to see female killing machines fuck the self control out of people?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Jorj X. McKie]

I agree. I'd rate The Dosadi Experiment as his best. They might have to pull in some background from Whipping Star, though. I do see a couple of potential pitfalls for a movie version (among them being how the Gowachin are represented, and the conspiracies within conspiracies nature of their civilization), but it would be tremendous if done right. I wish that Herbert had written more in the BuSab universe, rather than the somewhat tiresome later Dune sequels. Another interesting movie adaptation would be The Godmakers. That one is shorter, and could be told fairly well in two hour movie format.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cwills]

Actually I felt just the opposite... I've been a long time Herbert fan, and remember vividly waiting for the Dune movie to come out. Yes -- I was one of those folks that stood in line at midnight for the first showing in the area. I knew from the start that it was going to be a tough job transferring the book to film, and I was ready for artistic license with the story line. However... I wanted to walk out of that movie. From the opening to about the point where Paul and Jessica are left out in the desert I was about fine. I had a lot of issues with the weirding device.. but they needed some sort of hook to use.. but as the movie progressed, it got to such an absurd point about it that I felt that the spirit of the story was being left further and further behind, to the point that I felt that this was not even close to the story that I had spent so much time reading. The SciFi channel mini-series while lacking the visual feel of the Lynch movie, I felt stayed more in tune with the spirit of the Dune series.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[wonkavader]

The miniseries lacked pacing and directing in general. It was slow and long. If you'd read the books and wanted a replay of them, it was for you. It was not a quality product on its own, and not a mainstream product in general.

People who read Dune had problems with the Lynch version -- HUGE problems. But it was paced well, delivered lines with impact and was visually stunning. A big-budget film needs to take its cues from the Lynch version, not SciFi's.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Rogerborg]

Please note: a movie can be "a great film" without being a great adaptation of a book.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Maudib]

The first dune is a goddamn travesty. If the master of it was lost forever I would jump for joy. The first book needs a proper screen rendition. Not some crappy home rendered CG like the mini-series and not some gimmicky twist of voice into weapons. If you think I am trolling just take one look at my Nick please.

The first novel was split into two books. The movie should be as well. This is giving me heartburn. Friday night lights? The kingdom? Will Smith? I have visions of I Robot in the sand.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Plugh]

yeah, I love the whole idea of the Bureau of Sabotage... I think Herbert must have been a closet Anarcocapitalist >:)

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cwills]

That would be a great movie if they could pull it off...

The character Jorg X McKie is one of my favorite story characters.

First introduced in a short story "Saboteur Extraordair", then a short novel, "Whipping Star" and finally The Dosadi Experiment.

I think in order to do the Dosadi Experiment, elements of from these two other works would have to be introduced. The first short story establishes the necessary back story for Jorg, the second establishes his relationship to the Calebans and why he is so trusted by them.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Dread_ed]

What goober rated you offtopic? Very relevant remarks IMHO.

Breaking the book into 2 or 3 movies might work with the right acting. Adding in Dune Messiah might make a beeter story arc for the screen too, though I might be expecting a bit much from movie audiences there.

Personally I would welcome a new movie that stayed withing the original boundaries of the book. Anything to overwrite the creative license abominations the first movie seared into my memory.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[misterhypno]

By money alone, I do set my mind in motion
by the Coins of Profit, the project acquires speed,
the audiences acquire the popcorn,
by money alone, I do set my mind in motion...

The Producer-tat's Mantra...

Lee Darrow, C.H.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Ctrl-Z]

If you think I am trolling just take one look at my Nick please.

Too bad spelling isn't one of your strong points.

I love the idea of Will Smith being in a new version of the movie, as long as it includes lots of product placements.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[chivo243]

I totally agree with your statement, and can even extend it to LOTR.... There were many omissions in that screen epic series. I've just been listening to the Dune series on tape(mp3) and there really is a lot of internal dialog that won't lend itself well to an epic film. I'll still see it when it hits the theater, we will see won't we?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[yhetti]

You guys are all nuts. The 1984 version of Dune sucked so unbelievably hard. I have read Dune literally dozens of times (and each sequel slightly less thereafter.) I recently finished a complete re-read of the entire original 6 + the KJA/BH 7, AND watched Dune on VHS.

I think people are mistaking "bad" for "nuanced"; I was trying to explain to my girlfriend, who has never read Dune but is by no means stupid, what is going on. It was completely impossible. The only thing that I could get across to her was that Paul was the semi-penultimate step in a breeding program that took thousands of years. And now he's on Desperate Housewives.

I work with a guy who was at Dune on opening night. They handed out vocabulary cards at the theater. That's not "deep and mysterious Sci-Fi", that's bad movie direction.

Dune'84 is a piece of shit. I never would have read the book had I seen the movie first because it was clearly directed by a raving lunatic. The only saving grace is that the Evil Guys were genuinely evil and brilliant actors. GG Sting.

Also, they threw away Duncan's first life without ever explaining why he was even important.

"KWIK, TO THE WEIRD FLYING THING!"
"Duncan dyed, LOL!"

Sci-Fi's version was much more watchable. Sci-Fi's Children of Dune was fantastic (in no small part thanks to Brian Tyler's soundtrack).

I'm not saying they have to explain everything in the movie, but Dune: Sting Edition lost all credibility with me when the Navigator first shows up. He reminds me too much of Mer-Man, Skeletor's fishy sidekick.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[a whoabot]

I've never read the book. I've seen the Lynch movie and I liked it; I've liked other David Lynch movies I've seen as well. I've never thought that the movie didn't make sense apart from the unrealistic technologies.

In the Lynch movie Paul and Chani have a relationship which seems to transcend time: He dreams about her before ever "really" meeting her. I can hear her voice playing in my head saying something like "I've always loved you" to Paul in some dream-like sequence where they interact, so it would seem she never falls in love with Paul because she was always in love with him to begin with.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[domatic]

I have SEVERE doubts about there ever being a decent movie made from Dune.

1. Lynch movie: Got the look and characters right but did severe damage to the themes and story of the book.

2. Sci-Fi miniseries: Far more true to the themes and story but the look and casting were all wrong and nasty alterations were made to Paul as a young Duke in training. Paul was shown as a basically a whiny privileged brat who outgrows when it called upon to be a man. That always makes for a nice story but it isn't the young Paul Atreides. The Baron Harkonnen was also far too benign looking. What part of "gross and ugly" and "so fat he had to carry his excess weight with suspensors" did these guys have trouble understanding? That and he wasn't nearly diabolical enough. We didn't get The Baron. We got a prissy Adonis wannabe with delusions of being sinister. Similar atrocities were performed on the other characters.

It is also a certainty that the story will be severely dumbed down if this is to be a big budget film. I don't at all disagree with avoiding things like "thought vocalization" but this will be competing with Mission Impossible 7, Fantastic 4 Four, and other tripe with big money, lots of explosions, and no brains. I can't see any resisting the pressure to do the same.

As for writing another book of the series, it would be done by Kevin Anderson and Brian Herbert. Don't even get me started...........

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[daemonhunter]

So, whatchersayin' is, "It may not have been Dune, but it was OOH Shiny!"

Lemme guess, you're a Mac fan aren't you?

Lemme guess, you're not man enough to post your flames with your karma attached, are you? Grow up.

Seriously, both films had their strong and weak points.

Personally, I'd like to see this film surpass its ancestors. Learn from the other two films, take in everything we've learned about epic film-making in recent years, and set a new standard, much like LOTR.

Another note: Does it frustrate anyone else that the Dune Universe always gets pigeonholed as "The Sci-Fi LOTR?" I've always felt it's so much more than that. And so much less, at the same time. Herbert and Tolkien focused on different aspects of their creation. Why don't we have a 24-page thesis on Hobbit economy? Why don't we have a 40,000 word lexicon of Fremen common vocabulary?

Yes, they're both epic universes, carefully crafted, and both of them showcase humanity at it's brightest and darkest. That's just good writing.

D

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[bidule]

The costumes, set design, and dialog were all very true to the book. Lady Jessica flaunting her Bene Gesserit training completely destroyed the movie for me. I've always taken that she was discretely trained and that she wasn't an official member of the order.

For a group that tried to rule from the sideline, the Bene Gesserit would certainly show more political acumen, and avoid revealing the extent of their powers.

In addition, the omg-new-weapon! completely hides how Fremen were better soldiers than Sardaukar, and how Shaddam's fear of the Atreides military trapped him.

And the rain at the end...

This movie distorted the facts like only legends from a past long gone can.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Moridineas]

Wasn't a huge fan of the books his son wrote. I think I pretty much followed the typical Dune-reader pattern--loved 1, 2+3+4 were ok, 5+6 confused the hell out of me.

The sequels were entertaining reads--but they felt more like pulp fiction or some other low quality writing to me. Not that that's horrible--but they just didn't keep the Dune mystique going for me. I still read most of them :-)

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[KoshClassic]

Thank you for mentioning this! While I did like some aspects of Sci-Fi's adaptation, the stillsuits were a joke. And the actors who played the Fremen looked nothing like rough, desert hardened, water deprived people as Herbert described them. Still, the lady who played Channi made up for it :)

My other beef with Sci-Fi's version is that all of a sudden Irulan is showing up everywhere. I guess I can forgive them for it in the sense that she is a major figure in Dune Messiah, and if they planed for the possibility of bringing that book and Children of Dune to the screen then it might not be fair to the audience if Irulan suddenly showed up as a major character, but still...

Having said all that, I thought Sci-Fi's "Children of Dune" was quite good, better than their "Dune", but it only spent 2 of its 6 hours on Dune Messiah which, IMHO, was the stronger of the two books.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[ravenspear]

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.

Because that is what the studio wanted to do. I've been following this for a while now.

If anyone is interested there is a lot more info on this going back months in this thread.

The board admin there is a friend of the Herbert family and has been posting updates on the new movie situation for the last year or so.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Miseph]

Really? I thought Frodo was one of the few characters not turned into a completely pussified version... specifically because frodo is a total a pussy in the books. What pissed me off was that they character assassinated Faramir: it was symbolically important that he reject the ring of his own volition, because it "proves" that the flawed race of men truly do have the strength and wisdom to reject evil. He was a crucial counterpoint to his brother and father, who were possessed of such hubris that they could not accept the notion that evil cannot be justified by personal gain.

Anyway, what I want to see Jackson remake is The Lost Boys. The original was almost great, but the comedy was overdone and the plot was somewhat lost in the obligatory 80s cultural references.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Amilianna]

The first Dune movie did lack some of the elements of the book, but the story was recognizable (much more so than many OTHER books-made-into-movies - see Harry Potter or Flowers in the Attic). The base story line was the same and followed the same patterns as the book, even if they had to leave out some stuff and make a few changes due to cinematic constraints. The major plus of this movie was their characterizations. The cast was beautifully done and the characters portrayed accurately and faithfully to their core concepts in the book. The sci-fi mini series had the opposite. It stayed much more faithful to the details of the book on plot and world, but completely lost the essence of pretty much all of the characters. I can't actually even watch it again due to the complete butchering of my two favorite characters - not to mention the watered down Oh-why-won't-a-man-come-save-me aspect of pretty much every strong female role that originally existed in the book. One of the things I loved about Dune was the characters and how complex and fantastically interwoven their personalities and desires were. Due to this, I like the first movie MUCH better than the mini series. If this new movie can manage to somehow couple the two and create a movie that is true to the plot, world AND characters while still being under 3 hours and visually stunning, then they will accomplish a miracle. Realistically? They're much more likely to go the other way and screw up everything in an attempt to please everyone and end up pleasing no one. Truth be told, I feel like there is no need to attempt another shot at Dune. We have two well-made versions that each appeal to one half of the spectrum of readers so people can pick their favorite and feel that it accurately represents what the book meant to them. Instead, it would be nice if they chose books that haven't been done yet - or, even better, went back to making their OWN stories and stopped destroying perfectly good literature. As I have always said: I like movies and I like books, but I would generally prefer to keep them separate. Even if it is a well-done adaptation, it screws with my internal pictures by overlaying them with the movie-makers' ideas on what the book should look like which saddens me.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[SatanicPuppy]

The thing that killed me about LOTR was the Two Towers movie.

In the book the Ents were (entishly) spoiling for a fight. In the movie, they didn't even know that they were losing trees until a buncha hobbits clued them in. Worst Tree Shepherds ever.

And Rohan? In the book, once Theoden is "awakened" he moves directly into ass-kicking mode. In the movie, not only do we have Eomer wandering off with the whole army (wtf?) but Theoden does this fricking "King Lear" impersonation for the last 40 minutes of the film.

Oh yea, and the Elves? They're going to leave without a fight? And fricking Elrond throwing down on his daughter for having the hots for a human? Elrond Half-Elven? Jesus Christ.

If you're going to hollywood it, at least make it make sense.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Blakey Rat]

What a lot of science fiction (and fantasy) fans miss is that, while the David Lynch movie may have left out and/or changed pieces of the book, that doesn't make it a bad movie-- it just makes it a bad adaptation.

Guess what, Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame is a horrible adaptation of the Hugo novel, and yet it's still a pretty damned good movie. It's not that hard a concept to get, and I don't understand what a certain type of fan just simply doesn't get that those are two separate things.

(That said, you can be bad at both. For instance, the "American Godzilla" was both a terrible adaptation of the original Godzilla story, and at the same time a horrendously terrible movie. Go figure.)

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[eean]

I really liked the moral ambiguity of the later books, so I found them more interesting in some ways (the incredibly long dialog does get a bit dull).

7+8 pretty much returns to good vs. evil though.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

Dune dry? As in desert?

Groan...

Seriously though, when I read the book as a teenager, I couldn't put it down. I didn't find it "dry" at all. Dune was, and is, a masterpiece of fiction.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[discogravy]

but have you made a game out of murdering anyone not having lesbian sex?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Mister Whirly]

"Fair point, but nobody's going to turn up to a film with Kyle MacLachlan in the lead, surely?"

Yeah, Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks sure sucked. They were totally not interesting, different, and visually stunning at times. Nope, not at all.~

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Plugh]

I disagree. I read Dosadi before whipping star or the short story, and it made sense. A little background would be pretty straightforward.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[raw-sewage]

It's been a while since I've seen the David Lynch Dune movie. But I remember I hated it tremendously. I saw the movie after reading the book. At the time, I didn't know anyone else who was into Dune, either the book or the movie.

It was only later that I realized that the movie is quite polarizing; people either love it or they hate it. I just remember being so repulsed and disgusted at the movie that I never wanted to watch it again. But now that I've seen enough people be so fond of it, perhaps I'll give it another try. But I don't really want to!

The parent triggered one of the things I remember disliking most about the movie: the characterization of the Baron. While reading the book, I imagined him as a cold, calculating, truly sinister person---somebody who's mere presence was enough to make a well-adjusted person feel ill. I never got the impression that he was the cartoon-like "mad scientist" type as portrayed in the movie. His words and deeds were enough characterize his vileness---he didn't need to say and do them with "flair".

Another thing I remember was that the movie was only about 90 minutes long. Why even try? There's so much that's interesting and complex about the first book alone that it begs waaaaaay more than 90 minutes. The first book alone I believe is worth of a LOTR-style three-movie trio, with each movie being three or more hours long.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Maudib]

Funny that. My spelling hasn't much improved in the 10 years since I craeted this acoont.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

I drag them out every few years and re-read the series. I've listened to them as audio books. I loved Lynch's Dune, and Herbert liked it too from all accounts. Its different, but still good. I saw the movie in high school, never having really delved into sci-fi beyond Trek and Star Wars. After having seen the movie, I went out and bought the books and read them. I was fascinated by the differences in the story, and how much more complete the books were, but it did not negate the fact that I had loved the movie, and I had no trouble understanding the movie when I saw it. The book made me want to see the director's cut of the movie, and I did, and it filled in a lot of what was left out, but the book was still more complete, granted. I still like the books better, and Herbert was my gateway into hard sci-fi, but the movie is still one of my favorites, its one of the top 5 modern sci-fi movies I recommend to anyone now (Serenity, 2001, Dune, Gattaca and Bladerunner).

To address the death of Duncan...In the context of the movie as a stand alone piece of work, detatched from the importance the Duncan gholas would serve later, the death of Duncan is actually fairly unimportant. He was a friend who died, not much more really.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[MsGeek]

My requests for a new Dune movie...

1.) Semitic-looking Fremen speaking perfect Arabic with English subtitles. Remember, the Sayyadinas reconstructed the "Language of the Book" by imbibing the Water of Life and consulting with Ancestral Memory.

2.) Weirding Way of Battle = Sufi Mysticism and Kung Fu. Not stupid sonic guns that can be sold in toy stores.

3.) Vladimir Harkonnen as the evil bastard he truly was, without the flying crap. Those suspensors were attached to him so that he could move around under his flab.

4.) DIRECTED BY DAVID CRONENBERG. Boo. Yah. It would make this Dune a very adult and very brutal movie, but dammit, the books were written for adults, not for the moms little kids who wanted another Star Wars to take their kids to. See A History Of Violence or Eastern Promises to see what Cronenberg is capable of now.

5.) Guild Steersmen who look like mutant humans, not sandworms.

6.) Ornithopters with elegant, sweeping wings that flap and glide like birds of prey.

7.) Viggo Mortensen as Duke Leto. Awesome.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

Any movie that is actually going to be worth watching is going to have to hack out big chunks of that stuff.

LOTR movies also hacked out plenty and still worked. The biggest issue I had with the '84 version was the rushed aspect of important parts (as opposed to missing elements). With it being acceptable for movies to have epic running times again this may be easier to overcome. The challenge will be in finding the balance between faithfulness to story and broad appeal to make it a cost effective venture.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[AK Marc]

I still want to buy one of the stillsuits from the movie. It doesn't have to be authentic, but the suits like that just look so cool. I'd wear it to the supermarket and such.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Buckler]

Any movie that is actually going to be worth watching is going to have to hack out big chunks of that stuff. I agree. They could do away completely with the Tom Bombadil subplot.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[weicco]

While God Emperor of Dune is probably the best book in the serie, in my opinion of course, it would make terrible film. I mean 2 hours of discussions between Leto II and Moneo/Duncan/Hwi. There's no adventure, which was the central idea of Golden Path. Just one action scene, Fish Speakers vs Face Dancers in the city of Onn. Then little romance between Leto II and Hwi and finally a big end.

But Heretics of Dune would make a perfect film I would say! It has everything. Adventure parts are like Indiana Jones on steroids. Combats and hand-to-hand fighting between various persons. Mysterious stuff like Miles Teg gaining super powers. And sex! Wild sex and lot's of it! :)

Finally Chapterhouse of Dune. It would probably also make a great movie but not so great as Heretics. Allthough there's more sex in Chapterhouse than in Heretics...

