Dune (Denis Villeneuve, 2021-4)

[Shanzam]

I've also watched a documentary on Jodorowsky's Dune, and Lynch's version from '84. They were a nice complement for Villeneuve. There also seem to be 2 Dune mini-series from early 2000s, as well as announced Dune The Sisterhood series, HBO I think. (And I finished an episode of a Foundation, think I am done with sci-fi for a while.) Lynch's adaptation is not as awful as I read/heard people say, I wish it was approached more seriously though.

[Drucker]

I have mixed feelings after watching this film. I watched the Lynch version earlier this week so as to familiarize myself with the story. I found it mostly enjoyable, a bit slow in parts, and a bit charming. I went in expecting to like this much more, and thought it would be more cohesive. After 23 soul-crushing minutes of piercingly loud trailers for remakes of The Matrix, Scream, and painful looking Marvel movies, the thing finally began.

In many ways, this one succeeded where Lynch's failed. But whereas the Lynch version felt like a bit of a mess, punctuated by moments of brilliance and beauty, this one is kind of just a general slog. I enjoy Villeneuve, and really loved Arrival. But this movie mostly felt like 2 and a half hours of hitting you over the head about how important and dark and brooding it was. If there is ever a moment where you doubt the importance of what is happening on screen, don't worry, the painfully on the nose score will remind you.

I just re-read some of the earlier comments in this thread, so it sounds like my feelings are shared by others. But I did want to compliment Chalamet's performance. I found his performance really strong, and a more likely depiction of a young man overwhelmed by what is going to come before him than Machlachlan's. He's also responsible for probably my favorite moment in the film, when he lashed out and his voiced erupted at his mother. Admittedly, I can't quite remember what part of the film this occurs in (certainly after they've been stranded in the desert), but it really grabbed my attention in a way most of the film did not.

I was with a friend who loved the book, and he loved the film, so good for him. To me this was drab, and while it certainly had more merits than the trailers of the Marvel movies that preceded it, it too was weighed down by a formulaic seriousness that overall didn't do it for me.

[flyonthewall2983]

I saw it theatrically Wednesday. Thankfully no trailers in front.

[Persona]

I think Villeneuve certainly seems to know a lot about crafting a film in a "wall of sensation" sense but some of the more delicate nuances of subtext, flow, rhythm, build, etc. seem to escape him.

The score for this film is completely overbearing and as well-designed as the film is on many levels, particularly in areas of production design and sound design, it never feels especially inspired, just very technically adroit. (And even on some of those levels I'm not sure, as the cinematography drifts a bit too much towards murky at night and the editing leaves a bit to be desired in certain sequences).

I was particularly let down by the second act in the sense that this should have been transfixing cinema given what it is depicting, but the script is so flat and the characters so uninvolving that none of the stakes carry the emotional weight needed and Villeneuve can't seem to figure out how to configure his scenes in such a way as to convey the tragedy he wants us to feel.

I love plenty of films that are about their aesthetics, but this is an aesthetic film where the aesthetic never connects to anything beyond itself and can't fully seem to find its own life. It's certainly a far cry from the existentialist experience of something like the original Blade Runner or the vivid grandeur of Lean's epics.

[OldBobbyPeru]

I liked this film quite a bit. I haven't read the novel, but now I'd like to. What I despised was Hans Zimmer's 'score' that never shuts up. I must agree with the person who earlier in the thread simply stated, "Hans Zimmer must be stopped."

I saw a clip of Zimmer looking a bit like the Cheshire Cat congratulating himself and his team of low-paid interns for what he actually thinks is something that no one has done before. He must have forgotten Peter Gabriel's score for The Last Temptation of Christ, or he just wants to pretend that no film composer has ever used thundering drum samples drowned in reverb alongside vaguely middle-eastern sounding melodic fragments. One of his fragments is this same melody:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wupKsRbcjMI

If I wanted to make a snarky point, I could record an ominous synthesizer drone and play snippets of "We're in the Money" over it." Close to the same notes. Another fragment (they are all fragments, Zimmer has trouble developing a full blown melody) is completely stolen from the opening of Stravinsky's Firebird. It's the scene where Paul and his mother start marching across the desert, about 2 hours ten minutes in. The theme from the Firebird is double basses and cellos playing pianissimo in unison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHxstiIybz4

The frustrating thing is that not only is Zimmer the most popular and likely highest paid composer today, we don't even know which of them came up with these melodic fragments. Was it him, or one of the interns? This is basically how Kanye works. but I don't expect great music from him. He's an entertainer in the hip-hop world. Zimmer is the heir apparent to Max Steiner, Bernard Hermann, John Williams, and a host of others, but I can't think of a single hummable tune he has written. Well, scratch that, there's always "My Mama Done Told Me."

