Although I quite enjoy Dune, I think it is failure as a film. I enjoy the atmosphere and some scenes, also some of the sets/effects (including the sound effects) but it doesn't seem to be satisfying work as a whole. Here is the case against:

1) Dialogue. I understand that with SF/Fantasy a bit if explanation has to be done but it means the dialogue is really clunky/archaic. Dialogue is one of DL's strengths usually. Makes me glad he hasn't done any more SF.

2) Voice overs. Use of voice overs (as with flashbacks) is a sign the director is having problems or doesn't know what he's doing.

3) Plot. I guess the plot is a bit of a mess with ´loose ends etc.

That's true but Dune has its good points. It's just a story of character development of Paul Atreides, who starts of young and innocent and gradually becomes more powerful to the point where he can actually (spoiler alert) make it rain in the desert. He is a magician like so many of Lynch's characters. The story is of him gradually acquiring the skill to perform real magic. Each stage of his development is accompanied by a change of name: Paul Atreides, Esau, Mau'Dib, The Quizat Saddarack. (Sorry about the spellings which are totally wrong. I have not read Mr Herbert's novel.)

On the downside, it is an incredibly serious, humourless film and that can make it seem boring at times. But it has a certain epic grandeur, that you sense when they are riding on the backs of giant sandworms. There is a certain male camaraderie in that scene, but it never gets chauvinistic or vulgar, which is undoubtedly a good thing.

But I love the dream sequences and the bit where Paul Atreides folds space, and it's like a real acid trip combined with interplanetary travel, "travelling without moving" as they call it. And this is what Mr Lynch does best, I think. Dream sequences.

Fred, I definitely agree with the humour point.

4) Special effects. Some are great but others are a bit creaky (the attempts to combine the model worms with live action, the polysterene rocks etc.).

5) Characterisation. The Harkonnens are almost entirely caricatures - laughing demonically etc. Some are quite subtle (Paul Atreides, Dr Yueh) but more are pretty thin - but that's only to be expected in a film with lots of characters and a lot of back story/plot to explain. 

But I think most of the sets are fantastic. The palace at Caladan looks like the Great Northern and the flying vehicle interiors look like 1900 trams or ocean liners.

Have you read the book?

The use of voice overs is mimicing the novel's use of inner monologue, written in a narrative form.  It is actually word for word in some parts, and there would be no other way to truely illustrate the beauty of the spoken literature via the movie without doing this.  Yes, the book basically has WRITTEN versions of voice-overs.

The dialogue.

Well, the movie was so heavily cut, that many times, you are only hearing slivers and moments of scenes...which makes them stick out like sore thumbs....however, I feel it is done and acted so well, that the movie more than makes up for all of this.

Plot and loose ends.

Remember, David Lynch and Frank Hebert intended this movie to be 3 hours plus,...the studios MADE Lynch edit the movie down to 2 hours and 20 minutes.  What came out is like watching an abbreviated, extended trailer for what would have been.  There was a great deal more explaining in the book, and in the shooting script.  Lynch shot SO much more...it would tie up all loose ends.

These are the reasons for the percieved shortcomings of DUNE.  With these in mind, DUNE is actually a brilliant piece, and a film that I truly love.  If there was EVER a movie that needed to be COMPLETELY recut by a director getting to do all he wishes...it is DUNE! 

Thanks Hyde.  That was a wonderful explanation.  I love DUNE, too.  It was so sad that David was forced to edit like he did.  Did you know the Frank Herbert Family loved it, too?  And that the Frank Herbert Trust has been approached by some unknown company to make a new DUNE?

You can follow the details at the Discussion Board at Dunenovels.com.  Frank's grandson is the webmaster.

Keep your eye on the doughnut, not on the hole -- DL

QUOTE: Abbreviated and extended?

The more I think of it, we should be glad Dune turned out to be a disaster, because I think he's been drawing on that negative experience ever since, and using it to inspire him towards greatness. I've always felt that the Stigliani brothers scene in Mulholland Drive wouldn't have happened without Dino and Rafaella pushing him into a corner on Dune

for

Bleep you, & bleep the establishment, and bleep all of you who are trying to make me part of the unestablished establishment.

QUOTE: QUOTE: What came out is like watching an abbreviated, extended trailer for what would have been. Abbreviated and extended?