Brian Herbert's sequal? God no!

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[sbeckstead]

The mini series made me sick. Farther off the beam than the dreaded movie.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

fix

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[HiVizDiver]

I would agree. The visuals sucked in the miniseries, but the story was much better. The stillsuits, for example, were ridiculous. Much more believable in the movie (among many other things). Paul and his mother running in front of the giant movie screen (it was SO obvious) when they're traversing the desert in the miniseries was kind of what killed it for me (in terms of effects and cinematography). If there was a way to meld the David Lynch visual styling with the story they kept more intact for the miniseries, THAT would be awesome.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Sabathius]

I disagree. David Lynch's version has a great deal of merit. Maybe it's not as faithful to the book as many would like, but I believe the film stands as a great accomplishment in its own right.

Plus, c'mon...who didn't like Sting as Feyd-Rautha

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[rossz]

Blade Runner is the perfect example of a great movie that is not true to the book. I'm glad as the book, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, is a stinking pile of shit.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

The first Dune movie sucked. Maybe you never read the books, but it didn't capture much of anything good from the book. The made for TV mini series was amazing. That's how to do Dune.

The Lynch movie sucked from a storyline perspective ('weirding devices'? rain on Dune?); the mini-series sucked from an aesthetic perspective (loose-fitting, khaki stillsuits?). Bottom line: they both sucked.

Cut your losses. Dune is not a book you can make into a movie; it's too dense. At best, you can perhaps try to make it into two or three movies, but trying to squeeze all of it into 2-2.5 hours is not going to happen without something sucking.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Richard Steiner]

Yeah, but they should've left in a romp in the woods with fair lady Goldberry. Is she an elf? Is she human? Let's find out together on-screen... Proooot! :-)

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[OptimusPaul]

I agree... I think that there is too much left to the imagination in the book to get it right for everyone. I love the books, I love the movie... but that said, I'm game for another movie especially if it could lead to more from the series.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cappadocius]

You have the right idea suggesting they break the book into more parts, but I say why stop at 2 or 3?

I just bought the Dune sci-fi channel mini-series on DVD, and even the expanded version seemed rushed.

What I'd really like to see is an HBO-type mini-series treatment with 10-12 hour long episodes. I felt like they were able to do convincing political drama on Rome, so why not use that format for something like Dune?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cwills]

Yes.. the Dosadi story itself works fairly well as a stand-alone story and it makes a lot of sense by itself. But to really savior who Jorg really is...

The prior stories helps in understanding

• Why Jorg was selected for the task
• The statement that Jorg is more Gowachin then a Gowachin
• And why Fannie-Mae was so willing to help Jorg out.

Anyway... just my humble opinion of the story. As I said.. Jorg is one of my favorite sci-fi story characters.

But back to the original statement.. Yes -- I would love to see a well done version of the "Dosadi Experiment" on the big screen.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Rogerborg]

I should note for future efficiency that "by Philip K. Dick." contains 6 fewer characters than "a stinking pile of shit."

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[YaroMan86]

You are correct in saying Duncan was tremendously more important in the 5 Frank Herbert sequels and the 2 Brian Herbert/Kevin Anderson sequels as a Ghola everybody seems to get some use out of, but still, his characterization in the Book and the miniseries was still more focused on so that people understood the character and why it was important he died. In the 1984 movie I never got the feeling. We got like... two scenes with him, and little character development, if any. He dies and people wonder just who he is and why Paul was so unhappy that he *did* die.

In the books, especially the sequels, we started to absolutely love Duncan, almost as a tool of circumstance. Clone after clone after clone. He was manipulated in Dune Messiah, used by the Preacher in Children of Dune, killed in various ways in God Emperor, on and on. I think he's probably the one we want to be the big hero simply so that people will stop doing these things to him! I haven't quite read the Brian Herbert sequels, yet, but I imagine Duncan keeps having unfortunate things happening to him there, too.

Anyway, my point was that the 1984 movie made it damn hard to even understand who Duncan was and why we should care if he was killed.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[CodeBuster]

I agree completely. While I did enjoy the Sci-Fi channel version of Dune and even the subsequent Children of Dune (although even somewhat less in that case) I was rather disappointed with a number of issues. For those of you who wish to hear the remainder of my critique you may follow along below:

1. The Acting: While there were some performances which I liked in the film, P.H. Moriarty as Gurney Halleck (although Patrick Stewart was still the best in this role, wonder if they will get him back for this next outing?), Ian McNeice as Baron Vladamir Harkonnen, and especially Julie Cox as Princess Irulan Corrino, the remainder of the performances ranged from average, Alec Newman as Paul Atreides, to terrible, Robert Russel as Dr. Yeuh, Miroslav Táborský as Count Hasimir Fenring (he is supposed to be a fierce genetic-eunuch assassin, not an effete dandy as he is portrayed in the mini-series), and to be honest, William Hurt as Duke Leto Atreides was also average to poor. The minor supporting cast was mostly average and some of them, notably László I. Kish as Glossu Rabban, were notable for their clichéd and over acted performances. Uwe Ochsenknecht as Stilgar was also a huge disappointment to me. Stilgar should be the toughest and strongest among all of his tribe of freeman, not a middle aged balding man with a paunch.

2. The locations: While it makes sense to shoot certain scenes on the set, the imperial palace on Kaitain for example, the extensive use of rather cheaply done computer animations of outdoor desert scenes really dragged the film down, even though the sets were great in some scenes, as in the imperial palace scenes. The film is called DUNE darn it...at least make the desert and outdoor shots look GOOD.

3. The visual style: The overall visual style of the film was far to uniform. I know that visual set and costume designers like to produce a "unified" look or theme, but in the case of Dune, where the environments are so varied (from the water world of Caladan to the Imperial splendor of Kaitain, to the harsh and barren world of Arrakis itself) the style must really be unique FOR EACH ONE (this is one aspect that the David Lynch version really hit spot on, despite its other shortcomings). The bright and colorful stillsuits were EGREGIOUSLY inappropriate for the desert planet of Arrakis. The whole of Arrakis should much more closely resemble the rundown and used look (ala Tatooine in Star Wars but even harsher and more run down...remember that the books describe sandstorms so intense that nobody who is unsheltered behind massive rock survives them...they are sandblasted to to bone and then the bones themselves to dust) than the bright and colorful look of the Padishah emperor and his entourage. The freeman sietchs where also not rugged looking enough and the freeman themselves, who are described as dirty, disheveled, and stinking to high heaven in the books (the wild and untamed people of the deep desert) are presented as clean cut and well dressed in the mini-series.

4. The story: Finally we come to the one part of the Sci-Fi miniseries that really was done well and that is matching the action on the screen to the story told in the book. With the exception of a few minor departures, which are allowable to facilitate the demands of a screenplay, the miniseries was very true to the events of the original Dune novel. This is one area where the new film should pay CLOSE attention or even improve upon by working in more background material from the appendixes of the original book, particularly the sections on desert ecology and the politics of the Imperium, the Landsraad, the Bene Gesserit, and the Spacing Guild.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[aslagle]

and not some gimmicky twist of voice into weapons

That actually wasn't what killed that movie for me. Neither was it the vastly off-target characterization of the Baron.

What killed Lynch's Dune for me was the complete lack of understanding of "My name has become a killing word." What was a despairing cry at being the focal point of the jihad (which Paul wanted to avoid) was transferred into a completely literal statement. Feh.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[CodeBuster]

A mini-series can work, but you can't quite portray the many "feint within a feint" aspects of Dune in such a short time. Which are a CENTRAL part of Dune and also the subsequent novels. The plans within plans which take generations or even millenia in the case of the secret Kwisatz Haderach super-human breeding program of the Bene Gesserit are an indispensable element. The scale and complexity of Dune is what makes the whole story work and so it is essential to capture, as much as possible within the 2 (and Dune really deserves 3 hours) hours alloted to the film, this aspect of the story. The novels of the Dune universe themselves take place over a period of some 16,000 THOUSAND years in total and the long term evolution of humanity itself, which major changes in political, social, and even religious structure on a GRAND scale, is a major concern of the later novels which were set up and foreshadowed by the plans within plans intrigues of Dune.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[YaroMan86]

Actually. It was three parts: "Dune" "Muad'Dib" and "The Prophet"

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[EkriirkE]

I wish I had mod points at the moment to mark this funny.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[MattBD]

It is very good, the David Lynch film. Whoever directs the new version will have a real task on their hands. How about Peter Jackson? Lord of the Rings was of similar scope and he made that into an incredible trilogy, so he would be a great choice.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Warbothong]

Personally I bought the Lynch film on VHS because I needed a third video to use the store's "3 for £20" offer.

Watching it made me fall asleep. The first 3 times. However, my brain was so fried by it that I bought the book just to work out what the hell I was watching.

The book is incredible. The film is awful. The miniseries is better, but at conveying the story. In my opinion it is the overwhelming complexity of the Universe portrayed that makes Dune special, but that can't really be conveyed well in a film.

Plus, I like the way Dune's science works. It essentially can be reduced to 3 non-standard princples:

1) Memory is stored in DNA. This leads to Gholas regaining memory, the Other Memory of Reverand Mothers and the Kwisatz Haderach, etc.

2) The "Holtzmann" field, which is a controllable anti-gravity field. Give it a little power and it will make things float. Give it a little more and it will repel things (shields). Give it even more and it can 'fold' space through higher dimensions to make a journey's destination arrive at the departure point. Finally, cranking up the juice fully will fold space completely around something and thus make it drop out of reality (a No Field).

3) Spice can elevate one's mind to a higher dimension. This allows someone to see the entirety of everything over all time (analogous to looking at Flatland from the third dimension, but including time). Of course this destroys one's mind through information overload if it doesn't have certain abilities (passed on through genes).

Aside from that everything else just seems plausible with our current scientific understanding if we had thousands of years to advance and a vast number of life-supporting planets to explore.

Comparing this to, eg. Star Trek, where the problem of the week can be overcome thanks to some new invention of Mr Spock (or whoever) which relies on some vague scientific dictionary mashup of terms, this gives a more convincing story (issues seem more insurmountable when Mr Spock isn't around to discover something which will save the day) and situation (having few new concepts means that they can be explored more completely and crop up in more places. With too many new ideas there can be a shallow feel to the Universe portrayed, for example if the reader/viewer can think of a novel use for some technology that isn't shown then surely trillions of people thinking over thousands of years would come up with it?)

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Thomasje]

What I'd really like to see is an HBO-type mini-series treatment with 10-12 hour long episodes. I felt like they were able to do convincing political drama on Rome, so why not use that format for something like Dune? While I agree that that's probably the only way to do Dune justice, I can't see anyone raising the money for it. HBO has had to cut much less ambitious miniseries, like Rome and Carnivale, short because of production costs; I fear shooting Dune would be even more expensive.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

You are a true geek. Said with the utmost respect, of course.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

what movie are you people referring to? the david lynch version is a polished turd. special effects were ok, but some of the worst acting and dialog of all time. there wasn't one good performance in the whole movie, the actors made anakin in star wars ep II seem emotive and lively in comparison. MST2K could have a field day with this piece of garbage.

you may as well praise the virtues of the Bakshi version of Lord of the Rings.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Naturalis Philosopho]

First, good post, and I'm not arguing, but would like to elucidate...

1. Right on, except for Stilgar. I always thought that one point about the Fremen was that they were smarter than just a bunch of tribal tough guys. They may have required you to be ultra-tough, but I think that they were smart enough keep a wise leader even if he got a little soft in the middle. Rippling abs, after all, won't manage the infrastructure for enough cisterns to re-aquify a planet.

2. Really, how hard is it find some good sand dunes to film and digitally insert- they screwed the pooch on this one.

3. Definitely needed a more run-down Arrakis. However, about the unified look: I've been around the world, and despite the different alphabets used on signs, and the differences in people, it's amazing how much the same everything looks. From clothing to housing to packaging, it all just looks soooo similar. Any empire connected as well as the one in the word of Dune would have plenty of people actively trying to unify the look- everyone want to look like the rich people.

Ok, one gripe about your interpretation of the Fremen. Have you heard of "unreliable narrator"? The people who think the Fremen are stinking, disheveled, "untamed" people are the one's enslaving them. It's like how slave owners in America though of their African slaves as savages; to make them feel better about what they were doing, not as a accurate representation of who the Africans are/where. The Fremen were a proud people with a developed society (remember those cisterns again?). I think that it was a literary device to have the Fremen described that way, and then to be shown how inaccurate that description what- far more powerful than just saying "now I'm going to introduce you to a noble, civilized, but deeply misunderstood people."

4. As far as being accurate, I agree. How can someone make a more accurate interpretation in 2 hours than Sci-Fi could've in over 6 hours?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[eclectic4]

"Abstruse": Hey! That's not a... oh wait, there it is.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cpricejones]

Ditto. The Lynch version has a certain appeal in its wackiness. Of course it gets nowhere near covering the depth of the book, but it at least has an interesting way of presenting the material.

Let's not forget the last line of the movie ..

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[CodeBuster]

Ok, one gripe about your interpretation of the Fremen. Have you heard of "unreliable narrator"? The people who think the Fremen are stinking, disheveled, "untamed" people are the one's enslaving them. Yes, that is true. However, the book also describes first hand the sights, smells, and activities of the Freeman sietch Tabar from the first person view of Paul Atreides with worn and patched still suits, coarse beards, the acrid ammonia reek of water reclamation processes, the spice, and strong poisons mixed with incense and all or the other earthy, human, and unfiltered smells of the sietch. Precisely what you might imagine of a group of humans who live communally underground in the deep desert, don't bathe, and when they do go out in the sun and heat, walk around in suits that are reprocessing their urine and feces because the water discipline, as the book describes it, is the only way to survive independently, as the Freeman have done and must do, in the deep desert. So while the Harkonnen are prejudiced and exaggerate or play up the unkemptness of the Freeman while mentioning none of their more noble qualities, there is some measure of the truth (i.e. the wild freeman described by the narrator) even though the narrator is at times unreliable and the Harkonnen are certainly biased (they hunt them for sport with lasguns in the desert after all).

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Omestes]

Here here!

Though I doubt that the Muslim-ish-ness included in the book would make it okay for modern American audiences. As moronic as that sounds and is. You can here the commentators now "ZOMG MUSLIM HEROS! it endorses terrorism!"... God I hate modernity.

You definitely described my dream movie though, especially with the Viggo as Duke Leto bit. I full haredly endorse using Viggo for any kick ass roll. I'd prefer him as Stilgar though. I know the ages don't match, but it would kick as to see him running around with a crysknife killing shit.

The only thing I'd want to carry over from the 84 movie is the BIG set design, and epic feel.

I would be okay with Cronenberg, but I also wouldn't mind Peter Jackson giving it a LoTR treatment. LoTR is probably the most faithful treatment of "geek lit" to date. The only problem is I doubt these is anywhere in NZ that Arrakis could be set. Make it a full trilogy (first 3-4 books) too. The end of the first book, taken alone, makes to much of a "huh what next" moment to not move on to the sequels.

According to IMDB its being directed by Peter Berg, which doesn't make me hopeful.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[kaizokuace]

Yes I totally agree with everything you have said there. I'd add though that it is important to get the look and feel right. The 1984 movie was on the way to getting it right. Lots of desert location shots and the costumes were good. Especially the still suits. I think harkonen can be more evil thru his actions and good acting. Just making him ugly is a classic movie cop-out. I would like the sets to look more like ancient architecture just with the added futuristic technologies needed. It would make things seem more extravagant. I dont wanna see a bunch of HDTVs as props, AND product placement could kill the film. Also if done right a lot of the things that need explaining can be done quickly with good directing. The problem with that is pacing. I see pretty much anything happening on the Dune planet as having a slower pacing. That is important to the mood of the desert. Anyway I am jabbering enuff.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[kaizokuace]

what if it was translated to a high budget anime series? Would that not be awesome? I don't see any american studios doing it justice with american animation styling sense. Plus anime is the perfect format to liven up politics.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[KarmaOverDogma]

I personally like the idea of splitting the first Dune book into 2 or three really well made movies (probably three, in a similar vein to the Matrix Trilogy) with a budget to back up the special effects in a way that shows it wasn't made for the sci-fi channel (no offense intended to you SF channel fans out there). Also, to do them to well and true to every line in the book, what kind of an audience would it appeal to, outside of /.ers?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

"Jürgen Prochnow was a much more convincing Duke Leto than William Hurt. Barron Vladimir Harkonen was also more convincing IMHO oh and you had Sting."

Prochnow was a cipher. Hurt was a pussy. Neither one was the Red Duke.

Lynch's Harkonnens were a pair of fucking cartoon characters.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[catmistake]

Agreed. Lynch's movie wasn't made with complete fidelity to the book, but so what? It grabbed the major themes, and as others pointed out, it was gorgeous. I personally feel it is complemantary to Herbert's novel (helps immensly with pronunciations).

I think a second movie could be made mashing Dune Messiah with Children of Dune, and a 3rd movie could focus on the epic God Emperor of Dune. Lets keep Kyle MacLauchlan as the Preacher, and somehow make it seem as that misplaced last scene in Dune, the one where it starts raining, as a forshadowing dream sequence.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[UnxMully]

People who read Dune had problems with the Lynch version -- HUGE problems. But it was paced well, delivered lines with impact and was visually stunning. A big-budget film needs to take its cues from the Lynch version, not SciFi's.

To be honest I'm in the enjoy them both camp. Dune is for me one of the finest Sci Fi novels ever written. By a distance.

Lynch's film isn't in the same class, there are just too may odd things added and subtracted from the story, but I still think it's a decent film which I enjoy watching and will watch again.

And I'm +1 on Viggo for Leto.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

" The bright and colorful stillsuits were EGREGIOUSLY inappropriate for the desert planet of Arrakis. "

Ahahaha, you channel the Comic Book Guy so well in text! Well played!

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[UnxMully]

Or "The Santaroga Barrier". No special effects, a bit "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" but with a good cast would work well. Or "The Dragon in the Sea", all closed spaces and psycholgy.

Just not "The Jesus Incident", for ghod's sake not that ever.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

"The parent triggered one of the things I remember disliking most about the movie: the characterization of the Baron."

Look for a 1968 movie named "House of Cards" . Orson Welles - already enormous, although not yet up to his final weight - plays the villain, who is a homosexual pedophile plotting a fascist takeover of France.

"While reading the book, I imagined him as a cold, calculating, truly sinister person---somebody who's mere presence was enough to make a well-adjusted person feel ill. ... His words and deeds were enough characterize his vileness---he didn't need to say and do them with 'flair'".

Exactly how Welles played it. I've always speculated that the movie's writers lifted the character from "Dune".

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service.

