quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
That being said, I can't relate to the folks who are commenting on the second movie being a drawn-out affair. Consuming it in the three chunks we did, I enjoyed every bit.

I can't either since all the slow explanation was in Part 1. Part 2 was as straight forward as you can get with Dune.

Re-watched #1 last night. I'm not sure if the visuals are any better using UHD disk (vs streaming), but the sound sure seemed to come across more robustly.

I'm going to try to watch #2 tonight.

The UHD player seems to be working well. I'm SDR and so no HDR/DV. But still I think it's worth it over streaming. I'll look for other UHD disks in used retail stores.

Sound is the thing that gets compressed the most during streaming. Picture wise, you're getting about 95% if you have a fast connection, but audio is where everyone tries to save bandwidth.

Watched #2. It was a bit long, without knowing what to expect. The pace came and went but perhaps reasonably so. Some gratuitous scenes that didn't really add value that could have made it shorter. Some surprises for the uninitiated but they were hinted at in #1. And some satisfying moments of retribution.

One thing I didn't like was the speaking in the local language - it sounded fake.

I really need to read the book someday. Waiting for #3 now; hope it's the last one.

I liked it and thought the action, visuals, and sound were all very good. I was not expecting there to need to be a 3rd movie so that is a bit disappointing. The character development is solid, though. Having not read the books, I like the mystery of Chani's skepticism of Paul and his potential thirst for power, despite his declarations that doesn't believe and doesn't want it.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:

quote:

Originally posted by bald1:
So overall I'd say I prefer the Lynch version to this.

The Lynch version was, is, and always shall be trash except for the production design unless you want to tell me those stupid "voice weapons" were in the book when they categorically never were. That's a far more unforgivable change than anything Denis Villeneuve did in either of his movies.

Perhaps this will clear the air. These are the only Dune flicks I have in my library for good reason.
As for the Lynch version, my comment was vis-a-vis Villenuve. I simply enjoyed the former more.

The SciFi miniseries is my favorite as well. Had the right amount of pacing while still following the books rather well.

And Chani isn't a pissy whiny little teenager throwing a hissy fit.

I am two chapters into the book. It's going to be a long time before I finish it; I am a slow mover, when it comes to books.

Am I to understand that there was a war between people and androids?

Also, the way that the Reverend Mother describes the Gom Jabbar makes it seem as though a human could make the choice to remove their hand from the pain box, and survive the needle.

1) The Butlerian Jihad was the war that setup the universe of Dune as known in the first book. It was humans versus "thinking machines." It's why there's no computers in Dune and why there were Mentats like Thufir Hawat that acted as walking databases for whatever house could afford them.

2) I don't entirely remember that part, but what's likely is a Bene Gesserit or a Reverend Mother could process the poison and be fine. The Reverend Mother knew Paul had some training from Jessica, but I'd put it down to more of a taunt. Similar to purifying the water of life later in the book.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
Also, the way that the Reverend Mother describes the Gom Jabbar makes it seem as though a human could make the choice to remove their hand from the pain box, and survive the needle.

I don't remember that, but it's been a while since I read the first book. Can you cite the section where she says that.

My memory is that to remove one's hand from the box would be immediate death via the Gom Jabbar.

The only choice is that of an Animal instinctively pulling back from the pain or a Human choosing to leave their hand inside to tolerate the pain

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
Also, the way that the Reverend Mother describes the Gom Jabbar makes it seem as though a human could make the choice to remove their hand from the pain box, and survive the needle.

You got me curious enough to go look it up.

The passage with the Gom Jabbar test in on page 10 of the Trade paperback...not the Mass Market paperback...and it specifically said that there is no surviving it. It is like the "fall of the headsman's blade" with the only choice to be whether to remove your hand like an Animal or leave it in to prove that you are a Human

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:

Also, the way that the Reverend Mother describes the Gom Jabbar makes it seem as though a human could make the choice to remove their hand from the pain box, and survive the needle.

The point of the test is that a human will choose to withstand the pain, and have the willpower to succeed, so as to be able to confront the source of the pain. An animal will think of nothing but escaping the pain, no matter what the cost.

A Reverend Mother might be able to negate the poison in the gom jabbar, but I don't think Moiham says that. And that isn't the point of the test. At that time, Paul could not have done that, and had he removed his hand, he would have been killed.