[RIP Film]

I think Villeneuve certainly seems to know a lot about crafting a film in a "wall of sensation" sense but some of the more delicate nuances of subtext, flow, rhythm, build, etc. seem to escape him.

The score for this film is completely overbearing and as well-designed as the film is on many levels, particularly in areas of production design and sound design, it never feels especially inspired, just very technically adroit. (And even on some of those levels I'm not sure, as the cinematography drifts a bit too much towards murky at night and the editing leaves a bit to be desired in certain sequences).

I was particularly let down by the second act in the sense that this should have been transfixing cinema given what it is depicting, but the script is so flat and the characters so uninvolving that none of the stakes carry the emotional weight needed and Villeneuve can't seem to figure out how to configure his scenes in such a way as to convey the tragedy he wants us to feel.

I love plenty of films that are about their aesthetics, but this is an aesthetic film where the aesthetic never connects to anything beyond itself and can't fully seem to find its own life. It's certainly a far cry from the existentialist experience of something like the original Blade Runner or the vivid grandeur of Lean's epics.

Had similar thoughts. It’s frustrating that Villeneuve lands such projects but can’t seem to lift them off the page, as it were. In a way he’s like Zack Snyder with restraint and maturity, an extremely visual story teller but leaning too much into the image for its own sake— an image isolated from a emotional context that grounds it. Much of Dune looks like a perfume commercial, and that wouldn’t be so bad if everything else didn’t follow suite. Even the fight scenes are so immaculately smooth as to come off like choreographed dances. There’s this effort to distance the viewer with exotic beauty and wonders, but the consequence is you never feel quite involved.

I’ve come to terms with Villeneuve’s strengths and weaknesses, the latter being his inability to pull things out of a script and focus on them in a relatable way, like a landscape painter relying on indistinguishable forms. Conversely his greatest strength is in allowing quietude, for scenes to resonate as they will without intention. But as mentioned that is in danger of being upended by Hans Zimmer, who is intent on filling in all the gaps left behind.

I get the feeling Villeneuve is on track to being not so different from modern day Ridley Scott: an inoffensive, big budget, visual filmmaker without anything particularly vital to say; an entertainer. And Dune is fine as entertainment… I never read the book and found the story engaging enough, with some imaginative art direction and world building. I couldn’t shake that it felt more suited for a TV format, though.

[therewillbeblus]

I’ve come to terms with Villeneuve’s strengths and weaknesses, the latter being his inability to pull things out of a script and focus on them in a relatable way, like a landscape painter relying on indistinguishable forms. Conversely his greatest strength is in allowing quietude, for scenes to resonate as they will without intention.

Well said. Aside from Blade Runner 2049 (which is an unsung masterpiece), there's at least something glaring in every script he directs that threatens to ruin the movie. His strength you point out saves the rest of most of them, and in the case of Prisoners he thankfully returns to that strength in a powerful final shot that almost makes up for the way the reveal plays out. Unfortunately in a film such as Sicario, despite also containing a final moment that attempts to bring us back to that grey space of uncomfortable meditation, the third act shift is too obliviously executed as fitting within the internal logic of his narrative that makes me question his relationship to the material at all. It's a shame, especially when his bold sensory-flooding self-gravitas works at meeting the material where it's at beforehand- from what is undeniably a stupid and awful script. Having said that, every film Villeneuve has had a hand in writing I've flat-out hated thus far, so maybe they're still better off without his hand in that cookie jar.

[flyonthewall2983]

It feels like it kind of falls on me to fanboy (seriously I don’t think a movie has ever made me feel this nerdy but also this philosophical at the same time) over this, as someone who never read the novel or watched anything other than the Jodorowsky doc which has more entertainment value as Hollywood Babylon, rumor and innuendo then understanding the value of the story. From it I gleaned that this was a story about quite literally everything, of such an epic scale that it would be impossible to do it justice.

To be perfectly honest I probably haven’t seen as many movies as a lot of you, so my scope of the history of the art form is admittedly limited compared to a good deal of you who have put in the hours to understand cinema on a deeper level. I reserve that kind of commitment more to music, the more stronger love in my life, but this year I’ve kind of recommitted to film again with the ability to see things in amazing 4K quality.

