MovieChat Forums > Dune: Part One (2021) Discussion > So hyped for Denis to expose David Lynch...

So hyped for Denis to expose David Lynch's lazy, amateur hack job effort

posted 4 years ago by tanner21 (6)
35 replies | jump to latest

Lynch had three and half years, a 1500+ man crew and a huge budget to get Dune right.

He failed miserably. No cut of this movie would have been good, and the special effects were terribly done even for the time. A great director would have made it difficult for his movie to get cut to pieces, and if Lynch really did have a much better cut.. he would have released it by now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sguaghxZG8

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

Lynch sucks!

reply

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

Really? Going by the trailer, Villeneuve’s Dune looks as stark and bland as his Blade Runner, whereas Lynch’s Dune leaves images burned on your brain forever.

I have a feeling the Lynch version is going to come off very well from this.

reply

[–] MichaelJPollock (731) 4 years ago

I don't know.... I've difficulty trying to imagine that any of Villeneuve's films (including his 'Dune') will be remembered or of any interest whatsoever a decade from now.
Nothing in the recent 'Dune' trailer hints at Villeneuve's film having even an ounce of Lynch's film's vision and strange likeability (failed and ailing film though it was). Certainly not the costume design, uninspired casting or photography at any rate. For the rest, I guess we'll have to suffer through the film to know, won't we?

reply

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

I’ll be waiting for trustworthy reviews and audience feedback. If credible voices are saying it’s worth the slog I’ll go see it, but after Villeneuve’s bland Blade Runner snooze-fest and now seeing this lifeless trailer I’m pretty sceptical.

reply

[–] MichaelJPollock (731) 4 years ago

Well, Villeneuve has been making films for more than 20 years and already has 9 films under his belt; if he were a director of particular vision, with anything interesting to say about our times or able to make films remarkable enough that they could possibly stand the test of time, we'd already know by now.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

Go read the book. If you like it, you’ll at the very least, appreciate the movie.

reply

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

I already appreciate the Lynch movie.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

Then I think you’ll appreciate this movie too regardless.

reply

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

Not going off the trailer, in which Villeneuve’s trademark lifeless, stark style looks in danger of draining the content of energy, but I’ll wait for credible reviews.

reply

[–] Bateman (600) 4 years ago

Agreed. Villeneuve is the poster child for "all style, no substance" as far as I'm concerned; he can make stuff look pretty, all right, but that's about all he's got going for him.

Enemy (2013) was hands down the single most boring, unimaginative take I have ever seen on the whole doppelganger theme, and a pitifully vapid excuse for a story trying to hide behind a paper-thin facade of weirdness it couldn't even bring itself to fully commit to.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

You do know that Enemy was based off of a book, right? Let me guess, you didn't like Arrival either, right?

Just to compare, what are some of your favorite movies?

reply

[–] Bateman (600) 4 years ago

Yes, I'm aware it was based off a Saramago book, which doesn't help its case any, as I consider him to be the single most massively overrated writer of our lifetime. Can't say anything about Arrival, as I haven't watched it.

As for my favorite movies... Sanatorium pod klepsydrą (1973), Synecdoche, New York (2008), Mr Nobody (2009) or L'étrange coleur des larmes de ton corps (2013) all come to mind.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

So isn't the screenwriter and director bound to the source material if adapting a novel? If you didn't like the writer in the first place, why did you watch the movie then?

So take any of the movies you mentioned. What is it that you like?

reply

[–] MichaelJPollock (731) 4 years ago

"All style, no substance": if only! I'd be interested in a film that's "all style". And sometimes substantial things of some interest emerge from style alone (e.g. poetry, or a film like Korine's "Spring Breakers"...). But Villeneuve is not even a "stylist". I've seen all his films, and very very few images stick (perhaps that shot in 'Sicario' of soldiers at dusk disappearing into the horizon is the only remarkable cinematic shot I can think of in his entire filmography). There's very little aesthetic formal power in Villeneuve's films.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

So who's the right director for this movie?

reply

[–] MichaelJPollock (731) 4 years ago

That's a very good question.
Another one would be, do we need that film made again?

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

And the answer is yes. Lynch Dune was a valiant effort and I do appreciate it for what it is, but it made major story deviations and the SFX weren't capable at the time.

reply

[–] MichaelJPollock (731) 4 years ago

Faire enough. What did you think of the 2000 mini-series? Haven't seen it myself.
I somehow find it a little hard to settle for a watered-down, crowd-pleasing, would-be "artsy block buster" version of Dune (something the studio went for with Blade Runner 2049, which ended up being neither here nor there) when the remains of Jodorowsky's ambitious (and maybe a little insane) vision for a Dune film are still around to be seen...
If you cant equal that, I feel maybe it's better to just leave it alone.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

The mini-series is really low-budget, but much more accurate to the book. Watching it makes you appreciate what Lynch Dune brought to the screen. I don't know what the run time will be for this movie, but it is a part 1 to a 2 part movie. That gives them much more time to expand the history of the houses and the Bene Gesserit.

In my opinion, your expectations are infeasible. Jodorowsky's Dune was a pipe dream. It would've never made it to physical production once the price tag was put to it. It seems best that you don't watch it and just re-read the book.

reply

[–] MichaelJPollock (731) 4 years ago

"Jodorowsky's Dune was a pipe dream"
***
Yes, I agree it did indeed feel that way...
Still, I'm grateful some crazy directors had insane, pharaonic, ego-trip projects of unreasonable proportions: sometimes, one-tenth of their visions landed on the screen and it was still something to behold (if only because it hinted at what could have been).
I suppose I'll take a failed masterpiece or overambitious idea that falls short of its mark, over the sort of risk-assessed, safe and narrow vision Villeneuve seems to be proposing with his Dune.
We shall see. We shall see.

reply

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

A director has their creative vision. The studio has the money and wants a positive return. The studio execs are the boss and the director is the hired hand. His creativity is limited to the the budget given to him by the studio. He can allocate that budget wherever he wants. That's fair, isn't it? What isn't fair is when studio execs view the dailies and ask for changes in order to appeal to the widest possible audience. That is an infringement on creative vision. Remember, the studio didn't tap his shoulder to direct. He asked the studio he wanted to make this movie. We haven't seen very much. I think you should be a bit more open minded.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

This won't come close to matching Lynch's version.

reply

[–] tanner21 (6) 3 years ago

rekt

reply

1
2