I think I just misinterpreted it. She does say...
"Here's a new one for you: the gom jabbar. It kills only animals."
I suppose she didn't mean that literally. What she meant was it only kills animals because humans will behave as they ought to, during the test, and therefore not get jabbed. The poison is, however, lethal to everything.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
I suppose she didn't mean that literally. What she meant was it only kills animals because humans will behave as they ought to, during the test, and therefore not get jabbed. The poison is, however, lethal to everything.

I would say she did mean it literally.

She's saying that if you act like an animal, your actions will result in your death.

I think you're reading it with the assumption that all humans are Humans, what the Bene Gesserit are saying is that not all humans have the capacity to act like Humans

quote:

assumption that all humans are Humans

That much I did understand. I actually took to referring to the larger population as men, or people, when discussing the book with my wife.

I also started the 1984 movie. They just watched the sandworm swallow the spice harvester. I like it so far. I guess the "voice weapons" that folks have referred to is what Paul used to fight the training machine on Caladan?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KSGM,

Finished the 1984 movie. Wow. Starts OK, with good atmosphere and fun effects and costumes. Then, about halfway though, turns into and absolute shitshow trainwreck on a crash course with the end credits.

Again, I haven't finished the book, so my frame of reference is still relatively narrow. But, knowing what I know from the newer movies, and the research I have done online, I feel as though someone with zero knowledge of the source material would have found Lynch's movie near-impossible to understand.

If those voice weapons are not in the book, then I agree that they're a huge, stupid aspect of that film.

I don't know how Alia is portrayed in the book, but her portrayal in this movie seemed terrible. That child actress was on the struggle bus.

I did enjoy most of the first half, and I enjoyed the scene in which Paul drank the water of life.

I know some folks have said they thought Dune: Part Two felt rushed. That is nothing, compared to the Lynch movie.

Alia is a hard character to portray (hence her almost complete absence in the latest adaptation). She a toddler with all the mental facilities of an adult fully trained bene geserit with access to generations of ancestral memories. She is creepy as hell and scares the crap out the Fremen.

I only had two real gripes with the new movie. I hated the time compression. It left out the effort Paul spent in building his power in Arrakis and one of his major motivations for going no holds barred and embracing the jihad. Second, I absolutely hated the changes to Chani. They clearly wanted to inject some extra independence, but book Chani isn’t a blind follower. She’s a legit knife wielding murder machine in her own right and follows Paul by choice, understanding the political necessities.

I kind of missed the Thufir Hawat subplot and the suspicions of Gurney, but accept that some things had to be cut for time.

Maybe one day it will get the HBO GoT treatment. There’s easily enough in that first book for a season of TV.

quote:

Originally posted by copaup:
I kind of missed the Thufir Hawat subplot and the suspicions of Gurney, but accept that some things had to be cut for time.

Maybe one day it will get the HBO GoT treatment. There’s easily enough in that first book for a season of TV.

They filmed scenes with Thufir in them, but got cut from the movie. If you wait through all the end credits, there's a "Special Thanks" message at the end to that actor and one or two others that were cut from the film.

quote:

Finished the 1984 movie. Wow. Starts OK, with good atmosphere and fun effects and costumes. Then, about halfway though, turns into and absolute shitshow trainwreck on a crash course with the end credits.

Then by all means don't go looking for the 4 or so hour "Extended Cut" of Dune that one of the US TV channels pasted a lot of cut content and pre-production artwork to further explain the movie and fill up enough time for a "Sunday Night Feature Presentation" or some such. It was so awful that David Lynch successfully lodged a complaint with the Director and Writer's Guild to have his name taken off the movie. It's another reason David Lynch doesn't want to talk about Dune.

quote:

Originally posted by copaup:
Alia is a hard character to portray (hence her almost complete absence in the latest adaptation). She a toddler with all the mental facilities of an adult fully trained bene geserit with access to generations of ancestral memories. She is creepy as hell and scares the crap out the Fremen.

Movie audiences probably can't accept a three year old girl knifing her great-uncle. The book Alia is the person who killed the Baron.

Plus where are you going to find a three year old actress who can play an adult?

The child Alia is almost impossible to portray in a movie.

She doesn’t just kill the Barron. She kills all the critically wounded. St Alia of the Knife isn’t just a cool nickname. That’s not even touching on the things that happen later as she grows up.