In a sense, I’m coming to this cold in more ways then one. I don’t keep up with the higher-end blockbusters. I’ve really only ever bothered watching the Nolan Batman movies, and the first two Iron Man movies and became engaged with them, but interest fell off. My attention drifted to television shows, which were proving more interesting to me than a good percentage of everything coming out at least on the major levels.

And really it’s understandable despite my huge love for this movie, that many of you feel a bit left wanting more or not seeing the things I did. Anymore then I could see it the way some of you do, not just because of how many movies you watched but of life experience. For me this has come out at a point in my life where I can clearly see more of me and those I know and the lives we have led, in the stories I read the music I listen to and the very movies I am happy to set aside my attention for two and a half hours.

I brought my mother to watch it with me theatrically, after first watch on HBOmax. There’s really just enough of the things I felt in childhood enough to get her to watch this. This is not a woman who likes science fiction/fantasy at all, but I was so moved by it she was probably the first call I made after fully taking in what I saw. So without any pussyfooting on this, that’s the kind of level of love and awe I have for this in terms of my perception of this as not just a great movie but as an artistic statement in this weird, wretched time of life that brought so much misery with little reminders every so often as we go, at how good life is.

[senseabove]

Just to throw another non-negative reaction into the ring, I, surprisingly, actually liked this. I'd read the book in high school, and I remember enjoying it but that's about it, and apparently not enough to read any more in the series. I was pretty well indifferent to this going in, especially given my ambivalent to unenthusiastically positive reactions to other Villeneuve. He's always a little over-ponderous and too cocksure of his profundity, though proficient and engaged enough to be engaging. Which outweighs the other, in my experience, swings back and forth. But in the span of a week, I ended up reading the book for a book club and watching the Lynch version, which I had planned to do with friends who flaked at the last minute, and when that absolute clusterfuck was over, I decided what the hell, I'll go ahead and watch the new one too, since I can stream it. Luckily, Herbert is also a little over-ponderous and too cocksure of his profundity, so he's a good match for a Villeneuve—and I mean that, believe it or not, as a compliment.

Solely as an adaptation, it's quite good. The elisions are efficient without sacrificing too much—there's a lot more world-buliding palace intrigue that's almost entirely excised from the first quarter—and the changes mostly understandable (completely unlike Lynch's heart-keys, Guild creatures, etc., however interestingly Lynchian they may be). It does alter or minimize some aspects in ways that are a bit disappointing or puzzling, like the "just let go" moment in the storm, which is neither how that event plays in the book nor really in tune with the Paul's character or abilities. The most significant omission, in my view, is a thread of doubt and ambivalence bordering on antagonism between Paul and Jessica. The book keeps their relationship pretty well balanced on a knife edge up to the point where Part One ends: is she doubtful of his destiny or goading him to it? is she questioning her order's mission or questioning whether she's fulfilling it? or is she just afraid of him and succumbing to fear? does it matter, if it's desinty? As an example, there's a moment immediately after

SpoilerShow

Paul kills Jamis, where she hurls "How does it feel to be a killer?" at him,

and it's a moment where Herbert's ability to build a rattling house of cards out of the friction between characters, their beliefs, and their doubts really shines. Villeneuve's script flattens much of that, partly out of necessity, since a lot of that friction is conveyed via the internal monologues Lynch awkwardly kept, but its rather freehanded adaptation of other elements—there's nothing remotely like the talk between Leto and Paul in the graveyard, as far as I recall, though certainly learning to accept and handle power is the focus of much of their relationship in the excised palace intrigue—make me wish they'd found a way to work that interpersonal complexity into this. On the other hand, it's such a stunning moment in the book, it's commendable that they at least had the good sense to not try shoe-horning it in for fidelity's sake when it wouldn't otherwise mesh with what they'd written.

But otherwise, Part One was a pleasant spectacle. I don't feel the urge to come roaring to its defense, but having had no hopes, no expectations, other than ambivalence to Villeneuve, and no real intention to see it at all until coincidence led me to throw it on, it was enjoyable, sufficiently interesting, and I'll be happy to go see Part Two with friends when it comes out.

I will say I've been surprised just how much I've heard people talking about this movie, though. I'm sure part of that reaction is all the pre-release hand-wringing about "will it be successful enough for Part Two to even get made?!" But it seems to be a pretty genuine phenomenon even among those who aren't sci-fi/blockbuster film bro/on-trend movie-going types.