 I mean to say "abbreviated movie, or extended trailer"

Sorry.

Never read the books, but that's a major complaint from fans.  Aesthetically, he did a good job, but took too many liberties with the plot (they say.) 

I don't like it myself. Lots of TP actors doesn't redeem it.  The Baron and Sting and the boil popping and that big snail thing at the beginning are neat, but that's about it.  Too sci-fi.  The sandworm thing was overdone in the 80's, too.

Well, if you must criticize, then read the books, at least the first ones by Frank Herbert.  The "liberties taken with the plot" was the problem from Dino & Co, not David.

And DUNE has been heralded as the greatest Science Fiction Series of all time at the Science Fiction Hall of Fame.  The sandworm thing is directly from the books--has nothing to do with being in the 80's.

Keep your eye on the doughnut, not on the hole -- DL

Thanks for the info, Hyde. No, I haven't read the books. I imagine in an extended saga that it comes over more natural to read the background explanations and the thoughts of the characters. I think that the voiceovers are a mistake. I can't think of any really great film with voiceovers.

I defer to your greater knowledge on points about the plot. The acid test is whether or not an averagely intelligent viewer of the film gets the plot. I was confused by aspects so in that sense the film wasn't 100% successful on the plot side. 

Bobi 1 Kenobi

B. Beware
O. Of
B. BOB 

I have no interest in reading the books just based on the movie- and because the nerds love them sooooo much.   I'm well aware the sandworm thing started with Herbert.  That doesn't make it less cliche for an 80's flick.

I'm pretty sure Dave voluntarily took creative liberties, from Lynch on Lynch. He wasn't trying to make a strict adaptation, and couldn't anyway because of time constraint.

Dialogue is a strength of Lynchs...but its a quirky, awkward, non sensical (at times) style of dialogue.

Thats not the best thing to move the narrative forward in a film about spices and distant planets.

Im kind of so against Dune that I forget its in Lynchs library sometimes.

Much like Wild at Heart as well....*runs away* 

I strongly disliked Wild At Heart when I first saw it in the theater when released. But I watched it again recently, almost reluctantly, and really enjoyed it, even liked it. Interesting how time can change things.

I absolutely hated Dune. I have seen it since it's release a couple of times, but not for over 12 years. After my recent change of heart about WAH I'm thinking I should rescreen Dune, just to see if I might react differently. But my reluctance is HUGE.
 

"Do you see creamed corn on that plate?"

http://tinyurl.com/yqwurw

Well I just saw it, AGAIN.

I felt as a great admirer of the book, that I should straighten some things up.

First it was published in 1965 by Chilton Books, which was a small how-to edition house. The first release was of 2,200 copies.

The following year it won both Hugo and Nebula awards (two of the most prestigious awards in SF).

It was as groundbreaking to literature as I think David Lynch is to cinema. The work englobed themes such as ecology and the importance of water, the sustenance of life, human potentials, survival, the workings of politics and religion, manipulation of beliefs, different aspects of humanity, racism, war, spirituality, prescience and its trappings (the problem with determinism), breeding, heredity, tradition, heresy, nature and evolution, will, adaptation, etc.

It is the only SF i ever need. I am not so much into SF anyway...

It is highly devoid of high technology since the known universe by that time is subject to a long lasting Butlerian Jihad which prohibits the use or making of "thinking machines" and the rule is orthodoxly -or not- followed, depending where you are. For example Ix provide many semi-legal technology for everyone (Richese also) and Tleilax produces specialized humans in-vitro, like for example mentats (human computers), though it is said their mentats are twisted....Piter is one of them. They are worlds that are situated on the fringes of the Imperium (known universe).

The worms of Arrakis are a species exclusive to this planet (known as Dune by the natives) and are suspected by young Paul to have a connection with the Spice, connection that only the Fremen really know and appreciate and even revere.

This is because the Houses that were extracting didn't really care about the real origin of their wealth. Until that planetologist (did I mention Herbert invented that?-I predict it will become a real discipline: the study of a planet, planetary ecology). So this Dr Kynes was really baffled when he found this place and meddled with the Fremen and was later accepted by them as Liet. He taught them about stuff they could do to change their planet. So that was truly the dream after all. It was an ecological fable, somehow and Paul just came in at the right time, in distress but in perfect conjunction with the prophecies harvested by his mother's Order the Bene Gesserit to help missionaries. He just had to surf the tide of mysticism and he could have his revenge, expel the Emperor and acomplish their dream in the same breath.