Because the first book is the only one with significant literary merit. The rest of the first trilogy is mediocre; the second trilogy is abysmal.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[lgw]

Elrond's reaction to his daughter's romance was the only part that *did* make sense. Elrond and his brother Elros were "half elven" (technically, 7/16's Elven IIRC). They both had the choice to remain immortal or choose their human side. Elros chose humanity, and died at "only" 500, after fathering the line of Numenorian kings.

So (a) we clearly know Elrond's position on the whole "human vs remain immortal" choice, and (b) she's Aragorn's cousin (several times removed). It's quite understandable that he'd want to prevent his daughter from making a mistake here.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG SCORE!

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[lgw]

Hmmm, Elrond's mother's mother's father's identity is unknown (husband of Nimloth), but assuming he was Elven, then Elrond is 3/8 Human, 9/16 Elven, and 1/16 Maiar spirit. It's that last bit, the bloodline of Melian, that makes him so powerful and that same bloodline that makes Aragorn so powerful. The Maia were a big deal (Gandalf was Maiar, as was Sauron and the Balrogs - and there's no tale of anyone surviving a fight with a Balrog).

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[fat_mike]

Peter Berg is a pretty good director, but he's been an actor in some pretty shitty movies. He was the "Great White Hype".

Personally, I think he should make a sequel to Aspen Extreme and barring that should at least have the chick from it in Dune.

And oh yeah, his co-star from Aspen Extreme, the dreamy guy from Due South. Yum.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[thejynxed]

Count Fenring was a product of the Bene Gesserit breeding program. He was one of the attempts at creating a Kwisatz Haderach, and came out a eunuch due to a failure of genetics. A very interesting character indeed.

What got me about the movie and television versions of Gurney Halleck, was that he was missing the inkvine whip scar across his face. That was an important and overlooked "feature". It was given to him by the Beast Rabban in the Harkonnen slave pits on Geidi Prime, and explains why Gurney has such hatred for the Harkonnen.

I wish in the movie version, they had shown more of the espionage that destroyed the spice factories, etc that led to the Padishah Emperor being able to betray House Atreides. It would have helped tie in things a little more neatly.

That being said, I loved the books, but I also loved the long version of David Lynch's movie, as well as the Sci-Fi Channel remakes. I could quite easily follow along with the stories portrayed on screen even if they did take some license to get the story moving and try to cram it all into about 2-4 hours.

Also, during both the movie and television versions, it probably would have helped to explain Alia a bit better than they did - and how she knew the Baron Harkonnen was her grandfather. On a side note: it would have also been an interesting tidbit to point out how it was discovered that Reverend Mother Gaius Mohaim was Alia and Paul's grandmother..the Lady Jessica's mother via the Baron (and how he got his diseased boils - Mohaim gave him the plague intentionally).

Also, I missed the lasguns, no-globes, etc. At least in the tv version they mentioned the stone burner taking Paul's eyesight.

And...little to no mention of the Bene Tleilax or Ix. And of only two Mentats. Disappointing.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Plugh]

mmmmm... Jaspers. Could be a little trippy. How about Soul Catcher. Very new-agey. And the kid dies at the end. Cool.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[chris_mahan]

5 and 6 are my favorites.

Dar and Tar anyone?

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

“The made for TV mini series was amazing. That's how to do Dune.”

Oh please no! The mini-series was execrable. Paul Atreides played as a arrogant punk totally missed the character portrayed in the book IMO. Many of the actors in smaller roles were absolutely terrible - jolting you right out of your suspension of disbelief. And some of the set pieces and costumes were just awful.

The scene where Paul's humanity is tested (Reverend Mother, hand in box that causes pain inducement) is probably the best example of how bad this series was.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[ozbird]

3.) Vladimir Harkonnen as the evil bastard he truly was, without the flying crap. Those suspensors were attached to him so that he could move around under his flab.

Evil, fat bastard...

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[a whoabot]

Again, how was I trolling? Stating a line from the movie? It wasn't a spoiler.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[cheesybagel]

Australia is close to NZ. Lots of desert there.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[jasontn]

"OMG, they've killed Duncan" ... pause "Those bastards!"

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Eli Gottlieb]

Generally, the guy who knows he's about to lose his free will to a *WOMAN*.

I've heard of whipped, but at some point you have to reclaim your dignity!

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[GiantHaystacks]

Yeah, no doubt they will translate the sequels to the silver screen if this first one is a financial success. They'd do fine with Dune Messiah and Children of Dune, as both are fairly "screen-friendly". But God Emperor really is impossible to translate to film. That's not to say they wouldn't try. But it would almost certainly suck.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

7.) Yeah, yeah, but who cares for Leto Senior anyway? The more interesting question is, who's going to play Duncan. Oh, and I almost forgot, Alia! she's fighting against a robot, naked!

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[thejynxed]

The reason they did this, was to emphasize the fact that as a Kwisatz Haderach, Paul could kill with a word, and that his name was the strongest killing word in the universe. It gives a heightened sense of the "godhood" that Paul had ascended to.

Ergo, Weirding Modules that focused sound waves into energy blasts and the final scene where he kills Feyd and then totally crushes his corpse into the floor using only his voice.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

"Amazing"? Holy shit, do YOU have low standards! AMAZING? Amazingly BAD, maybe. They turned Baron Harkonnen into a Batman villain (complete with campy acting and weird camera angles in his "lair") and turned the Paul/Irulan dynamic into some emo crap you'd expect to see on Dawson's creek.

The original movie was odd, slow and boring but then so is the book in its way. This film was FAR more true to the original than that Sci-Fi POS was.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[hughk]

I thought that the Santaroga Barrier was quite good and would certainly merit at least a thoughtful TV-movie. How about "The Godmakers"? Might get the mid-west in a huff.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

"Wasn't a huge fan of the books his son wrote."

Ah, well you see that's because Brian Herbert DIDN'T write them. Kevin Anderson (ptui!) wrote them, and Kevin Anderson couldn't write his way out of a wet paper bag that was open on four sides.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[Anonymous Coward]

The costumes, set design, and dialog were all very true to the book.

Bollocks. The book and virtually every other treatment of it had an islamic/arabic feel to the culture and dress of Arrakis. And nobody else sank to the idiocy of black stillsuits. I remember reading about the making of the film, and seeing pictures of the actors sweltering in the mexican desert heat in what amounts to black wetsuits.

The books also didn't make out 3rd stage guild navigators to look like that foetus from Eraserhead. Also the 'thopters looked like obscure gilded victorian ornaments with virtually no moving parts. Among other things, the re-use of the Lynchian acting troupe was an insult for what should have been a homage to Herbert, not Lynch.

2 stars out of 5, for what could have been at least 4.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[TheQuantumShift]

Yes it is, complete with a "spot the ridiculously obvious set" drinking minigame guaranteed to get you from zero to drunk in 20 seconds

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[rossz]

The only nice thing I can say about Philip K. Dick is, "He's a better writer than L. Ron Hubbard."

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[mink]

We sort of had that in Legend of the Galactic Heroes but I doubt it will ever see the light of day here.

Re:Why not do another book in the series

[omfglearntoplay]

Agreed. Lynch's version did it for me by a long shot. It was more eerie, freaky, and charismatic.

Hope it's not like the mini series

[boris111]

I only made it halfway through it. I couldn't believe how pretentious it was. David Lynch's version was good, but I'd like to see a modern adaptation closer to the book.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[kyofunikushimi]

Well, luckily this one stands a decent chance of sticking with the book's plot. HOWEVER, having purchased the rights certainly doesn't guarantee this will ever see the light of day. I'll hold my enthusiasm until they tell me they've got a working script.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[Trent Hawkins]

I only made it halfway through it. I couldn't believe how pretentious it was. David Lynch's version was good, but I'd like to see a modern adaptation closer to the book. You mean a Dune movie staring Will Smith?

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[boris111]

True... I'll take Omega Man any day over I am Legend.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[FuckTheModerators]

And the Matheson novella any day over any movie of it.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[Z00L00K]

If you have read the book you may recognize that there are references to the Hajj, so maybe some actors with Arabic heritage should be incorporated.

Even if Will Smith isn't that bad it may not be a good idea to incorporate him in such a movie - there will be too many associations with MIB.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[Jerf]

The first sci-fi miniseries needs to be understood as a filmed theatrical presentation, rather than as a movie. This explains the "pretentiousness"; I believe it was deliberately done in a theatrical style, complete with monologues and heavy symbolism (to the point of incomprehensibility if you didn't read the book).

The second miniseries did this to a lesser extent, but it is still present.

All things considered, while I believe they were forced into it by budget constraints rather than choosing it, I think it was a good choice. However, if you were expecting a modern-style movie presentation, you will be very disappointed.

If you watch it this way, it makes a lot more sense.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[Anonymous Coward]

A good movie adaptation should stand on its own without reading the book. It can also deviate in ways that are not offensive to the readers of the book. Blade Runner is a perfect example of this IMHO.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[sbeckstead]

well at least "I am Legend" was closer to the original story than "Omega Man".

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[holyspidoo]

You mean a Dune movie staring Will Smith? And Tommy Lee Jones as the sandworm.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[barneyzang]

You mean a Dune movie staring Will Smith? The Fresh Prince of Arrakis!

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[Omestes]

Actually The Last Man on Earth (Vincent Price FTW) was a MUCH closer adaptation than the Omega Man. Granted Charlton Heston could kick both Smith and Price's asses with his eyes closed.

I'm coming to believe that Will Smith is the scourge of things geekish in movies. He helped slaughter both I am Legend AND I, Robot, neither of which (as far as I can tell) has anything to do with their respective books.

I hope they cast him in the crappy The Day the Earth Stood Still remake, and perhaps even as Jane Fonda's character in the crappy remake of Barbarella. Him or Keanu Reaves (who is going to be Klaatu). Perhaps Reaves and be Maudib, and Smith can be the rest of the cast.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[boris111]

Vincent Price!! I'll have to check that out. I'm not opposed to the movie deviating from the book as long as it's good. Speaking of multiple movie adaptations I'm actually fonder of a PBS version of the book: Lathe of Heaven. A&E did a later version starring James Caan and Lisa Bonet, but it was barely watchable.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series

[mink]

I agree with you on the Lathe of Heaven. One of my favorite storys. It was so horrifically gutted by A&E with the removal of... just about everything important to the story!

The invasion, and Heather's attempt to do something about it (sort of falling into the same trap Haber did) I think were pretty damn important, especially how things turn out.

If you can tolerate Anime, check out a film called Paprika, it deals with dreams and sort of goes a bit down the path of lathe.

How many times are we going to do it?

[vecctor]

I mean, I like Dune, but how many remakes is enough?

Ok ok, the first one was a bit off (but it had Patrick Stewart and Sting!).

But the Sci-fi Channel version was pretty good.

I just wonder what is to be gained by doing it again.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[lbmouse]

Well hopefully third time is the charm and the grass fuckers in Hollywood will finally get it right. Not holding my breath.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[lancelotlink]

The first one may have been a little off, but the actors actually ACTED. The SciFi channel one, from what I remember, the actors just had that glossy eye style that many actors do these days. Not a great trade off. I like the "True to the original" take as many people do, but if the acting is supurb, and they're telling a good story, then I'm happy.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[WarPresident]

I mean, I like Dune, but how many remakes is enough?

I don't know, but I hope they find a group of musicians on par with Toto!

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[jagermeister101]

The best (or may just the coolest/weirdest) version of Dune will never see the light of day. It was supposed to be directed by cult hero Alejandro Jodorowsky with contributions with equally amazing underground and cult artists like illustrator Jean "Moebius" Giraud. I read somewhere that he even had Salvador Dali on board.

The project went way over budget and the few script and storyboard advances took ages to complete. Here is some info

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[eean]

Really the mini-series is the only way to really adapt a book like Dune and have any chance to do it justice.

I'm currently half-way through the Dune miniseries, it's looking good indeed. ^.^

So yea I agree, at the same time I won't turn down more Dune.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[jagermeister101]

This is also relevant. Here

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[dargaud]

You forget the version of Dune from Jodoroski, Dali, Giger (of Alien fame), Moebius... the greatest movie that never was. Google it up.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[s4ck]

Actually, parent should have been modded as insightful! ... even thought it is true that toto's music is a good laugh. btw, their videos can be pretty funny too.

the irony of the irony is that as MUSICIANS toto were the creme de la creme in terms of rock/pop musicians of the late 70s early 80s. as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toto_(band) put it :

"Toto is a Grammy Award winning American rock band founded in 1976[1] by some of the most popular and experienced session musicians of the era."

and

"Described by Eddie Van Halen as "collectively the best musicians on the planet" [2], the band is known for their technical prowess in the studio, as well as a musical style that combines elements of pop, rock, soul, funk, progressive rock, hard rock, R&B, and jazz.."

hell, some of them were session musicians for the session musicians of steely dan. uber musos band of the 70s!

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[ekgringo]

The Sci-Fi Channel version was pretty good, but some of the sets were unbelievably bad. I mean a huge planet encompassing desert reduced to a sound stage where it looked like they taped together color laser-printed pictures for the background matte was just unacceptable.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[bughunter]

how many remakes is enough?

Agreed.

Why not abuse another epic SF classic, like Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land*, Asimov's Foundation, or perhaps even Delany's Dhalgren?

Even Herbert had some other novels that would make awesome movies (Whipping Star, Hellstrom's Hive, The White Plague)...

(*I hesitate to even mention RAH, due to the inevitable flame war that his name inspires, and SiaSL is not the most cinematic story in his bibliography, but it's arguably his most thought-provoking work.)

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[frogzilla]

"I just wonder what is to be gained by doing it again."

I would imagine that money is the item they hope to gain.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[Omestes]

Please don't suggest making Foundation a movie... It would be 40000 hours long, and really not worth watching after the first 3 or so hours. I love Asimov as much as the next guy, but Foundation can be a real dog.

Why does RAH cause flame wars? Sure I confuse all of his characters with Hagbard Celine (from Illuminatus!), or some Ayn Randian ubermensch, but that doesn't diminish the fact that the man could write a damn good story.

I hope that this is successful, so we can resurrect some good old books from the hey-days of sci-fi. I'd be game for Clifford Simak's "City" to be made into a movie, actually just about any of his old pulp novels would make a good movie (for some reason I'm the only nerd I know who considers him among the sci-fi greats). Stanislaw Lem's "Memoir found in a Bathtub" would make a great Bourne-esque movie too.

I'd also like to see John Varely's Steel Beach turned into a movie. His Gaean trilogy would also make a damn good LoTR-esque epic.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[bughunter]

Why does RAH cause flame wars?

Rather than try to summarize the entire net history of RAH flamewars, you can explore a somewhat reasonably-stated approximation of the typical love/hate fest on everything2.com: start reading here.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[Jainith]

Uhm, the dune movies aren't remakes.

Each one is based off a different one of the first 3 books.

Dune = Dune

Dune2000 = Dune Messiah

Children of Dune = Children of Dune

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just wonder what is to be gained by doing it again.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt SiaSL would work at all as a movie....I would like to see Methuselah's Children and the rest of the Lazarus Long novels made into movies, or even Revolt in 2100. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress would probably work pretty well too....

It's too bad the two attempts at making a Heinlein movie have failed, but then again, they never tried to stick with the books. Starship Troopers was seriously bastardized, and Puppet Masters lacked the underlying story of the book.

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[WarPresident]

Yep, they were actually excellent musicians. The score, as it was applied to the movie, was horrific. It still didn't stand a chance against the heavy handed acting...

Re:How many times are we going to do it?

[mink]

I think the simple solution is to do all the Harry Harrison films we can.

Eden series = Jurassic park but in space/alternate history.
Stainless Steel Rat series = Spy-Kids/Oceans # but in space.
Bill the Galactic Hero = Catch 22 but in space.
Death World series = total badassery but in space.

Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

Dune is incredibly relevant to our times because it shows how an oppressive power structure exploits a people's resources and make enemies of the natives on Arakkis, it is completely analogous to how we handle oil today. Even more so Dune provides insight into what makes an extremist and their motivations.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[boris111]

I see how you correlate the examples you provide for the power struggle for resources, but I don't see how they're specific to Islamic culture. Provide examples that are specific to Islamic culture.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

Freemen = Arabs. Simple as that.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[BodhiCat]

"Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture"

Duh.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

If you read the novels they all follow strains of Islam from Sufi to Sunni. Eventually sand worms become the ``prophet''.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[esocid]

Then how would you explain the concept of the Kwizatz Haderach which unites the masculine and feminine, explicitly with the water of life which is a profoundly feminine symbol in literature. I don't see Islam as having such an instance as that.
It does have religion rooted into it and religion's subjugation of the Freman, but I wouldn't say that is Islam, more Christianity. The correlation of spice and oil today may seem good, but oil is not a hallucinogen that also allows a greater perception and awareness. Dumbing it down to oil and Iraq does no justice to Frank Herbert.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[proc_tarry]

Parent is correct. Dune is as much current political allegory as Lord of the Rings was with the industrial revolution.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[jiggerdot]

off the top of my head - The desert setting, the many similarities between the Fremen and the real-world beduin culture and the quite extensive use of Arabic (Mujahidin, anyone?).

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[moderatorrater]

You do realize that Dune is a work of fiction by a white man, right? This book's political commentary is no more or less relevant than his opinion would have been without a huge-ass story tacked onto it.

I'm not saying anything bad about the book, especially since I love it so much. But claiming that the book has any special insight may be overstating the case.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[imgod2u]

I agree that there are huge similarities between the Fremen and modern Islamic groups. What's funny is that Frank Herbert got the idea of the story not from the conflicts in the Middle East but from the exploitation of Africa. Diamond and oil.

One of the key points of Dune is not necessarily power or oppression but political trappings. It is much more a criticism of how the powers than be (the emperor, the navigator's guild, the bene gesserit, etc.) were all interlocked and trapped by each other in a perpetual cycle of deceit and backstabbing. None of them could accomplish anything and humanity was at a standstill destined for extinction should anything slight thing (such as the sandworms dying) interrupt their routine.

It's an allegory to the dependence on oil and the globalized politics of today. How even the U.S., being the superpower that it is, is locked into binding treaties and very restricted in terms of what it can do to help itself or the world.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[liak12345]

http://baheyeldin.com/literature/arabic-and-islamic-themes-in-frank-herberts-dune.html

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[imgod2u]

I don't think Christianity has much in terms of merging of the feminine and the masculine.

That aside, you're reading into the minor parts that most likely to pad the story with details. The Kwizatz Haderach is simply a profit figure. It unites the Fremen to become the dominant power of the world (and quite violently so). That is very allegorical towards modern day extremist Islam.

The other theme is that the profit of the Fremen is not complete. The later books show this in that Leto II came and did away with the Fremen empire built by his father.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I think it's easy to see *some* parallels, but I can't just make all of them connect to real life.

Oil = spice, I get. Oil is needed for everything.

