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!"
Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.
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.
Why, yes I have been touched by His noodly appendage. And I plan to sue.
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.
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.
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!
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.
Test your net with Netalyzr
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).
Why, yes I have been touched by His noodly appendage. And I plan to sue.
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.
Anybody want my mod points?
... 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.
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.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
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*
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.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
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?
I drank what? -- Socrates