That said an awful lot of stuff is cut, diminished, simplified for the sake of a better flow of image, DL being the painter that he is, I think he hit his renaissance-era revival with this luxurious piece. The ambition of such a project at least deserves a notch of respect and trying to understand more of that which it came from is in itself I think a gesture to a great disaster. The two artists, although being diametrically opposed made for some real potential on screen.

The extended version: I was quite shocked by the fact they removed Virginia Madsen's beautiful voice and face and replaced it with a lengthy exposé on the Dune universe as if told by Herbert himself (or so I was under the impression of) along with sketchy drawings of an improbable version of his universe. After a while I got over the uselessly long opening scene and my interest was finally rekindled by some scenes that had been totally left out to fit those 2:30.

The worst part of the film, regarding faithfulness has to be the ending scene with Alia proclaiming her brother IS the Kwisatz Haderach and then, hold on, it starts to rain...

In the novel, it only started to rain like a few weeks after, and you see evidence of the ecological program taking place everywhere i.e. bushes in plastic bags, etc.

Another detail: Paul taking the Water of Life. It is supposed to be a poison that no man endures, only trained Reverend Mothers (Sayyadinah for the Fremen) can transform it into a consumable produce for all to indulge in orgy. About orgies: it's because of the rigours they live in, the water-discipline is very tight all year long, but that day they let go. So in the film, you see Paul and Chani running(?) in the sands (no wormsign?) with the Fedaykin (Paul's commandos) closely following. In the morning he is ready for battle. I mean in the book, he actually was in a cave, secondary from their main one, and the trip induces a coma for three weeks and people come and visit that great mystic warrior they say is in a trance before the great day, the great fight. They only learn after what happened: he took the Water of Life (a big no-no).

This gives them confirmation Paul is their Mahdi, their Messiah. Oh and another detail: the term Kwisatz Haderach is mainly employed by the Bene Gesserit, means "The Shortening of The Way". The being that the Fremen were expecting was called Lisan-al-Gaib, which means "The Voice From The Outer World" I think this was being too complicated for the general public. But then why the idea to make a DUNE movie? It should have been a trilogy. Actually the book is written as a trilogy but comes in one tome (two in some cases).

Personally I think the worst part of the movie has to be Raffaella de Laurentiis, I mean has she ever read the book?

There, sorry for the geekiness, I really love these books.

Talk about Dune: gholaforum.zaup.org

The sound wind makes through the pines. The sentience of animals. What we fear and what lies beyond the darkness.

Well, I like the score, could not say I'd go out and buy a Toto album but the soundtrack is great. I like the Prophecy Theme.

There should have been more mid-eastern tinges in there though. I feel it's too epic all the time.  

The sound wind makes through the pines. The sentience of animals. What we fear and what lies beyond the darkness.

alleyghost, thanks for your info. I feel very enlightened. Thanks for taking time to explain some stuff for us.

I love the score. I don't like Toto but it fits really well with the whole look/feel of the film.

Most welcome, Montana.

Real glad it helps. 

The sound wind makes through the pines. The sentience of animals. What we fear and what lies beyond the darkness.

For those to dislike Dune, here's some food for thought:

David directed Dune so he could direct Blue Velvet. Its been well documented that the Dune experience was not a great one for David. The emotions, negative and positive were poured into Blue Velvet, which many consider to be his greatest work. In my opinion, Blue Velvet was the true pilot for Twin Peaks. Without Dune there would be no Blue Velvet and no Twin Peaks.

I'm neutral on Dune.

The novel was to sci-fi what Lord of the Rings was to fantasy.

I lean towards disappointment due to involving my favorite director and an excellent novel, but everyone makes mistakes and boy did DL respond with Blue Velvet.

"Harry, I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Every day, once a day, give yourself a present. Don't plan it, don't wait for it, just let it happen. Could be a new shirt at the men's store, a catnap in your office chair, or two cups of good, hot, black coffee. Like this."  -Dale Cooper