Spice is needed for space-travel --> oil is needed for long-distance travel
People could obviate spice except for galaxy-wide prohibitions due to the Butlerian jihad --> People could obviate oil except for international restrictions on nuclear

But then, we get:

Spice extends your life indefinitely --> oil ... yeah, it helps, but it's not going to guarantee you make 100
Spice is needed for prescience in religious ceremonies --> um?
Spice makes you able to do calculations really quick --> um? I guess run computers...?

Also:

What's the earth-counterpart to the mysterious, influential female order (Bene Gesserit)? The stillsuits? CHOAM? The Kwisatz Haderach(sp)? The Harkonnen(s)? The worms?

The people who get offended at having their table spit on, because they didn't gather rudimentary understanding that in the spitter's culture, that's a compliment?

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you really don't know much about the history of Islam (and/or the Dune series) if you can't see the influence in Frank Herbert's writing.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always found it intriguing how Colin Powell pronounced Iraq is. It really sounds closer to Arakkis than to Iraq is. Dune really can be taken farther than that, though. When you really stop to look at it, the economy is based solely on one good, the ecology has thousands of years of work to do, and the Feudalism seems slightly analogous to the way the US's states break down.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[meringuoid]

Spice makes you able to do calculations really quick --> um? I guess run computers...?

You would make a machine to imitate a human mind?

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[cachimaster]

And the dune wars called "Jihads" in the book, go figure...

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[frost_knight]

Quote: "The Kwizatz Haderach is simply a profit figure."

I think you meant "Prophet". :)

But your word choice actually puts an interesting spin on your comment, so...hmmm...maybe you did use the right word after all?

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[R2.0]

"The correlation of spice and oil today may seem good, but oil is not a hallucinogen that also allows a greater perception and awareness. Dumbing it down to oil and Iraq does no justice to Frank Herbert."

To the contrary, Herbert was showing great insight. He was pointing out that oil has not only become vital to transportation, but has permeated the rest of our economy and culture in ways we weren't even aware of - we literally breath it in in atmospheric pollution, eat and drink it in the plastic containers we use, and "live it" in the sense that it has allowed a culture of mobility that is historically unprecedented. The Fremen were literally addicted to spice; the Middle east is addicted to oil in that if it ran out their governments and power would collapse. But Herbert was pointing out that the rest of the world is ALSO addicted to oil, but simply don't recognize it. Remember, Dune was published in 1965, well before the oil shocks of the early 70's, the Iranian revolution, and the final collapse of the colonial systems and their vestiges.

I think the only part Herbert missed was the need for the Fremen to have a leader that was from the oppressing outside but going native, who brings outside technologies and ways of thinking and applies them to the lean, tough, religious culture of the Fremen. I think this is where his "white maleness" showed through; in reality, the Middle Eastern people have simply applied Western technology on their own, or used that given by Western powers, along with western organizational techniques. Although perhaps Herbert isn't as chauvinistic as I propose - the fact that a truly unifying Arab/Muslim leader has not emerged might be indicative of an insight that the Islamic world CAN'T unify on it's own. I think we'll see within the next few years how right Herbert really was.

As for sandworms? They are just fukkin COOL!

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

Fremen were inspired from Arabs/Muslims http://baheyeldin.com/literature/arabic-and-islamic-themes-in-frank-herberts-dune.html

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[kamapuaa]

The prototypical mosque will mix round domes with tall spires - so obviously (well, to any Freudian, at least) there's some mixing of the Masculine and the Feminine. And "oil" is not a concept taken from Islamic religion, just it's generally associated with Arabs.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[ednopantz]

It is Lawrence of Arabia in outer space. You have to take the Middle East stuff with a huge grain of salt. The Fremen are the ideali

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[ednopantz]

Goddamn AJAX!!! ...The Fremen are early 20th century Britains idealized version of the baduin: self reliant, noble savages.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[tbuskey]

Dune is partly based on the the Britsh handling of the middle east and oil in the 20s (30s?) and even Lawrence of Arabia.

So, of course it provides insight. It was derived from it.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[xRizen]

Seriously? Paul Atreides is called the Mahdi, for fuck's sake.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Abreu]

The whole book is filled to the brim with middle-eastern cultural references, both in and out of Arrakis

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[boris111]

Yeesh... dead horse already. I asked for examples and I sure got it. Obviously I didn't read the book so I wasn't enveloped in the story as much as you guys. As for Muad'Dib sounding Islamic... I had no idea. Guess I'm a Dune poser then.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[esocid]

You make some good points, and I think it can be applied to today, but I think at the time Frank Herbert was referencing drug cultures. Almost reminds me of A Scanner Darkly, then again Philip K Dick was pretty in to drugs.
He who controls the spice controls the universe.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Warbothong]

I see how you correlate the examples you provide for the power struggle for resources, but I don't see how they're specific to Islamic culture. Provide examples that are specific to Islamic culture. Are you serious? The Fremen are "Zensunni" (a projected combination of Zen Buddhism and Sunni Islam). The Fremen lore and culture is full of Islamic references, for instance Paul's Fremen name is Usul (pillar).

This is no doubt due to the time Frank Herbert spent with desert dwelling people here on Earth.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[imgod2u]

hehe, you give me too much credit, I meant "prophet" although by all rights, he wasn't.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Fieryphoenix]

It's your opinion that a man who is not only prescient of possible futures but able to choose which among them become real is, by ALL rights, not a prophet? *boggle* Erm. Picking a very narrow definition of prophet, are you? Such as "a person that the God Of Abraham reveals stuff for public consumption to"?

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[Anonymous Coward]

iirc Herbert even stated that CHOAM = OPEC

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture

[imgod2u]

He was not a prophet because he chose himself over humanity. He had the prescient ability to see the need for the Golden Path but he chose not to follow it because of his love for Chani. His son, Leto II, made that sacrifice. Prophets in almost of the various biblical notions, is one who serves to bring humanity to the right path to salvation. Hence the Judas references in God Emperor that puts Leto in the Jesus role.

Go Read A book

[spribyl]

I am so sick of seeing bad movies being made from good books hell from bad movies from bad books.
Just go read a book any boot will do.

Re:Go Read A book

[Anonymous Coward]

any boot will do Usually a fitting size matters :)

Re:Go Read A book

[Teflon_Jeff]

But then we'd ruin Hollywood's tradition of messing up good book-to-movie transitions!

Seriously, you would think they learned from peter Jackson that the closer to the book you hold, the more popular it is.

Besides, there's enough nerds out there, that if you get it close enough, they'll be chanting "The DVD is life!"

The problem is not the director

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

I happen to think David Lynch is a genius. Some will not agree. That's fine. However, I think hopefully we can safely agree that Lynch does know how to direct (he's been nominated for several Academy Awards). The problem with the original Dune in my opinion is that the story is vast. It was just impossible to do justice to the story in a 2.5 hour movie. I don't personally consider the differences between the film and novel to be significant and for those who do, well, just wait until you see this film. If you think that in 2.5 to 3 hours that Peter Berg will somehow be able to produce a more faithful version of Dune , well, that's a rather interesting thought that surely will be proven false. Lynch had to leave out large sections of the first book to save time and Berg will operate under the same conditions. That's why the SciFi Channel filmed Dune as a multipart story.

Re:The problem is not the director

[zehaeva]

I agree, the time constraints are just too much for something like dune. I personally loved the David Lynch version of it, it may not have been the more perfect adaptation and it does leave out a lot, but the feel of the movie and the acting is, at least to me, far superior to that of the mini series. there was, to me, something just a bit off in the mini series. I was happy that they were able to take their time with the story but it just felt off. The book is far superior to either version. hopefully this next telling will be the best version yet.

Re:The problem is not the director

[bcrowell]

The David Lynch version wasn't just bad because it was compressed, it was simply a bad movie. The SciFi channel's version was actually pretty good.

Re:The problem is not the director

[omega_dk]

I dunno, Peter Berg did a decent job with Friday Night Lights... and then did it again with the TV show as a producer.

While it may not be a perfect movie, he captured the 'feeling' behind the book. If he can do for Dune what he did for Friday Night Lights, I would call that a good translation.

Then again, to me the main point of books like Dune isn't exactly what happens, but the message behind what happens. I would be more okay with them changing the plot than changing the message (not to say that I want him to change anything, but just if I had to choose one).

Re:The problem is not the director

[Hoi Polloi]

I never understood the strong rejection of Lynch's effort. No movie is ever going to be a perfect reproduction of any book, it would just be a glorified narration if it was. For instance, I found Kubrick's version of Steven King's book "The Shining" to be far superior to the later TV effort to copy the book that King had always wanted. Kubrick's cutting of tangents and unnecessary details from the story made of a well paced film with an extremely strong mood. The TV mini-series just seemed to drag, granted it didn't have Jack Nicholson and it had that AWFUL fish lipped lispy kid.

The look of Lynch's movie was what I really love about it. The quasi-Victorian/WWI look and feel to it (please don't make me say "Steampunk") seemed truer to the spirit of the book than the later mini-series and its elaborate high fashion. Here was a society that had rejected high technology (thinking machines) and so had purposefully restricted itself to the industrial age. The high quality of the actors involved (José Ferrer, Jürgen Prochnow, Dean Stockwell, etc) is also impressive.

Re:The problem is not the director

[Anonymous Coward]

Lynch has all but disowned Dune. He has a terrible time making it and it was the last film that he did not insist on having
final cut. His vision for it got paired down by his obligations to the studio. What we got wasn't anywhere near the film he wanted to make. Fortunately this forced him to find his way of making beautiful cinema outside mainstream channels..

I like Dune too though. Heartplugs!

Re:The problem is not the director

[DrWho520]

SciFi's interpretation also spanned multiple books. I think it ended at either Children of Dune or God Emperor of Dune.

Re:The problem is not the director

[zehaeva]

Here Here! I fully agree on both the assessment of Lynch's Dune v SciFi's and Kubrick's The Shining v whatever-horrible-miniseries-that-i-could-not-stand. Just as in with video games you have to sacrifice some realism to make the game fun so too while directing a movie it may be better to go a different route with certain aspects of the translation. Keep to the spirit as best as you can but some things will never translate well. something that comes to mind is Red Dragon by Thomas Harris, the most recent version of it was very well done, it lacked the Dragon's voice in the guy's head (sorry its been a long while since i've read this one) which should have been included however how does one visually show what happens when the fakes suicide in front of the blind girl? how do you visually describe what she felt as she was running her hands over him and finally reaches the face (or lack there of)? some things really do not translate well.

Re:The problem is not the director

[tbuskey]

Frank Herbert liked the original. He apprciated that things had to be done to convert his novel into a different medium, the movie.

He didn't like that they subsequently cut it down so much to fit into a movie theater time frame.

Today, after LoTR, I think they'd have more leeway on movie length.

Obligatory

[Bootle]

The spice is life!

Re:Obligatory

[Missing_dc]

But it is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

It is by the juice of saffu that thoughts acquire speed,
that lips acquire stains, that stains become a warning.

It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

Re:Obligatory

[daVinci1980]

Did you actually read Dune? What on earth are you talking about?

Did you mean 'He who controls the spice controls the universe?'

Re:Obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

Baron Harkonnen says that in the movie, is it in the book?

Re:Obligatory

[Bootle]

that lips acquire stains Whoa buddy, keep your lips to yourself!

Re:Obligatory

[truthsearch]

What on earth are you talking about? What on Arakkis are you talking about?

Fixed that for ya.

Re:Obligatory

[sentientbeing]

I think hes talking about Gerri, Posh, Mel B, Mel C and the other one.

Lets hope they....

[goobermaster]

Don't screw around too much with artistic license. I still shudder when I watch Lynch's version and see Harkonnen as a screaming-crazy diseased pus bag instead of a sociopathic-sadist-scheming bastard.

Re:Lets hope they....

[Punko]

Except in the book he was diseased and overweight.

Re:Lets hope they....

[Bobb9000]

Overweight, yes. Diseased, not so much. Screaming-crazy, covered in boils, barely able to form coherent sentences, not so much. The book's Baron was actually threatening, instead of just ridiculous, because he seemed like exactly the kind of man who would be in charge of a group like the Harkonnens. Realistic villains are usually more frightening than cartoons.

Oooh, oooh!

[realmolo]

A new sci-fi movie? Have they checked the availability of the "Official Sci-Fi/Fantasy Actors of the 21st Century": Patrick Stewart Milla Jovovich Wesley Snipes Toby Macguire Christian Bale Liam Neeson Natalie Portman Hugo Weaving Samuel L. Jackson Hugh Jackman and, of course, Ray Park I mean, you can't make a sci-fi movie without *at least* 2 people from that list!

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[totallyarb]

If they cast Tobey Macguire as Paul, we may all have to kill ourselves. :)

On a more serious note, I do hope they remember to cast a serious actor as Duncan Idaho... you've got to plan for sequels.

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[MBGMorden]

On a more serious note, I do hope they remember to cast a serious actor as Duncan Idaho... you've got to plan for sequels. Not really. IIRC, the Duncan that appears in the first movie is pretty old. He doesn't become "young recurring Duncan" until the sequel comes around ;).

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[nicolastheadept]

Duncan does get the most mileage out of the series

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[Anonymous Coward]

In the first movie you barely notice he's there. He gives one lesson to Paul, and then he's killed when the palace is attacked and no one mentions him again. In the book he has a much bigger role before he is killed.

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[halivar]

IIRC, the Duncan that appears in the first movie is pretty old. Actually, he's pretty dead. His name was Richard Jordan, and he was a damn fine actor. I am really sorry Duncan didn't have a bigger role in the Lynch film. That said, Duncan didn't have a really huge role in the books until they started resurrecting him. Too bad you can't do the same thing with Jordan. :(

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[Digi-John]

I want to see Samuel L. Jackson as Gurney Halleck. Admit it, that would be awesome.

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[MBGMorden]

I wasn't referring to the actor, but the CHARACTER of Duncan Idaho in the first movie. IIRC, he's an old man, and then is ressurected as a younger Duncan as subsequent Gholas ;). So the Duncan in a "Dune" remake wouldn't need to look anything like the "Duncan" actors in any sequels that came up ;).

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[yhetti]

"I am tired of these motherf***ing worms on this motherfu***ing planet."
From "Arrakis: The Ecology", Imperial Planetologist Jackson

Clearly, the cast is as follows:

Paul - Will Smith
Duke Leto - The guy who played Paul in 84 (Desperate Housewives...)
Jessica - Angelina Jolie
Stilgar - Hugh Jackman, complete with adamantium.
Chani - Lucy Lui
Alia - Dakota Fanning

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[Anonymous Coward]

You say that as if its a bad thing, I can think of a good fantasy movie for Milla Jovovich and Natalie Portman...

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[rossdee]

"Actually, he's pretty dead."

Not a problem, the Tleilaxu can make us a Ghola.

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[Anonymous Coward]

Samuel Jackson as Paul...

Paul: I want you to go in that desert, and find my sandworm.
Random Fremen: Which one is it?
Paul: It's the one that says Bad Motherfucker

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[cthulu_mt]

Nathan Fillion as Duncan Idaho.

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[Kelz]

Missing option: Ian McKellen as Duke Leto!

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[YaroMan86]

I read nothing suggesting Duncan was very old in the original book, and I just finished reading the book for the 1500th time.

Though yes, I think you're right that he was likely regrown as a younger self in Messiah and on.

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[Anonymous Coward]

No Will Smith? He'd make a kick-ass Duncan Idaho!

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[largesnike]

I guess they got their last chance with Mission To Mars http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0183523/

Re:Oooh, oooh!

[zaba]

"I've had it with these motherfuckin' worms on this motherfuckin' rock!"

Yes but...

[EricR86]

Will it have Sting?

Please be LotR

[xzvf]

The only decent recent translation of an adult SciFi/Fantasy novel has been the LotR trilogy. A decent job was done with pre-adult Potter series. Considering how studios have butchered other children books recently (Golden Compass, Earagon, Spiterwick, etc) it will take a strong hand to keep it on the correct path. Maybe they should try to tell an "original" story written to be visually presented in 90 minutes.

Re:Please be LotR

[Robber Baron]

You forgot The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe...
Excellent depiction IMO...Tilda Swinton was brilliant as the White Witch.

Re:Please be LotR

[MozeeToby]

I was just about to say that Dune doesn't make for good movies because there's just too much back story and narration to have a decent screenplay adaptation. Then you had to go and remind me ove LoTR, a fantasy novel with possibly more background and narration that was made into an awesome movie that even fans of the books enjoy.

I honestly don't know how they did it. I guess part of it was not trying to explain the background in depth; the fans of the book already know it and the rest don't care. Another way was to represent as much information visually as possible (the settings in LoTR were fantasticly matched to the book, atleast in spirit if not some details). Still, I don't see them spending tens of millions for a new Dune movie; which is what it would take to make it really work.

Re:Please be LotR

[daVinci1980]

Are you serious? I thought TLTWaTW was a terrible, terrible adaptation. And that book was short, there was no excuse.

Now, the first and second Harry Potters were shockingly faithful to the books (although they've diverged as they get further and further along).

Re:Please be LotR

[MBGMorden]

Excellent depiction IMO...Tilda Swinton was brilliant as the White Witch. My friends think it's weird that I find her sexy, but I do :). You can definitely tell that Edmund is pre-puberty though - when she first meets him and gives him the "you can have ANYTHING you want" line I almost expect the "bow chicka bow wow" porno music to cue - then he asks for candy.

Re:Please be LotR

[cerelib]

I honestly don't know how they did it. There is an important difference between how Dune was written and how LotR was written. Frank Herbert was spinning a complex plot that required quite a bit of internal dialogue, narration, and back story to let the reader understand the characters and their motivations. LotR on the other hand is a much more straight forward black and white, good vs evil story. Much of the back story parts are almost completely superflous to the story and instead are used to immerse the reader into the world. These things include historical descriptions of places and societies and of course songs/poems. Much of this can be skipped while reading LotR, but makes for a less enjoyable read. The advantage Peter Jackson had is that, with enough good cinematography and special effects, the format of a movie is good enough to provide the immersive experience to the audience. LotR is what is good because of Tolkien's style, and Dune is good because of Herbert's style, but they are quite different especially in regards to their ability to be translated to a feature film.

Re:Please be LotR

[MacColossus]

You should remember The Lion, Which, Wardrobe was written by Christian theologian CS Lewis. Probably not going to see that in the movie unless the apocalypse is at hand. Of course, it very well could be one of the four horsemen. :-)

Re:Please be LotR

[Anonymous Coward]

A decent job was done with pre-adult Potter series. It was OK. But I'm still holding out for the "adult" version. "Hairy Potter and the Sorcerer's Stones" anyone?

Re:Please be LotR

[kehren77]

Now, the first and second Harry Potters were shockingly faithful to the books (although they've diverged as they get further and further along).