[barbarella satyricon]

So without any pussyfooting on this, that’s the kind of level of love and awe I have for this in terms of my perception of this as not just a great movie but as an artistic statement in this weird, wretched time of life that brought so much misery with little reminders every so often as we go, at how good life is.

That whole post was quite an appreciation – thank you for sharing it. I gave the Lynch version a casual watch ages ago, still know next to nothing about the book, and had no interest in seeing this one, but I just might head out now to catch it before its run here is done. Also, your phrasing in the quote above put me in mind of this old Fripp & Eno album. I’m listening to that now and it’s sounding mighty Dune-ish, for what little I know.

[flyonthewall2983]

Oddly enough I mention Eno and Fripp via King Crimson here, my fourth review of the movie for Letterboxd. I blanched initially at mentioning them here but honestly the use of the word didn’t come from that source so it’s a nice coincidence if you believe in such things.

[R0lf]

Much of Dune looks like a perfume commercial, and that wouldn’t be so bad if everything else didn’t follow suite. Even the fight scenes are so immaculately smooth as to come off like choreographed dances. There’s this effort to distance the viewer with exotic beauty and wonders, but the consequence is you never feel quite involved.

I think what undermines it is that Villeneuve doesn’t commit enough either way. He has those great sets and costumes which we see in establishing shots but then everything else is done in extreme close up so we never really get a very good look at anything. Which is frustrating! And sure, if the movie is then investing in the script and characterisation that would be a fine trade off but it never really follows through on that either. It needed to commit *more* either way and because it doesn’t the whole movie just ends up being a bit ho-hum.

[Matt]

After ignoring it in theaters and on HBO Max in its first run, I finally gave in and watched this upon its return to HBO Max. Unexpectedly, I loved it. The cast is uniformly excellent, the tone is serious and somber (which is frankly a huge relief in a blockbuster entertainment after so much forced jokiness in Marvel and Star Wars films and series), the visual design and cinematography are muted but texturally lush (I loved all the nods toward insect bodies and exoskeletons and the very low and long overlapping horizontal visual planes like scales and armor plating), and, as DarkImbecile noted, the dense lore and mythology of the film’s universe is mostly developed visually and exposition accomplished very economically:

Fundamentally, I think the challenge of adapting something dense and potentially messy as this story appears to be is actually well-suited to one of Villeneuve's strengths: he's been very good throughout his career at carefully doling out information to the audience and removing pieces from a Jenga tower of exposition to leave it as minimally structured as possible while still getting across what one needs to follow the plot and the mechanisms of the world being presented (Arrival being the obvious example, but several other features of his also do this well).

I wouldn’t say Chalamet gives a great performance, but he is exactly right for this callow son of privilege who identifies with an exploited and oppressed people because he thinks them more noble and righteous. There’s a shallow but omnipresent critique of colonialism, White saviorism, extractive capitalism, etc., but the film is mostly just a solid “rise of a hero” fable and I was completely entertained by it. I didn’t mind the Zimmer score, but I also didn’t pay a lot of attention to it. I suppose it really makes one wonder what Jóhann Jóhannsson might have accomplished here given the same resources as Zimmer.

[swo17]

I agree that the serious but not pretentious tone was very welcome, and I liked the score during its less Zimmery moments.

Out of curiosity, does HBO Max play it with HDR? On the 4K disc the level of contrast is absolutely insane, like it's actually painful sometimes when it switches from night to sweltering day

[Matt]

HBO Max says it’s available in 4K UHD with Dolby Vision, but I’m not 4K-capable.

[swo17]

Well if you do ever go 4K, this would be a fun disc to break in your system with

[RIP Film]

Most streaming devices can turn HDR off now.I know there’s an option on roku and the newer fire tv sticks, I think apple tv has it too.

[domino harvey]

I'm somewhere in the middle on this one. While not a great movie and just barely a good one, I think the vitriolic reactions here and elsewhere are absurd. I get it, you saw the documentary on Jodorowsky's Dune. This film feels very familiar, but I'm shocked so few people are mentioning Star Wars, as in addition to many overlapping motifs, most of this movie struck me as the same as the first twenty minutes of Rogue One, feeling like I'm being read an appendix to an Encyclopedia. The "chosen one" hero's journey is so played out that I can't get too mad at another bite at the apple, but it certainly doesn't thrill me (but I was reminded of how well Villeneuve cheekily circumvented this kind of thing in Blade Runner 2049). I am vaguely aware of where this storyline goes in future books, though, and that kind of insanity sounds far more interesting-- maybe we can fast forward to the half-worm intergalactic rulers for Dune 3? I liked Zimmer's score too, but I've never understood the sheer hatred so many of you have for him, and let me assure you not one of you has ever come close to explaining it beyond something I'd expect to read on Reddit. Beyond that, I don't know, this was just entertaining enough to keep me watching without too much of a push, and I am certain I will forget most of its lore by the time the sequel arrives. But anyone trying to act like this is some great travesty of cinema is just trying too hard.