Actually I think (IMHO) what happened after the first 2 is that the books themselves began to grow exponentially and there was much more editing of the story to just keep the "key" story plot points.

Re:Please be LotR

[mink]

She did good, but was not IMO as good as Barbara Kellerman did in the BBC adaption YMMV>

the film by Lynch is awesome

[Chutulu]

I do think that the film by Lynch is awesome. One of his better movies. But i would love to see a remake by Peter Jackson for example.

It is by fanboys alone...

[nweaver]

It is by fanboys alone that drool is set in motion.

It is by the news of cool that mobs begin to form, the slash begins to dot, the hype begins to build.

It is by fanboys alone that drool is set in motion.

Re:It is by fanboys alone...

[MacColossus]

Hilariously awesome. A Slashdot readers new mantra. Now if I could get the grocery clerk to tell me which aisle the juice of saphu is in.

Re:It is by fanboys alone...

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

Now if I could get the grocery clerk to tell me which aisle the juice of saphu is in.

Look up a bit. There are signs over the aisles. Look for the one that says: COFFEE

Re:It is by fanboys alone...

[MacColossus]

Ahh yes. I have been known to drink so much of that I become prescient. :-) By the way, i love your signature.

Re:It is by fanboys alone...

[gnick]

Look up a bit. There are signs over the aisles. Priceless advice. Whenever I find myself lost and in need of guidance, I look to the heavens and seek a sign. Unfortunately, it only seems to work in grocery stores, mass transit stations, and on the freeway...

Re:It is by fanboys alone...

[Anonymous Coward]

the slash begins to dot ROFL!

Favorite Dune quotes.

[MacColossus]

The sleeper has awakened. Long live the fighters. "Oh-h-h, the Galacian girls Will do it for pearls, And the Arrakeen for water! But if you desire dames Like consuming flames, Try a Caladanin daughter!" I also enjoy the Dune references in Fat Boy Slim's "Weapon of Choice"

Re:Favorite Dune quotes.

[residieu]

I liked "My name is a Killing Word", even though it had no basis in the book.

Re:Favorite Dune quotes.

[Phu5ion]

Christopher Walken was the bomb in "Weapon of Choice".

Walk without rhythm and you won't attract the worm.

Dune isn't even sci-fi

[kindbud]

It's swords and sorcery fantasy with a slight patina of technology. You have magic psychics, aircraft that flap their wings, space folding (just say teleport, asshole), and weapons that magnify a shout. This is magic, not sci-fi.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[falcon5768]

what do you think most sci-fi is? Is it hard sci-fi well depends on the books (the later ones delve really hard into genetic research and transfer of consciousness) but it IS sci-fi.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[Anonymous Coward]

Who kicked you in the nuts as you got out of the wrong side of bed this morning?

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[MacColossus]

I would characterize sonic weapons written about in 1965 as science fiction. Folding space isn't the same as teleportation. Teleportation in science fiction usually refers to turning matter into energy or disassembling the matter for transmission and the reassembling on the other end. Folding space is more like traveling through a worm hole although that is a crappy analogy as well. Think of space as a two dimensional plane like a piece of paper. Take the piece of paper and put a dot on the far left of that piece of paper. Say you want that dot to get to the far right of the piece of paper without moving. You fold the piece of paper in half and the dot is now touching the far right piece of paper.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[MillenneumMan]

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Arthur C. Clarke,

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[Anonymous Coward]

Being classified as 'sci-fi' does emphatically _not_ require the work to be about technology.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
-- Arthur C. Clarke

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[hansamurai]

You also have stillsuits, one of the coolest and most imaginative things I've ever read in a book. The Freman's entire culture and way of life can be explained through this single piece of sci-fi clothing. Awesome if you ask me.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[harry666t]

1. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

2. It's also a lot about pushing the boundaries of what a human body and mind is capable of. You know that at the moment we're using no more than a few percent of our brains, don't you?

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[meringuoid]

weapons that magnify a shout

I don't remember those, though it's been a while since I've read Dune. Got a page reference?

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[Faluzeer]

Dune is more like Science Fantasy than Science fiction, but it is still a damn fine book. As for your comment about weapons that magnify a shout, surely that is only from the first Dune film...

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[Anonymous Coward]

Clark's an idiot. The distinguishing feature is... that science can be explained. Saying that some tech in the future is going to be so awesome that explaining it to use would be impossible is pure BS, and an excuse for lazy and ignorant authors everywhere.

When an author makes no effort to explain their 'advanced technology' and it makes no rational sense, then it's magic. For example, I seem to recall the explanation of stillsuits is they recycle your sweat and pump it around your body based on motion... for a modern-day stillsuit, go try wearing a wet-suit in the desert, it will function the same.

Science fiction vs fantasy has a grey border, where suspension of disbelief becomes more and more difficult. On the fantasy side live Larry Nivin, Arthur c Clark, Frank Herbert, and scores of other authors. On the science fiction side you have Ian M Banks, Robert Forward, Vernor Vinge, etc.

Of course, it requires some general knowledge of science to distinguish between believable future drama and idiocy.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[ultramk]

Clark's an idiot. The distinguishing feature is... that science can be explained. Saying that some tech in the future is going to be so awesome that explaining it to use would be impossible is pure BS, and an excuse for lazy and ignorant authors everywhere.

He wasn't talking about science, he was talking about technology. There's a difference.

The problem is that adequately explaining advanced technology to someone who does not have the cultural background/education/whatever to understand the even the basics of the explanation is, well, really fricking hard.

Imagine taking an iPhone deep into the Amazon, maybe a two hundred years ago. Find a native, and once you get past the language difficulties, go ahead and show him how you can take a photo, play a movie, and talk to someone on the other side of the world. Now explain to him how this isn't magic, and that it's perfectly understandable in simple, rational scientific terms.

Now ask yourself, would he be able to distinguish between what the iPhone can do, and magic? How exactly?

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, no, it's science fiction because it pretends to have scientific explanations. That's really the only difference between fantasy and sci-fi, is how you make your effects happen, magic or science.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[toddestan]

Not everything has to be the "Star Trek" style of sci-fi where they like to throw around lots of jargon and try to explain everything. A lot of authors make the mistake of trying to overexplain everything in their books when it isn't really relevant to the story and doesn't really add anything to the plot - sometimes to the point where the story reads more like a technical manual than a novel. Once you're willing to accept that you don't need an explaination of how the starships work, how force fields work, how you can make a hull impervious to everything but gravity and light, etc. to enjoy the story, you'll find that a lot of science fiction and fantasy aren't really all that different. I find the most important thing is that the author sticks to any rules that he/she lays out about the technology/magic/whatever they decide to invent for the story.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[kindbud]

Folding space is more like traveling through a worm hole although that is a crappy analogy as well.

But you forgot about the spice-snorting mutants. Fit that into a scientifically plausible wormhole fiction.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[kindbud]

1. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

They fold space by having pet mutants snort spice.

2. It's also a lot about pushing the boundaries of what a human body and mind is capable of. You know that at the moment we're using no more than a few percent of our brains, don't you?

There is no evidence whatsoever for that folk tale. In fact, what evidence we have suggests very strongly that even a small loss of brain tissue can cause massive changes in cognition and function. Then there is the evolutionary argument that humans would not have evolved a brain with a mass of about 1400 grams if a brain with a mass of about 140 grams would do. Nervous tissue that is not active atrophies. If we really only used 10% of our brains, it'd be 10% of its present size.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi

[mink]

The flip side of the coin are people like that French man who has only a thin layer of brain tissue on the inside of his skull, yet has had a (as I understand it) normal life.

You Know ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I posted a story about this two or three weeks ago and now it's news. Why do I even bother posting stories to this site?

Lynch mob

[Dr. Cody]

The first "Dune" movie was camp for nerds. I read the book, and, as much as I liked it, I can't get worked up about David Lynch's ( and Frank Herbert's) less-than-faithful adaptation. It was just too great. Sting in a knife fight? A flying, boil-covered fat man as the antagonist?

That movie had everything but the Log Lady.

Re:Lynch mob

[theshowmecanuck]

The first movie was a log if you get my drift. I agree entirely with what you said.

Re:Lynch mob

[primalamn]

That movie had everything but the Log Lady. Made me spit me coffee out! If there was only a red room in the space ship...

bzudo

[bzudo]

the only way to do Dune justice is to make it a trilogy. there is no way to cram all of the story into one 3 hour film.

Re:bzudo

[esocid]

Rightly said. I really like the first rendition of Dune, although it did leave a good amount out from the books, but the movie would have had to be 6 hours long to capture all of that. They could have gone with a three movie series or something but this is all hindsight. The new one will be so full of CG it will look ridiculous. I'm still a fan of using something physical over CG, both can look fake in their own rights, but the original did a decent job of portraying everything. Someone else already mentioned this but the Toto soundtrack was awesome, so we'll see what crappy music the new one will be set to. "My name is a killing word" - by Kanye West, remixed by Paris Hilton. If David Lynch does a good job of it, I'll gladly eat my words, but IMO the odds are against it.

Re:bzudo

[esocid]

If Peter Berg does a good job of it, I'll gladly eat my words, but IMO the odds are against it.
There we go, fixed.

Dupe

[cashman73]

Great. Another remake. Too many more of these and Hollywood is going to have as many dupes as Slashdot,... Whatever happened to originality, people?

Re:Dupe

[Rik Sweeney]

Whatever happened to originality, people?

The reality TV craze led by Simon "I buy number one singles on Oprah Winfrey" Cowell and Andrew "Sell out" Lloyd-Webber killed it off.

Re:Dupe

[_Shad0w_]

Calling Andrew Lloyd Webber a sell out implies he had some integrity to start off with.

Nope

[Etrias]

Sorry, it can't be done. It shouldn't be done. The first book of Dune can hardly be encapsulated by one movie, and I'm not even sure it can be done in three.

What makes Dune great is it's breadth of subject matter enveloping politics, revenge, society (both tribal and "civilized"), power, religion, hierarchical hegemony and other big words. Plus, it is driven by an inner monologue from all of the main characters. How the hell do you portray inner monologue on the big screen, or any screen for that matter?

Nope, it promises to be another suckfest, a pissing on Frank Herbert's grave. And if the writer Kevin J. Anderson is involved in any way, it will be more bag-loads of awful than you can stuff into a stadium.

Re:Nope

[mdm-adph]

Not that I have any great, overwhelming love for the original Lynch movie, but I think he did a good job showing the "inner monologue" parts with the narration work.

Re:Nope

[Etrias]

Oh I agree. Lynch did about as good as could be expected but I still feel it a bit lacking. Lynch also had the benefit of working with some great actors who could pull off the little quirks of portraying thoughts. However, in a movie, they become little more than asides. But Lynch also added the weirding device, which was...odd. The Sci-fi mini-series was okay but it felt cheap. Honestly though, Paul seemed too old.

Bottom line on this is any potential movie will never be as good as what I have envisioned in my head...but isn't that always the case.

BTW, everything I said about Kevin J. Anderson and suckitude is still valid.

Re:Nope

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed.

As I'm currently reading Dune, for the 3rd time, there are the aspects you mentioned that make that book what it is, that can not be transferred to film. Because of that, ANY film created will ultimately fail to in representing the totality of what Herbert was trying to get across. Personally, I liked the Sci-Fi version better than Lynch's film, but even that had its faults.

Ultimately, Dune is probably a story best left to the book. We'd all like it to be brought to the big screen, but because of the nature with which the story is told, it truly can't be represented artistically on the big screen.

Re:Nope

[Tanubis]

What might be a better idea is to do Dune as a video game... something first or third person where you swap off between different characters and play out the various scenes in the book. There's enough combat in the game that you could run something like Jade Empire for it, but there's also lots of puzzles that would keep the game intriguing. There's no limit to how long you make a computer game, generally the longer the better, so the story could be given justice. Internal monologues are also easy to do in a computer game.

On the other hand I always said the lord of the rings could never be made into a good movie (how many failures were there before the big blockbuster one?), but the newest take on it brought in mega cash. Even if many Tolkien geeks didn't like the movie, even if it did miss huge portions of the book, more people enjoyed those films in the last five years than have even read the books in my entire generation, much less enjoyed them.

Re:Nope

[CodeBuster]

What I would like to see is the WHOLE story shot, no matter how long it is, and then they can cut several different versions from that: one for theater release to give the general audience a taste of what Dune is in a way that makes sense as a whole, a regular DVD release with some more scenes added back in for the regular DVD cut to expand upon certain themes that were probably only hinted at in the theater version, AND finally...The whole nine-yards Ultimate Edition 9-hour DVD extravaganza for the TRUE hard-core fans which covers in exquisite minutiae the entire breadth and depth of the story to the maximum extent possible with film. If they do shoot the film in this way with these things in mind then I do think that re-making Dune ONE more time is WORTHWHILE. It would also be nice to set up the filming of the Remaining 5 (five) novels at the same time (and you wouldn't even need long term contracts for many of the actors with the possible exceptions of Gurney Halleck and Duncan Idaho for the Ghola versions) for a truly EPIC series of films that would stand the test of decades or even centuries in their scale, vision, and sheer magnificence (I know, I know, I am probably setting up an impossibly high standard, but one can hope anyway).

Re:Nope

[Anonymous Coward]

Inner monologue can't be... Oh, I guess you've remembered the obvious by now. (Audio.)
You can also say that all 'fiction' is a monologue at some level of abstraction, like a dream. Cinema can draw on the other art forms to create an effect, or to help it out when it's insufficient. So, not all parts of the story need to be acted out, but could be read aloud at the beginning of multiple parts or chapters. (Like it's done at the beginning of Lynch's film.) Even then, a much longer runtime might be highly beneficial.

Re:Nope

[mdm-adph]

Old? Oh, come on, Kyle was barely 25 when that movie came out. :P

But you're right -- the "weirding devices" made absolutely no sense, but you have to admit the book is kinda vague on what, exactly, the "weirding way" is, anyway.

And you're right -- anything Kevin J. Anderson touches is horrible. I read the first three books in the "Butlerian Jihad" series, and I seriously had to force myself to continue reading it by about the third one, just out of respect for Frank's bones, but it was seriously painful -- the book is horrible. Horrible. Did I say it was horrible?

one book should be many movies

[RichMan]

I wish the studios had the courage to break single books into 2 or more movies. And definitely not try and cram 2-3 books into one movie.

It would give the movies more chance to cover the details of the book. Sort of like StarWars 4,5,6. Where the different movies can end on up or down notes in the overall story.

Re:one book should be many movies

[nicolastheadept]

Sort of like StarWars 4,5,6. Where the different movies can end on up or down notes in the overall story. Episode 3 is a better example of ending on a down note.

Re:one book should be many movies

[Oktober Sunset]

No, episode 3 is an example of how you can feed a heap of dog shit to fans and they will gobble it up and keep asking for more.

Re:one book should be many movies

[orbitor]

If you have the pull of Harry Potter, I guess you can. Story here.

Re:one book should be many movies

[Hausenwulf]

Remember that "Kill Bill" started as a single movie. Still, the real problem is finding a good ending point for each movie so that the audience doesn't feel cheated by a less-than-satisfying ending.

At last

[Anonymous Coward]

It has been too long reading Slashdot without a Natalie Portman mention!!!

Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[daVinci1980]

It seems like all Hollywood does these days is re-cover movies they've already made (which were generally adaptations of books in the first place).

Seriously, there's only one of two reasons why these are successful:
1) Nostalgia.
2) The idea was good the first time around.

We're rarely improving on the ideas at all. It's just mindless drivel rereleased again and again.

NBC's fall line up consists of a Jekyll and Hyde remake, followed by Knight Rider, followed by... A movie studio (not sure who) is making another "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure", and yet another is making a sequel to Wargames.

Seriously Hollywood: stop. Just stop it. You're embarrassing yourself.

There are plenty of other books that you could make into movie that would translate well. For example, the Feist series of books, starting with Magician: Apprentice would translate pretty well to the screen.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[pshumate]

I don't see why the movie companies can't consolidate a few of their "ideas". Go ahead and make "Bill and Ted's Righteous Kwisatz Haderach Training" and "KITT and KARR: Two Minds, One Mustang". Save me the trouble of having to miss four crappy movies/shows.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[popeye44]

You've got my vote. Feist and a few others have some great stories.

Enders Game from OSC, That would make a cool movie.

Lots of good things to choose from. Not that Dune isn't good. I just agree that something new could be made. Well done CGI makes the unbelievable believable.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[ataraxian]

The original illustrations by John Schoenherr when it was originally serialized in Analog are still, for me, the greatest visual realization of the Dune books. You can see some of them here: http://nebuh.blogspot.com/2007/08/illustrated-dune-part-1.html An animated Dune in the style of Schoenherr would be, IMO, would really bring something completely new to the Dune table.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not embarrassing. The whole reason why sequels and remakes are made is because they sell, because people are familiar with them & are less likely to take chances with new stuff that they don't know. And they do sell. Year after year, sequels, remakes, and movies based on books tend to be the highest grossing films.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[DerekLyons]

It seems like all Hollywood does these days is re-cover movies they've already made (which were generally adaptations of books in the first place).

Where have you been for the last 75 years? This isn't new, or news, or insightful. Hollywood has been doing the repeat/remake/exploit thing since about the time the third movie was filmed there.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[ODiV]

75 years?

Shakespeare's Hamlet is a retelling of an old legend.

This has been going on as long as we've been telling stories.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas...

[DerekLyons]

Oh, I know that. I was just trying to break the news of how ignorant the OP was gently.

Epic Anime

[russlar]

I've thought for a long time that the only way to properly present Dune on the big screen, and be 100% true to the details of the book, was to make it into an epic Anime.

Re:Epic Anime

[halivar]

Will the Bene Gesserit have magic school-girl outfit change sequences? Ooh, ooh! The Guild navigators could have tentacles! And Paul needs to be 12, have a girly voice, and spiky hair. Totally play up the angst. Also, you have to call out the name of the Wierding Way maneuvers you're using ("Desert Flower Wierding Strike Omega!!!!").

Re:Epic Anime

[Anonymous Coward]

Pixar needs to start a new label and do some high quality CG anime titles. Dune would be great, and so would Ender's Game.

Re:Epic Anime

[Anonymous Coward]

exactly, word of wisdom here. I think studio I.G. would do wonder. Btw you can't just cover the fist book, the 3 first book need to be done to make sense.

Also the obligated videogame tie-in? i would like Hideo Kojima to do that one with the metal gear 4 engine.

Re:Epic Anime

[xbytor]

Ever see Akira? Ever read the manga? Same thing with Ghost in the Shell. In both cases the movies didn't do justice to the books. The movies weren't bad but they were different, just slices out of the original.

The problem with Dune is that a lot of people have read the book. Doing it as a single movie will either have to be a summary or a slice.

Re:Epic Anime

[CodeBuster]

Will the Bene Gesserit have magic school-girl outfit change sequences? Now THAT was funny. The Bene Gesserit in the Sci-Fi mini series really did remind me of magic schoolgirls, all they needed were sailor uniforms and two-fingered salutes to complete the look. The Bene Gesserit were supposed to be cunning, ruthless, cynical, and at least amoral if not downright evil in pursuit of their goals. Oh well, that was among the least of what the Sci-Fi miniseries, decent though it was, got wrong.

Why another version (there is 2 all ready)

[blanks]

I don't know why they want to re-do the first book in the dune series. We have the one lynch came up with, and Peter Berg has all ready done the first dune book for the sci-fi channel.

Why would Peter Berg want to direct the same book twice? Seems silly to me.

O and to any hardcore dune fans; if you havn't read sandworms of dune yet do not read it. It will make you angry and comes off like they want to come up with the worst way possible to end the series.

Re:Why another version (there is 2 all ready)

[zaba]

Why would Peter Berg want to direct the same book twice? Seems silly to me. I do light design for theatres. This month, I will be doing Godspell again and in November I'm planning on doing a lesser-known show that I did just last year.

While my experience is not an apples-for-apples comparison with a director's experience, revisiting past work can be very satisfying. Different cast, crew, sets, blocking, etc. make each show unique.

Of course, I haven't rtfa yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if a bigger budget and a higher probability of having more of the additional books developed for the big screen with Berg as director are motivating factors.

As someone who was NOT a fan..

[Gewalt]

As someone who was NOT a fan, having simply never read the book, or watched the first movie, I have a rather clean impression of the Sci-Fi version. Here's my quick and dirty review of something that I saw several years ago, and only once.

My first impression was "wow! this acting is terrible, it totally destroys the suspension of disbelief."

Then I got over that and suspension of disbelief was restored by the excellent job that was done with props and scenery.

Then I got to the end of the movie, and thought "well, there was certainly a very good story there, too bad they did such a terrible job telling it."

I bet you can guess why I never watched it again.

Reading the book can ruin the movie ...

[AHumbleOpinion]

... but if the acting is supurb, and they're telling a good story, then I'm happy.

Maybe, if you have not read the book. The 1980s theatrical movie had good acting and a good story but plot elements really knocked the movie down a notch, for example for many who read the book the sound based weapons were a strong negative. The Fremen won fights because their environment and culture made them tough, it was not a technological gimmick. The movie discarded a major element of the book, people adapting to and being influenced (culturally and physically) by their environment.

Re:Reading the book can ruin the movie ...

[PakProtector]

... but if the acting is supurb, and they're telling a good story, then I'm happy.

Maybe, if you have not read the book. The 1980s theatrical movie had good acting and a good story but plot elements really knocked the movie down a notch, for example for many who read the book the sound based weapons were a strong negative. The Fremen won fights because their environment and culture made them tough, it was not a technological gimmick. The movie discarded a major element of the book, people adapting to and being influenced (culturally and physically) by their environment.

A-frickkin'-men-, brother.

Dune may have been dedicated to dryland ecologists, but we all know the book and series were for Anthropologists.

Re:Reading the book can ruin the movie ...

[MadUndergrad]

That reminds me of a scene where Paul realized just how bad it was to be have the Fremen as an enemy:

After they ambush a small group of Harkonnens and steal an ornithopter, the Fremen in the thopter spots a Harkonnen troop carrier en route to the ambush site. Without hesitation he gets into position, and kamikazes into the thing, killing around 300 Harkonnen soldiers. Paul is amazed at this action, until he realizes that the Fremen are that loyal to the sietch and that calculating to be willing to trade 1 life for 300. It's then that he really understands Desert Power as his father envisioned it.

Not every book needs to be a movie, too

[acvh]

Dune, and its descendants, are novels that rely a great deal on narration and inner dialogue to tell their stories. They work great as novels. Not so much as movies.

and for whoever is saying that the TV version was worth watching - shame on you.

maybe Hollywood should look to other genres of art to rape for movies: paintings perhaps, or sculpture. "Waterlilies, the Movie" has potential....

Re:Not every book needs to be a movie, too

[RiotingPacifist]

The TV version lacks in style but lacks a lot less in plot than the movie version.

I suppose as im used to southpark and indie movies i think that the plot matters alot more than the effects, same reason i wont be getting a HDTV.

That was my problem with it, basically

[Moraelin]

Well, that was my problem with David Lynch's movie, basically. It's like an abbreviated summary of the book. Actually, probably a better way to explain it, would be Woody Allen quote: "Woody Allen I took a speed-reading course and read War and Peace in twenty minutes. It involves Russia." That's just about it.

If you had already read the book, I guess it wasn't a bad movie. It had just enough visual clues to let your memory do the rest. So you can look an go, "ooh, I know, this is the Gom Jabbar sequence", and you'd already know what led there, where it goes from there, and why is that important. While the movie would move to the next scene and give you yet another piece, and again, it would be mostly up to your memory to fill in the gap and put the new scene in context too.

I, however, must have been one of the few who saw the movie before reading the book. In fact, I got the book only because the movie didn't make that much sense at times, and certainly didn't leave me with the awe for Dune that everyone else semed to have. (I know, I know, I'll hand in my nerd card now;) It wasn't a _bad_ movie per se, but in retrospect it just wasn't Dune. It was a mildly SF-themed action movie, where some guys fought for some desert planet, for some resource those guys had. And not only it was just as superficial as any other action movie (it could have been "Rambo Does Iraq" just as well), but the plot seemed a little bit condensed and rushed through even by action movie standards. Everything that made it... well, made it _Dune_, was at best hinted at, and sometimes it came via short scenes that didn't seem to make that much sense or have much relevance for the rest of the movie.

Again, in retrospect I can see how you'd figure it out if you had read the book already, and only used the movie as a visual summary. Without that background, I wasn't impressed much.

Can someone else do better? Heck if I know, to be honest. One can only hope. It's certainly impossible to do justice to the whole Dune story, you're right in that aspect. But maybe he can make a movie that at least makes sense on its own.

Re:That was my problem with it, basically

[holyspidoo]

I find that most books or writings which have so much more internal dialog and thoughts than actual dialog don't translate well to series or movies. A silly example of this would be spiderman, where the movies are simply not the same without Parker's inner dialog (which is present in many of the cartoon series)

With all the inner dialog, I wish Dune was done in some sort of animated series where thoughts can have voice over and it somehow works better than in live action movies.

Re:That was my problem with it, basically

[Sardaukar86]

That was just about the best damn critique of the original Lynch movie I have ever read.

I read the book rather than approach the movie first as you did, but I certainly experience the 'memory required to fill in the gaps' feeling you describe when re-visiting the film. I find with movie/book pairs it is often far more enjoyable to watch before reading the story, however with regard to Dune I agree with you that the book is almost a pre-requisite for viewing the movie and it still makes for a broken and disjointed affair.

That said I still find myself regarding the work with a semi-perpetual feeling of awe; it is far and away my favourite sci-fi flick of all time.

Don't judge any movie by the GREAT trilogy

[assertation]

I finally got around to reading the Dune trilogy a few years ago. Think of all the books that get mentioned as the crown jewels of sci-fi novels. They are all pure crap fiction compared to the Dune Trilogy.

No movie will ever come close to doing right by those books.

However, taken as separate works I thought the Dune movie in the 80s with Sting and the sci-fi channel's mini series were pretty good.

If you haven't, read the Dune trilogy soon. Don't bother with the Dune books that came after that except for the 4th in the series.

Re:Don't judge any movie by the GREAT trilogy

[Faluzeer]

Dune Trilogy???

On my bookshelf I have the following Dune Books :
1. Dune
2. Dune Messiah
3. Children of Dune.
4. God Emperor of Dune
5. Heretics of Dune
6. Chapter House Dune

All 6 were by Frank Herbert, my favourites being Books 1,3 and 5 respectively.

Re:Don't judge any movie by the GREAT trilogy

[assertation]

I agree, #2 should shave been part of Dune.

Just my opinion but I don't think anything past the 4th book is worth it.

Double that for the Dune books his family wrote and compiled from his notes.

Re:Don't judge any movie by the GREAT trilogy

[Anonymous Coward]

it's not a trilogy. There are 6 books that make up the series.

Re:Don't judge any movie by the GREAT trilogy

[assertation]

That is one way of looking at it.

Sometimes in the city you can see an old house with a great design that has an addition that look like it was stapled onto it.

I think that is the case here.

Herbert meant for the story to be contained in a trilogy, liked the success, and tacked on junky sequels to cash in like the Wachowski brothers did with The Matrix.

Sufficiently advanced technology

[uberjoe]

Shame on you! Has the great Clarke taught us nothing? It's not magic, just indistinguishable from it.

Remember Dune takes place 10,000 years after the Butlerian Jihad, which is 10,000 to 20,000 thousand years from the present day. (in the dune chronology, I know its not real ok). Could you explain the computer you are typing on to a Neanderthal?

Never read the books or saw the movie

[waterlogged]

*hands over geek card*

Sorry, I'll add it to my ipod immediately. Won't happen again.

Just finished 2 of the ringworld books though, and Snow Crash rocked.

You obviously haven't read the book

[wiredog]

No weapons magnifying shouts in the book. The SciFi miniseries was much closer to the book.

but, yes, it's a fantasy. So is almost all SF. Any "SF" that has faster than light travel is (probably, pending further discoveries in physics) a fantasy.

Wish they'd tackle Ringworld instead

[Thomasje]

Of course, Dune is a great novel, perhaps the greatest classic of the Sci-Fi genre... But after two disappointing attempts to bring it to the screen, maybe people should rethink the viability of turning an epic with such a convoluted backstory into a movie.

Now, Ringworld, on the other hand... That's a classic novel that just aches to be made into a movie. A simple, easy to follow adventure story, with interesting characters and plenty of potential for awesome visuals. *crosses fingers*

Re:Wish they'd tackle Ringworld instead

[GordonCopestake]

Didn't M$ make that made into a Video Game instead?

Re:Wish they'd tackle Ringworld instead

[sinebubble]

I'm not so sure about Ringworld. If you think about it, not much really happens in the movie that would hold the audience attention. They would have to punch it up with a lot more action. The Ringworld itself held our attention through the book, but I think someone sitting in the theater would be looking for something beyond it after the first 15 minutes of exposure.

Re:Wish they'd tackle Ringworld instead

[CodeBuster]

They said the same thing about the Lord of the Rings and it WAS eventually done well (perhaps not perfectly, but it was really really good). The technology of movie making is finally approaching the point where it CAN do proper Justice to Dune IF and it is a big IF...the studios are willing to spend the kind of money that it would take. I think that it would cost at LEAST $300 million to really do justice to Dune and possibly even more than that. Are the studios willing to take that big of a risk on a Science Fiction film? The past history with Sci-Fi and Hollywood bean counters does not exactly inspire confidence. In order for this to work there must be at least a troika (group of three) people at the top who really understand and grok Dune and have the clout to actually get the resources to do it right. I am hopeful, but not certain that it can FINALLY at long last be FULLY done and done right.

The old movie was awful...

[MaWeiTao]

I finally read the Dune series last year. And because of that I decided to watch the David Lynch movie despite being aware of how bad it was. The movie managed to be even worse than my already low expectations.

The first problem was that they tried to cram every event from the book into the movie. So the entire movie felt like a summary of the book. No scene was sufficiently fleshed out and it was clear that if I hadn't read the book I wouldn't have had any idea what the hell was going on. I even read that when the movie was released in the theaters that pamphlets were handed out to moviegoers so that they had some background on Dune.

The other major problem for me was the depiction of the Fremen and Stilgar in particular. The movie made them look like a band of bumbling, superstitious savages completely dependent on Paul and his mother. His mother was an emotional twit, nothing like the strong personality depicted in the book. And the baron was nothing more than a stereotypical comic book villain. I could go on indefinitely with my complaints of the movie.

I did, however, generally like the visual style of the movie. And I have to concede that Frank Herbert wasn't particularly good at depicting action sequences in his book. That final battle in the first book was about as big a letdown in writing as it was in the movie.

So, I am looking forward to a remake. However, I also expect to be disappointed by the usual Hollywood-style polish. I hope they're smart enough to not try to cram every last detail into the movie but still remain faithful to the Dune universe and its characters. The last thing we need is some hack's personal reinterpretation further soiled by a contemporary veneer of Hollywood coolness.

Re:The old movie was awful...

[mozkill]

there are 2 different versions of that movie. one version is at least 1 hour longer. it sounds like you watched the shorter version. in the longer version of the movie, in the "cut" scenes, the natives all have glowing blue eyes because of the spice. do you know which one you watched?

Re:The old movie was awful...

[MaWeiTao]

I have the set which includes both versions. I watched the shorter version, however. A friend of mine saw both and felt that the longer version didn't really add much.

I may get around to watching it at some point but at this time I'm not inclined to sit through that movie again.

More rooted in Arabic culture

[AHumbleOpinion]

While there are elements taken from Islamic culture Dune is more rooted in Arabic culture, elements that pre-date Islam. The GP's post was only partly nonsense.

When the Dune movie was released in the theater...

[Anonymous Coward]

(The first one) they gave out manuals (they were like Cliff notes for the movie - that wasn't a good sign) to the those who watched the movie to explain what was going on - some of you may not have been around to remember this. You really need an epic sized movie (think Lawrence of Arabia) to do the books justice and explain what was going on.

Not relevant to our times ...

[AHumbleOpinion]

Dune is incredibly relevant to our times because it shows how an oppressive power structure exploits a people's resources and make enemies of the natives ...

That is not relevant to our times, it is relevant to all of human history.

... Dune provides insight into what makes an extremist and their motivations.

No, *extremists* are usually looking for any excuse or pretext to justify their actions. Legitimate grievances are not required.

Re:Not relevant to our times ...

[Anonymous Coward]

your opinion is actually really funny because it is so extreme that it mocks itself.

Re:Not relevant to our times ...

[Anonymous Coward]

The comment wasn't extreme, though your reaction sort of is. [Shrug]

. . .true to the original text

[noewun]

. . .to provide a screenplay that is true to the original text.

Let's hope it's not too true to the original because, Dune aside, that means hours of characters standing around with hundreds of pages of exposition and half-baked "deep" debates on politics, religion and humanity. I'm still a fan of the series, but Herbert really shot his wad after the first two or three books. After that he was just milking a franchise.

However, if they finally let H.R. Giger do the art direction, I will definitely go see it.

Re:. . .true to the original text

[Bobb9000]

I've never understood why so many people want H.R. Giger to do the art for Dune. He has a very interesting style, and I think it was perfect for Alien, but I've never once imagined anything like a Giger setpiece when I read Dune. Seriously, people, what kinds of things are you envisioning when you say you want Giger? There is a profound sense of corrupted humanity in his work that doesn't fit with the descriptions of anything in Dune, or even feel appropriate. The Harkonnens were corrupted, sure, but it was an opulent sort of corruption, not the sort of quasi-human organics that Giger draws.

Re:. . .true to the original text

[noewun]

Why? Because this is freakin' cool. Plus, I've always wanted a Harkonnen Chair.

Please no resemblance to Sci-Fi's abomination

[wikdwarlock]

Please, for the love of melange, do NOT let this stray into the territory of the horrendously terribly Sci-Fi channel adaptation of Dune. I mean, seriously, Fremen strutting around w/o their stillsuits on? Never mind all the times they're wearing them but don't have their nose plugs and mouth covers on. And Jessica as a sniveling woe-is-me damsel in distress! Bah!

Dune is by far my favorite series of books. I've read and re-read them many times, and always find new, provocative stuff in each iteration. Someday I plan to go page by page and make notes, ask questions in the margins, and analyze the hell out of the whole series. I've never felt that compelled about any other story.

I don't think a movie can be entirely true to the text, nor can it, I think, approach it much better than Lynch's work. Short of doing one movie per book, the plots, characters, politics, etc are just too wide AND deep to be presented on screen. For goodness sake, the original screening of Lynch's movie included a handout telling the characters' names and a short bio of each!

I hope that they do an excellent job with this movie. I must not fear that they mangle it as badly, or worse than, Sci-Fi did.

Can't we just have the directors cut

[Big Hairy Ian]

The original David Lynch version would probably have been fine if the producers hadn't edited it down to fuck! Please don't let them do anything that looks like that shity tv series version.

Re:Can't we just have the directors cut

[r1v3t3d]

They released the "director's cut" on DVD last year. It is quite a bit longer, and in my eyes, improved. But there are still many horrible inaccuracies. Lynch took far too many creative liberties with it, and the lack of Giger's art/design made it less than it could have been.

Re:Can't we just have the directors cut

[Blackforge]

They released the "director's cut" on DVD last year. It is quite a bit longer, and in my eyes, improved. But there are still many horrible inaccuracies. Lynch took far too many creative liberties with it, and the lack of Giger's art/design made it less than it could have been. I believe you're thinking of the "Extended Edition" Dune DVD. As far as I am aware there has not been Director's cut done by David Lynch. The Extended Edition is the version they showed on TV a long time ago with some extra scenes slapped together. Though they did fill in some gaps that were in the book.

At least the movie got the costumes right....

[Shivetya]

There were only three things from the movie that "irked" me as a big fan of the books.

1. The sound weapons. (but wasn't the author there at the time and approved it?)
2. That STUPID EFFING CAT
3. Rain at the end.

Now I like the SCI-FI version too, but I like the movie more because...
1. The characters actually look like they were described in the book, hair color anyone?
2. The costumes were good and looked right.
3. Because I really liked how Paul and his relationship to Gurney, his dad, and his mom, came across on the screen.

I am with others, there are other books they can make movies out of instead, do them. I would love to see someone pull off the books, or even some of the newer books, with their ever so NOT-PC issues. (like using women for wombs)

Re:At least the movie got the costumes right....

[Digi-John]

Wait, you didn't like Thufir's cat? Awww...
We've brought you a kitty, Thufir

God Emperor!

[phobos13013]

I have been waiting since i read the novels to see how they would pull off a God Emperor of Dune movie. I have always been in doubt they would ever attempt such a feat. The effects needed alone to pull off the first movie only recently hit its stride. In that case, to have the main character of your movie be a 1,000-foot long worm is probably pretty difficult.

That being said, the Children of Dune mini-series was a remarkably close approximation to how I see God Emperor of Dune. If they took that as a model then took it to the next level in terms of sets and effects, you might be able to have a blockbuster on your hands.

Quite frankly though, there is no ability to put these books into a movie form unless you commit the money and resources to create an epic on the scale of LOTR. Even if they did, there is a high risk that it wouldn't even gross half of what LOTR did.

Re:God Emperor!