[Never Cursed]

Surely the greatest takeaway from all the public information about Jodorowsky's unrealized project is that it would have been terrible as a film, right? Villeneuve's film is a lot less bombastic than that "vision," score notwithstanding, but I think it's better in how tactile in its own distanced way (in that Villeneuve is very good at translating the "lore" and obscure encyclopedia citations into straightforward enhancement of the film's weird tone - this isn't at all like the breathless lore references of a Marvel or Star Wars movie, which transparently exist for pure audience projection onto them and grate against whatever the film as a self-contained thing is doing). I don't know, I feel like such glossed-over oddities as the warrior throat-singing or the use of swords are so much more immediately enjoyable than any mode of total banal overexplanation to the audience, whether in the form of Jodorowsky or Jon Watts.

That said, I think the hero's journey stuff is a bit more interesting than a lot are giving credit for, even if one discusses the presentation of this outside of Duniverse terms

Spoiler for the events of this first filmShow

in that the set-up of Paul as the messiah of the people of Dune is explicitly described as part of a colonialist strategy (with the band of magicians in the employ of the colonizing power spreading the prophecies as part of their attempts to dominate those people). Paul isn't just a holy figure or symbol, he's being made into a theocratic leader with the ability to co-opt a hostile populace for the benefit of an authoritarian core, and the realization that this position is being imperceptibly forced on him is what sets off his various breakdowns regarding the future jihad in his name.

[flyonthewall2983]

I liked Zimmer's score too, but I've never understood the sheer hatred so many of you have for him, and let me assure you not one of you has ever come close to explaining it beyond something I'd expect to read on Reddit.

The best way I can interpret it (and I think he’s great, so maybe not as direct an answer as you might get from those who hate his stuff too) is that a lot of film buffs don’t like the electronics, and the pivot away from the sort of sweeping John Williams or Jerry Goldsmith stuff his approach is, usually calling upon a more diverse and eclectic musical vocabulary. I see some of this for Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross more recently, especially since they started out sounding more like Nine Inch Nails then the typical lush symphonic approach, which they did finally for David Fincher’s Mank.

[swo17]

I don't necessarily have a problem with Zimmer, other than I guess to the extent that he makes other films sound like Inception, which reminds me that I'm watching a movie and might take me out of the story for a moment. But in this case it took me a bit to even peg him as the composer

[Never Cursed]

I thought the anti-Zimmer backlash came from how it's an open secret that he doesn't write most of the music credited to him (props to I think DarkImbecile for sharing this somewhere else on the forum)

[Matt]

I definitely remember some complaints (here or on Reddit or Twitter) and someone saying it sounded like people just loudly banging on metal for three hours with the occasional patented Zimmer BWAAAAAAAP thrown in. It was probably the thing that prejudiced me most against watching the movie when it was originally available on HBO Max.

In my post above, I was going to mention Lisa Gerrard (of Dead Can Dance) featuring prominently in the vocalizations in the score, but I deleted it when I couldn’t find her in the credits. I’m happy to discover my ears weren’t wrong after all.

[swo17]

I thought the anti-Zimmer backlash came from how it's an open secret that he doesn't write most of the music credited to him (props to I think DarkImbecile for sharing this somewhere else on the forum)

Nor does just about anyone else, save John Williams

[Never Cursed]

Oh sure, I more mean that Zimmer seems to be regarded as sort of the poster child of the deceptive collective enterprise thing that scoring has become (I've heard people talk about Zimmer's setup in real life and on Twitter and on AW, whereas I've never seen anyone point similar fingers at other film composers guilty of the same things outside of plagiarism allegations - it isn't like there's the same vitriol towards Desplat or Thomas Newman or whoever). Maybe that's just because of the single very famous case of the guy who wrote the cue from Inception talking about his experience not getting credited for what must be one of the most influential pieces of film scoring in a long time