[r1v3t3d]

I couldn't agree more. God Emperor of Dune is without a doubt my favorite of the novels. It would be both epic (in scale of the passage of time) and creepy as hell (Leto II as the worm king and the constant resurrection of Idaho).

Lynch's Heresy

[Gallenod]

I preferred the Sci-Fi Channel mini-series to the original movie for one simple reason: Lynch had it rain on Arrakis at the end of the movie. Worse, he had Paul make it rain. It was an unforgiveable departure from the Herbert's story.

That said, the movie was great movie-making with, for the most part, an outstanding cast and perfomances. But I agree that it would really take more than one movie to relate the first book properly. The first three books could (and probably should) be done as a four-movie series:

          1. Dune: Arrakis
          2. Dune: Prophet
          3. Dune: Messiah
          4. Dune: Children of Dune ...and maybe even a fifth movie...

          5. Dune: God Emperor of Dune

Split the first book into two movies and then one movie each for the remaining stories.

Just please don't make it rain on Arrakis again. It was beyond silly.

Studying history would be helpful ...

[AHumbleOpinion]

The Iraqui insurgents have figured out a doctrine that works against armor. That's new.

Uh, you really should study a little history before making such statements. Except for a very brief period after the tank's introduction during World War 1, countering armor was a known. Something that many an ordinary infantry was taught over the last 70+ years. All the insurgents have discovered is that pointing a weapon in the general direction of an enemy and saying a prayer while shooting, relying on God to guide your projectile to the target and make it effective, does not work and that adopting well known infantry tactics do work. All these guys had to do was find one of the millions of field manuals printed and distributed during the cold war.

No insight in Dune?

[R2.0]

Hmmm, lets see.

- There is a substance that is absolutely essential to transportation, and has also become vital to many other aspects of the widespread economy.
- This substance exists in an incredibly harsh desert environment and can only be extracted in commercial quantities by large technological implementations not native to the environment or culture of the indigenous people.
- The aformentioned indigenous people have been toughened by the environment and by the continued exploitation of them by outsiders. They have also become fanatical followers of a particular religion with messianic elements.
- The indigenous peoples realize their situation and, using technology and techniques received from those who exploited them, turn on those exploiters and seize control of the geography and production of that substance, thereby throwing the rest of the wider economy into turmoil and stepping onto the wider stage.

And, in later books, wage Jihad against the balance of the world/universe, taking them over and enforcing strict religious tenets on the conquered cultures and people.

Nope, don't see any insight at all.

Who can write it?

[Scribblenerd]

Sounds like a job for Spider Robinson!

Re:Who can write it?

[thirtimecharm]

I don't think there could be a worse person to write it. SR would insist on adding humor, optimism and real human emotion to it. These have no (apparent) place in Dune. At least we would get an idea about what music they were listening to and the best machine with which to brew up some spice and Irish whiskey with. Actually, have him write it.

By Jove, I can see just see it

[Moraelin]

By Jove, a trilogy might just be the right thing. It worked so well before, after all. I can just see it.

And then they make 3 prequels telling the story of what the Atreides family was doing before they came to Arrakis, and what a whiny kid Paul was before he became Muad'Dib, right? Or maybe, about how the Harkonen weren't that bad guys, and the Atreides were't that good. And at the end they can have a lightsab... err, wait, wrong movie, this is the one with the voice amplifiers... right, at the end they can have screaming fits at each other while surfing on lava. It would be so awesome.

Oh, wait, they're not putting George Lucas in charge ;)

Oh great, global warming tie-in

[Digi-John]

According to Variety, the movie's producers believe the theme of finite ecological resources is timely given the increasing threat of global warming.

Great. We'll get to spend half the movie hearing about how Arrakis was once a beautiful planet, until evil corporations and wasteful humans caused global warming and turned it into a desert. Seriously, with a statement like that, I'll be shocked if the producers don't decide to jam something like that in there. Never mind that to the best of my knowledge Arrakis was never supposed to have had plants/oceans/whatever until the God Emperor created them.

Cinematic justice not possible

[FridayBob]

Has anyone here bothered to read any of Brian Herbert's Dune stories? I've read a few that are supposed to predate the stories in his father's novels. At first they seemed okay -- entertaining at least -- but then I started to get the feeling that it was really just pulp. To be sure, I decided to read Frank's first Dune book again. I hadn't read it in at least 15 years, but soon after I got started again it became clear to me why Frank was such a genius. I'm sure I've read at least as much sci-fi as most people here, but there is a quality to Frank's writing, particularly in these books, that I've not encountered in any other work of science-fiction or fantasy. It's not so much the plot, but the way the central characters develop, the different philosophies involved and the many layers of loyalties and complicated politics that make it all so fascinating. I ended up reading all six of Frank's books again and was even more impressed this time around because I understood and therefore could appreciate more of the books than before.

However, it's this difference -- the qualities that make Frank's writings stand out -- that are impossible to do justice to on the screen. Take any combination of movie director, actors, budget, producer, special effects and cinematographer you want, but if were to shoot a movie based on one of Frank's Dune books and then on one of Brian's, I'm pretty sure you'd see no difference. It's simply not possible to do Frank's genius any justice on the screen. He was brilliant for being a *novelist* -- not for being a playwright. So, forget the movie; just read the books again!

Here's my $0.02, from a HARDCORE Dune fan

[r1v3t3d]

I've read all of the novels several times (in some cases more). Yes, even the ones written by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson (they're nowhere near as good, but still entertaining). The first film was pretty good, and I'll be the first to admit that I'm a big fan of David Lynch's work. However, there were many major inconsistencies, and were it not for the fantastic cast (namely McLachlan, Sting and Stewart) and incredible set design, I would have surely hated it. Then there was the SciFi miniseries, which lacked some of the starpower of the original, but held to the original story MUCH more accurately. There were a couple of minor revisions, but nothing that really upset me. It worked. Children of Dune was something I'd been waiting for nearly all my life (I started reading these VERY young). While some of the dialog felt contrived and forced, it still held true to the books for the most part. Personally, nothing would make me happier than to see God Emperor of Dune translated to film, either a big-budget movie or another miniseries. It is by far my favorite of the novels, and I think it would be visually engaging if done right. I tend to agree that another remake of the original book is completely unnecessary when there is so much more (and better) material to draw from. I can't tell you how aggravating it is that most people believe there's only the one story (Dune). Visit the library, yo. Yes, they can be challenging to read, much like Tolkien, but totally worth it.

Re:Here's my $0.02, from a HARDCORE Dune fan

[CodeBuster]

Personally, nothing would make me happier than to see God Emperor of Dune translated to film, either a big-budget movie or another miniseries. Yes, but if they pick up right in the middle of the books there is NO WAY that they can give people even a minimal proper frame of reference for the deeper meanings of that story AND do justice to God Emperor. Even if there were no time limits and budget was no object it could not be done. The preceding films simply MUST be done and done right to the same scale FIRST or it just won't work. People who are not like the Slashdot crowd, who have generally read and groked all of the novels, at least at some level, would be totally lost. They would excoriate the movie, no matter how good it was, because they would be coming at it completely out of context.

Re:Here's my $0.02, from a HARDCORE Dune fan

[r1v3t3d]

I totally see your point, and I guess what I'm getting at is that there should be a miniseries done of it with the same cast as the first two. I'm cautiously optimistic when it comes to a new and complete revision of the first story. It could be beautiful if given 3 or so hours in theaters and 4 and a half or so on DVD... maybe? I don't know. This has been one of the more interesting threads I've read in a long time, though. =)

Does anyone know of a literary criticism of Dune?

[wikdwarlock]

I've always wished to find some literary criticisms of Dune, or the entire series, or the other individual books. However, as an engineering student, I've never been able to find any and am convinced that I'm just woefully uneducated when it comes to literary journals and publications. Can anyone point to or suggest some Dune analysis or criticism articles, papers, theses, etc?

Too much messed up to make sequels

[VickiM]

I saw the movie first, and loved it. Then I read the books later. I didn't know any better and read past the fourth, but I forgive myself.

After I read the books, I still liked the 1980 movie, but was a little annoyed with it. I know they had a monumental task and the movie captures the soul of the book and the cultural vibes very well, I thought. But it messed up all the essentials! What the water of life actually did, the breeding program, that silly voice-activated weapon, and, worst of all, making Paul out to actually be a god that could summon rain. If only for that last point alone, filming the second and third books and saying they're sequels of the 1980 movie would be almost impossible unless they're completely unfaithful to the books.

Dune Should be a TRIO

[KidSock]

The original Dune movie had the potential to be great. But it was just too much packed into one movie. It's impossible to follow the first time around and needed a lot of narration.

They should have made Dune into a trio: Part I - The boy trains in "wierd" ways and travels to the other planet where in the last sceene he sees a big worm. Part II his family is betrayed, his father is killed and they flee to the rebels in the dunes. Part III he leads the rebels to victory, gets laid and saves the universe.

If the new flick is everything in one movie, then you know it's duned to failure.

Mike

Re:Does anyone know of a literary criticism of Dun

[r1v3t3d]

Try this paper. VERY well-written and engaging. It's interesting to see someone attempt to identify the myriad of influences Herbert used to craft these fantastic and detailed worlds. http://baheyeldin.com/literature/arabic-and-islamic-themes-in-frank-herberts-dune.html

Hey, Rocky!

[Chris Mattern]

Watch me pull a Dune movie out of my hat!

Again?? But that trick *never* works!

Heretics

[Ragzouken]

I want to see a Heretics of Dune movie, I just recently finished reading it and have found it to be my favourite in the series.

Re:Heretics

[csoto]

Couldn't agree more. But who would play Taraza? Or Miles Teg? They better not "affleck" it, like they did Daredevil!

He who controls the spice...

[Enoxice]

...controls the movie industry.

Re:They had to wait until the US was losing in Ira

[couchslug]

'The Iraqui insurgents have figured out a doctrine that works against armor. That's new.'

Command-detonated mines, conventional mines, and Panzerfausts (ancestor of the RPG) are hardly "new".

Refusal to be prepared for that sort of thing is the fault of US military leadership. They were amply warned by Somalia and Chechnya, and had "lessons learned" reports aplenty. The "insurgent" doctrine works against ROADBOUND convoys in URBAN areas (and of course against vehicles whose operators keep them on roads elsewhere).

Open desert is different because it does not channelize vehicles into kill zones. RMA firepower works very well there.

low hopes

[0WaitState]

I'm sure Hollywood today can do for Dune what they did for Beowulf, a rather great epic with a much simpler storyline. Feh.

Unless it comes with a cheat sheet .....

[h2okies]

it will suck ...oh wait......

Re:Does anyone know of a literary criticism of Dun

[wikdwarlock]

If I had MOD points, and hadn't already commented in this article, I'd give them to you! Thanks for the link. I've added it to my bookmarks and will probably be reading over lunch(es). It also linked to this Tim O'Reilly book: http://tim.oreilly.com/sci-fi/herbert/ which is available free, online.

Re:NEVAR 4GET JEWS ARE THE ENEMY!

[Trails]

Wait, I'm confused, you're saying the Harkonnens are jewish?

Re:Does anyone know of a literary criticism of Dun

[r1v3t3d]

Yep, read that one, too. Quite a fascinating read. Glad you find that link valuable. I spent hours reading and re-reading it. Extremely interesting, IMHO. =D

It needs six hours.

[jcr]

At a minimum. Trying to squeeze Dune into the standard hollywood 1:30 format just isn't going to work.

Their best shot is having Peter Jackson do it.

-jcr

Sorry about the bold

[icebrain]

Gah... should preview first when I'm using tags... sorry everyone

Peter Berg can do it?

[hammster]

How is Peter Berg the right guy for Dune? The Kingdom and Friday Night Lights aren't bad movies but they aren't amazing either. The Kingdom is a half-assed character study which doesn't quite work with something like Dune where there are such strong archetypes. Sure you get a sense of Paul as an adolescent before he becomes a God but the Harkonnens are never less than pure evil. Friday Night Lights might come closer but only because its football. Burg might be able to pull it off... think I rather see a Bollywood version.

Re:NEVAR 4GET JEWS ARE THE ENEMY!

[sarhjinian]

I think he's sarying the Corrino are.

And the Fremen are Muslims, but we already knew that.

How About A Younger Paul?

[ryanisflyboy]

I am a fan, but one of my beefs with the movies is Paul looks so old when he comes to Arrakis. In the book he is 15 (maybe 16) and is soon thereafter thrown in to exile with the Freman due to the Harkonnen/Corrino betrayal.

He is also trained as a mentat, which the movies don't really make clear. I think it is important to the story to understand that, and compare him to the other Mentants portrayed in the film and books. He is Mentant and Bene Gesserit, thus making his 'godlike' existence have more of a twist - being a master of both domains.

General time-line:
10175 A.G. - Paul born.
10190-91 A.G. - Goes to dune and is betrayed.
10193 A.G. - Paul takes over as Emperor (at 18!).

He is 32 when he wanders in to the desert.

The author seems to have put a lot of thought in to the timing of these events, and it is a shame the movies haven't taken equal pains.

Re:How About A Younger Paul?

[Kongming]

I wholeheartedly agree. One of the main aspects of Paul is that he unnerves everyone around him by being a child that is so intense and insightful. The dinner party scene in Dune is an excellent example of this. I do not believe that the book can be done well without finding a truly extraordinary young actor to play Paul.

Re:NEVAR 4GET JEWS ARE THE ENEMY!

[r1v3t3d]

Corrino is a Latin/Italian name. Harkonnen is German/Dutch. Atreides is Greek. And yes, the Fremen are based on a combination of Muslim and Hebrew cultures and ideologies.

Title of the new movie revealed...

[GlobalColding]

The Cash Must Flow!

Dune

[CaptainChuck]

Dune was a product of its times. Three themes are apparent 1) Near east political strife,
2) fears of computers taking over, and 3) fascination with psychoactive drugs.

Much has changed since the first book was written. The intellectual appeal of Jihad has
faded for most of us. Our relationship with computers is different. Psychoactive drugs
are a creative dead end.

Will a new movie attempt to address these changes?

I can't see how the first book could be squeezed into two hours.

The litany against Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I must not FUD.
FUD is the mind-killer.
FUD is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face the FUD.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the FUD has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

Originality died a long time ago anyway

[Moraelin]

Unless you're talking about a different Hollywood, originality there had already died, IIRC, in the 50's, when they proclaimed the Monomyth as their One True Religion. Ok, One True Way To Write A Story.

It's not just that the general structure is set in stone, they've long been at the point where they prescribe in exactly which minute of the movie each twist will happen. If your movie is X minutes long, by jove, you have to have to reach the first milestone in that script in exactly minute Y.

Honestly, you could probably get away with bigger deviations from the Qur'an (and I chose that as an example, because you're not even supposed to translate it, lest that corrupts the meaning) than from the sacrosanct Monomyth.

So is _any_ movie original nowadays? Hollywood essentially has 1, maximum 2, sacred scripts per genre that the High Priests approved (all in turn based on the Monomyth), and each movie has to use exactly those. Fill in your own character names and locations, and you have a pre-made script for your movie. I don't know why they don't make a script generator with drop-down combo-boxes yet. I mean, that's the result anyway.

So from the other end of this, as a viewer, once you've figured out which of the sacred scripts they used, and such details as who's protagonist, who's antagonist, and who's the love interest, you can accurately know who'll die in what minute and roughly what twists will the plot have. Again, and in which minute they'll happen.

And I'm not just talking about that as a theoretical possibility or hyperbole, but speak very literally and from first-hand experience. By high school I only needed the first 10 minutes of almost any movie, to tell you what's going to happen until the end. And not as in "in retrospect I should have seen that coming", but as in, literally, I'd bet someone that I can tell them exactly what happens in the rest of the movie. I did it with Mom so often, that eventually she too got into that game. It was ages before I read about the Monomyth too, and it just finally told me a name for the phenomenon I was seeing.

And, I'm, you know, just an average Joe. I'm certainly not the biggest genius on the planet or anything. I can't be the only one who noticed that they're using the same scripts over and over again, only with the character and town names changed. Even if not everyone actually reverse-engineered it all the way back to the one script per genre they're using, I'd expect there must be enough people coming out of a cinema with the gut feeling that they've seen the same movie before. Repeatedly.

Is that originality? Sure, each movie was based on a different book, but it had been digested and shit into the same mold. Even if you'd find a writer who still can write a non-monomyth novel nowadays (in itself a challenge, after so many decades of courses, seminars and colleges teaching everyone how to write only clones of that script), a screenplay writer would slave over it and mangle it into fitting the sacrosanct pre-approved shape.

Shouldn't that be...

[Anonymous Coward]

This extends/replaces the WinSxS philosophy This extends/embraces/extinguishes the WinSxS philosophy

Dune is still unfilmable (mostly)

[jollyreaper]

Years ago, I maintained that the two greatest books that could never be filmed were the Lord of the Rings and Dune. The Lynch movie I considered to be an excellent proof of this assertion. I considered both books to be unfilmable in similar ways. The scope of the books would require an extravagant amount of screen time. LOTR could have been split into a trilogy like the book was but even that would hardly be enough time. Dune was even worse, so much of the subtext was inner monologue, so much background information was neatly slipped into the scenes as description rather than action, any viewer not intimately familiar with the material would be hopelessly lost.

Well, Peter Jackson's LOTR was about 95% perfect. Even at that, they were originally planning on shooting at most two movies, only the New Line president got us three with his offhand comment "But I thought there were three books, why not three movies?" There were a few rough patches in the production, a few changes that didn't quite hit the right notes, but overall, 95% perfect. This is a trilogy that never should have happened, the odds for success just too damn slim. The achievement is remarkable.

The miniseries approach to Dune by the Sci-Fi Channel was not as successful as LOTR in my view but it gets extra marks for doing so well with such a limited budget. I'd probably rate it a 70% in terms of content with a a curve for effort bringing it up to 80%. William Hurt made for an awful Duke, the limitation of the budget and actors prevented a proper depiction of Paul growing from a young boy into a man, some of the sets ended up looking too much like an elaborately constructed stage (desert scenes) which, of course, is exactly what they were.

I think anyone talking about remaking LOTR should be kicked in the nuts on principle, what we see here cannot be improved upon. Anyone talking about remaking Dune could possibly deserve a kick in the nuts, depending on his record. It's possible to improve upon the Dune we've seen but a) it could not be done as a movie, it would have to be a miniseries b) it would have to improve upon what we saw with the Sci-Fi series.

I'm anticipating a shitfest like Starship Troopers but I could be surprised. Battlefield Earth? Oy. Actually, I'll have to take that back. Battlefield Earth was actually a very accurate adaptation -- the novel was every bit as awful as the movie.

Re:Dune is still unfilmable (mostly)

[Anonymous Coward]

You may think the book Battlefield Earth is as awful as the movie, but that doesn't mean the movie follows the book. Anyone who is familiar with both can see that the movie made a lot of changes. (I also don't agree that the book is awful. The book tends to be love-it-or-hate-it (I loved it), while the film is universally panned.)

Re:Dune is still unfilmable (mostly)

[andr0meda]

Like many here say, dune is indeed non film-able, but not because of the risks to success. The world may have been ready for the fairytale land of LOTR with it's elves and knights and walking trees, but will it be ready for

- the difficult to grasp twisted minded political evils and schemes..
- the glorification of persona worshiping and subsequently the mockery of it..
- the various "abominations", the "accepted" nature of being married and love someone else in power circles, even discussions on sex between siblings.. I can imagine that budget-wise, these topics will be avoided as much as possible.
- the intriguing but purposely never clarified deep analogies, metaphors and symbolism.. Hollywood is mostly a question/answer game, a mold that this book definitely does not fit into.
- an untold (but avidly quoted) history of events that are so subtle yet so important to get the whole universe in a dynamic living breathing state.
- many "discussions" on balance versus risk, courage versus fear

There are, of course, some easy grabs to get it going:
- the many races and characters, houses, plots,..
- the many sets (planets, underground, wide open,..)
- dramatic events (killings, battles, learn/teach,..)
- ecological topics (water / spice / drugs / fuel / addictions /.. )
- the superstitious & supernatural (Hello REM)

So while I think I can also make a Dune movie, I don't think I can make one that this world would accept, hence it will not be for me. Nor for any producer that remains faithful to the original book.

My suggestion would be to simply read the book out loud in several movies, and a black screen to go with that.

And eh, who the fuck is Peter Berg, at that.

There is something about Berg movies I enjoy

[pw1972]

There is something about the mood of Peter Berg movies that I tend to enjoy. I don't normally go see movies based on actors, directors, producers, but lately I go out of my way to catch his movies. Friday Night lights is definitely #1 on my list of favorite sports movies.

I have not read the books, but...

[xLittleP]

They are on my list of books to read (after the Ender's series). I have heard that the Dune books get better and better, with the fourth book being the best, and after that it's not worth reading the others. The fact that they are making a movie for the first book means that they will most likely use the revenue from it to make a movie for the second book, and so on, until we have four movies for four books. This fits in perfectly with what could be a new practice in Hollywood: not stopping with a mere trilogy and going for a fourth movie (see: Spider-man, LoTR + The Hobbit, Die Hard).

Rubenstein got the feel right on the SciFi Dune

[WillAffleckUW]

IMHO, David Rubenstein had a better Dune feel in his SciFi channel series of Dune and Children of Dune, more like the book, even if it didn't have half as much name talent as the Dune movie did.

This looks promising.

In particular, in a post-9/11 world where we all have a deeper exposure to and understanding of fanatacism and what can go wrong with the clash of cultures, as well as different expectations and social mores about ecology and our place in the world and universe, it's likely that a final full scale movie might bring fresh light to Dune.

don't forget Buddhism

[DeepHurtn!]

I don't see too much Hebrew in Fremen culture, but there is some Buddhist thought there. Explicitly so; the Fremen descended from the Zensunni wanderers.

Re:don't forget Buddhism

[r1v3t3d]

Well, the Hebrew thing isn't so much a commentary on their religion per se, but more about their oppression and ostracism by those in power. The Fremen are often looked down upon as being less-than-human, and are often used for slave labor by the Harkonnens. This point is brought home even further in The Butlerian Jihad/The Machine Crusade/The Battle of Corrin, where the Zensunni (the direct ancestors of the Fremen) are literally slaves to the other, more powerful system governments.

Quickie LOTR Movie Summary from long-time fan...

[Richard Steiner]

(1) Fellowship was good. Time compression and Bombadil removal understandable (what *is* he, anyway, a maia?). The Shire, Bree, Moria, and Rivendell were all brilliantly presented, and the main characters were introduced in an engaging way that was largely true to the book, at least in spirit. Though the council scenes (all versions) were a bit awkward. I like the extended version. The easter egg version wasn't bad, either. Heh.

(2) Two Towers was only an approximation of the book. Elves in Helm's Deep? WTF? Ents not being aware of obvious herbicidal mania occurring at their doorstep (as you say above) and not reacting properly. WTF? That said, I really liked the way the reunion with Gandalf in Fangorn was handled, and the Ents tearing up Saruman's stronghold around Orthanc was fun to watch. Do not (repeat NOT) piss off the tree herders! :-)

(3) Return was okay, but two glorious scenes from the book were completely missed: (a) The confrontation of Saruman by Gandalf and resulting staff breaking is absolutely classic in the books, but is only poorly attempted in the extended version and is almost totally unrecognizable in the theatrical release. (b) The scene with newly crowned Eomir raising up his sword in despair and defiance to the Corsairs coming up the Anduin just before Aragorn's banner unfurled in the breeze is a scene absolutely BEGGING for screen time, and it gets none. That is the turning point of the battle, and the point when hope replaces "we're fcsked" in Eomer's mind. And the dead saving Minas Tirith? Uh... WTF? The Battle of the Pellenor Fields was a victory of combined *HUMAN* force of arms (Gondor, Rohan, and the folks from the south)), not the sort of whoosh-and-you're-dead supernatural scene portrayed on screen. But the rest of it was not too bad. I don't even begrudge the chopping of the Scourge of the Shire scene, though to me it was the entire point of the LOTR story...

No binding international treaties

[Britz]

Actually the problem is that there are not binding international treaties at all. Because there is no enforcement. The powerful entities, EU, US just force their will onto everyone else. And you know who's got the biggest guns? The US is not restricted in any way. This is not really good, but OTOH, who is to decide what is good and what is not good? After all, the US is much more democratic than most of the rest of the world.

But the myth that the US is in some way bound by any treaty is is just that: A myth.

One problem for example is the ABM treaty, that the US signed and ratified, but don't feel bound to, just ignoring it and triggering a new arms race.

Re:No binding international treaties

[imgod2u]

Believe it or not, treaties are binding (albeit much less so in the Bush Administration). The U.S. has been more aggressive in pursuing its interests but if you look at the actions of Washington, it's not always in the best interest of the American people. What's more binding to the U.S. however, is not any piece of paper (just as in Dune, what really stops the factions from achieving their goals isn't superficial agreements), it's the reasons behind those treaties. Specifically, the hold the Saudi's have over U.S. politics because of our dependence on oil. Many of the actions of the U.S. in that region are definitely not in the interest of the American people and yet....they occur.

That's the allegory, that powers, even superpowers, are bound to do things that aren't good for itself or humanity.

Lawrence of Arabia

[Anonymous Coward]

Please note: a movie can be "a great film" without being a great adaptation of a book.

If you want a story where one man changes the geo-political course of human history through warfare in a desert go fucking watch Lawrence of Arabia and stopping screwing with great sci-fi literature.

Dune remake released on youtube

[baby_robots]

A remake of the dune movie recently was released on youtube. Clocking at under 1 minute, I think it did the original movie (not book) justice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rlIuMzuUE0

Re:

[Darinbob]

Harkonnen is a Finnish name.

Watch it again

[Radical Moderate]

I hated it the first time I saw it too, but now if I see it while flipping channels I can't take my eyes off it. I agree the Baron--and Sting--are way over the top, but Lynch did an incredible job of creating an alternate universe.

There already is one

[Anonymous Coward]

A new Dune movie? Was there something wrong with the old Dune movie?

Re:There already is one

[phlegmboy]

Yes. It was a complete pile of Tleilaxu crap.

Reasonable minds might differ...

[jddj]

That first Dune picture was one of the turdliest movies ever made, IMHO.

Even if one can forgive David Lynch for not having access to the greater realism of modern CGI, the scene where they're "riding the sand worm" still looks like a bunch of guys standing around on bucking pieces of styrofoam wondering when this take will end so they can get some coffee.

Lynch settles for making Baron Harkonnen ugly, vs. actually evil - convenient movie shorthand, sure, but not quite a filling meal.

And what was up with the interior monologue? Lynch keeps cutting to Kyle MacLachlan and we hear him think: "...Spice!" and he turns his head. Poor man's exposition, and really lame. OK dude, "Spice". WTF? Get to the point.

Don't even get me started on the goofy-looking cigar-butt navigators, Sting's wrestling shorts or those silly shouting crotch-cannons...

I read the book (a few of them, in fact), and thought Lynch's movie was an embarrassment and a waste of wonderfully developed characters and an epic story.

No film made from a book with such cerebral detail will be able to include everything, or even most things in the story, but the director would've done well not to try so hard to put his particular stamp on the film (including finding someone other that MacLachlan to play the lead).

Re:Reasonable minds might differ...

[vidarh]

I liked the movie, but for people who haven't read the books it takes a second viewing to really get the story. The voiceover was added exactly because it otherwise would've been either far too long or completely incomprehensible to the audience. As it was it was still too dense, and suffered massively from it in terms of critics and box office results.

The mini-series was much better despite shitty CGI mainly because it had the time without having to take all kinds of shortcuts and relying on visuals, voiceovers and the dialogue to convey different aspects of the story all at the same time.

But then Lynch isn't exactly the posterchild for easily digestible movies to start with.

Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind

[Guppy]

I've thought for a long time that the only way to properly present Dune on the big screen, and be 100% true to the details of the book, was to make it into an epic Anime. Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind was strongly influenced by Dune -- for instance, the Ohmu fill the role of the Sandworms. I've heard that Nausicaa herself supposedly was created in part around the question of "How would the Kwisatz Haderach be different, had it been born a woman?"

Asimov's "Nightfall" already a movie

[LanMan04]

I saw it on VHS in the 90s sometime, I remember it sucking badly.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0095738/

For the love of Shaitan

[el cisne]

No "weirding modules" this time, please? K, thx. Also maybe lose the "dancing giant sandworms"....

I'm not afraid of them screwing it up.

[Kingrames]

I'm not afraid of them ruining the story.

After all...

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

Arabic and Islamic themes in Frank Herbert's Dune

[kbahey]

There is a lot more Islamic and Arabic stuff in Dune that one thinks.

See Arabic and Islamic themes in Frank Herbert's Dune.

Movie quality and details

[NoobixCube]

There were a lot of things wrong with the old movie, and they kind of ruined the experience. Fair enough the special effects weren't much, since it was made years ago, and I first saw it in 2004 (I was late to the party, I read Dune in 2002 :P), but some things were just wrong. Spoiler alert, though I doubt anyone who cares wouldn't know already, but in the movie (and I may be wrong, I couldn't bring myself to watch it again), I'm sure Duncan Idaho was shot. Through his shield. And I was sitting there thinking "That's the whole fucking POINT of shields! He copped a sword to the head, dammit!" Dune is a hard book to compress to a movie, because there's a lot of introspection and internal monologue, which border on a definite no in cinema since nothing is actually happening while the character talks to himself. I just hope they don't omit crucial details, and keep most of the seemingly insignificant ones in. Some of the most meaningless insignificant details meant a lot later in the book, and later in the series, and it would just be a shame to see the book ruined by a bad movie a second time.

Fuck Herbert, he had his chance!

[OMNIpotusCOM]

If this movie comes out before Ender's Game, Halo, or The Hobbit then I will be pissed. The first movie was alright, the TV series was ok, but another remake? To me that's kind of like remaking Conan with an aging Arnold... or making a new Rocky film th- wait...

Could be great if...

[Purple Grant]

If you had the script of the mini series and the look feel and costume of the film it would be perfect! Then we could get on to the Heretics/Chapter House era that I love the best. A Bene Gesserit could kick a Jedi's ass!

Why Lynch's Dune is mostly bad

[BorgCopyeditor]

His mysticism led him to get the Weirding Way wrong (it's neither a kind of word-mysticism about certain names, nor an advance in "weapons technology"). His irrationalism led him to get the mentats wrong (they do not need a drug to help them think). His moralism led him to get the Baron Harkonnen wrong (he is not a cackling madman likely to rub his hands together and declare things "excellent"). Stilgar and Dr. Yueh were OK. So were the shields, hunter-seekers, and stillsuits. The prog-rock bombast soundtrack was rot.

Muad'Dib

[agendi]

Matt Damon 4 Muad'Dib :P Isn't it always tipped lately that any newly announced sci-fi movie will lead by Matt Damon?

Yeah right

[Anonymous Coward]

An American company is going to make a movie about a tough Arab people who kick out a small "civilized" occupiying force there to grow fat on the profits of natural resources only found there in a brutal jihad ? They will neuter the story beyond all recognition.

I recognise the story isn't just about the jihad, but still.

Re:They had to wait until the US was losing in Ira

[couchslug]

"Refusal to be prepared for that sort of thing is the fault of US military leadership."

Troll, eh?

Sending soft-skinned light truck HMMWVs into urban combat works badly. They cannot surmount roadblocks and do not effectively protect their crews. (US forces at Mogadish had to be rescued by Pakistani M113 and M48s, because the US armor was left in CONUS!) Uparmoring HMMWVs for Iraq was reactive to tactics that had been used against soft trucks for DECADES.

http://www.specialoperations.com/Operations/Restore_Hope/97-0364.pdf

As for soft-skinned supply convoys (OK in open desert, not OK when channelized in cities) we had protective solutions in the form of the famous Viet Nam war gun trucks. We have them again, but they had to be fabbed locally (again) because of the collective post-Viet Nam brain dump. Good thing the enlisted folks and contractors had their act together.

VN "Iron Butterfly" truck w.box style body:
http://134.198.33.115/sims12.htm

OIF homebrew version:
http://news.webshots.com/photo/1124605382054144800oTBMQt

Livermore high-dollar version:
https://publicaffairs.llnl.gov/news/news_releases/2005/NR-05-07-07.html

VN truck King Cobra (scroll down)
http://134.198.33.115/agee1.htm

Looks familiar!
http://www.cmvmag.co.uk/cgi-bin/news.cgi?article=040103

MRAP armored truck:
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/xml/news/2007/05/marine_mrap_070523/070253mrap_story.JPG

BTW, Israel has figured out how to carry troops into combat under far more armor than the US uses. The Israelis use recycled Russian tank hulls as the basis for the Achzarit. Might be time for us to do the same thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1ly0fk1Pro

Re:Does anyone know of a literary criticism of Dun

[XchristX]

Interesting paper. Although I always thought that "Crysknife" was taken from the Sikh "Kirpan" rather than the Malaysian dagger as the paper claims. Plus, the Fremen codes of conduct are definitely closer to the Sikh Khalsa Panth than any martial culture in the mideast that I'm aware of (maybe the Pukhtun in Afghanistan, but they're not Arabs either). Also, "Bene Gesserit" seems closer to Hebrew or Akkadian than Arabic per se ("Bene"/"Venei" the Hebraic phonetic of the Semitic root word "Children"; the Arabic is "Banu" I think). Then again, Semitic languages are so closely interconnected that it's hard for the non-linguist/non-native speaker to tell them apart...

Obligatory

[Lost Engineer]

Will it feature Sting? Will Baron Harkonnen be able to fly?

Abbreviations are inevitable

[PapayaSF]

Well, that was my problem with David Lynch's movie, basically. It's like an abbreviated summary of the book

True, and it could have been done better, but to some extent it's just inevitable. The rule of thumb for screenplays is that one page (about 250 words) equals one minute of screen time, whether it's dialog, action, description, or a combination. The paperback of Dune is about 540 pages, with about 400 words per page. So if made, literally and entirely, into a movie, it would be over 14 hours long. The extra time helped make the mini-series better (in some ways!), as others have noted.

Dune and Religion

[Neuticle]

Semitic-looking Fremen speaking perfect Arabic with English subtitles. Remember, the Sayyadinas reconstructed the "Language of the Book" by imbibing the Water of Life and consulting with Ancestral Memory.

Now you're spot-on about them being semitic, but I would argue against Arabic. Yes, there are a lot of Arabic words borrowed and adapted, but the actual language examples in the book are NOT Arabic based, but rather a dialect of Roma (according to Wikipedia, YMMV). Secondly, even though the Fremen religion is called Zensunni, it is not distinctly Muslim in any way. Based on what we do read of the Fremen religion I would argue that they are more Mizrahi JEW (with Zen sprinkles) than Muslim. Let me make my case:

Herbert played fast and loose with his religion, mixing things around a lot. This ISN'T sloppiness though, since he fully intended to have his religions be amalgams: The appendix in Dune says the Orange Catholic Bible "contains elements of most ancient religions, including ... Zensunni Catholicism" (blatantly ripped from the WP page, don't have my copy of the book handy). That's pretty mixed together if you ask me.

Now, what we actually know about the Fremen religious tradition is mostly centered around the Messianic nature of Paul, which fits in very closely with the Orthodox Jewish notion of the Messiah (anointed leader who takes power and rules etc). The Muslim notion of the Mahdi is vaguely like a messiah, however it is not of the highest cannon (it's only in the Hadith, not in the Qu'ran) and what the Mahdi will do is not always explicitly said. Consequently, it's not a formal doctrine of all Islam and there are vastly different interpretations between sects: The Sufis and some Shias take it pretty seriously, but even those beliefs don't correlate with Paul Atreides very well; the Sunni (>80% of Muslims) are ambivalent about it. This all comes back around to the fact that the Fremen are "Zensunni", not Zensufi or Zenshia, which are given as distinct religious groups.

Another important fact we know about the Fremen is that they spent generations in slavery, and they wandered the galaxy before settling on Arrakis... That's a clue-by-4 of Jewish-ness if there ever was one. No Muslim tradition includes that.

Yes, I know that the Fremen are not the only Zensunni and that Judaism is specifically referenced in the books as a distinct religion, but when you look closely, Herbert made the Fremen Jewish in all but name. It might be too late for this post to get noticed, but I had a fun time blowing my Nerd-load while writing it.

David Lynch as a visual designer?

[Anonymous Coward]

If they hire david lynch to do the visual design again I will watch it.

Why not do the Dune "Prequels"

[initialE]

I didn't care a bit for the prequels, so I wouldn't care if they made a mess of it. Hell, it might actually improve the storyline.

Jodorowski's Dune?

[Mechanized Elf]

This remake ought to reach back further than Lynch's Dune and take inspiration from the work done by H.R. Geiger and Moebius for Jodorowsky's planned nine-hour screen adaptation of the novel. Jodorowski's a kook, but he understood something essential about Dune: that it ought to be profoundly unfamiliar--alien.

Hell No!

[phlegmboy]

We all know that, with very few exceptions, Hollywank is completely useless at making Science Fiction movies. I am truly scared to think how some talentless dickwads in suits will stick their clueless noses into the creative process, being their usual anally retentive, beancounting selves.

Lets face it. Hollywank suits know about as much about making good Science Fiction movies as a flatworm knows about quantum mechanics.