Damn, why dont they make a decent Dune movie?

[BD2003]

Dune is by far my favorite book. LOTR holds a special place in my heart, but Dune was just awesome.

I saw the Sci-fi miniseries, and thought it was kinda blah. Special effects sucked, costumes were RIDICULOUS, acting was so-so, and that casting was alll wrong. Stilgar is not some old mexican dude. Leto wasnt so bland. And paul was supposed to be 15! Jessica was alright, but come on, Chani was busted. And it was fairly obvious the whole thing was shot in a big room full of sand with a big painting behind. They didnt even bother to match the colors of the painting to the lighting. But it followed the book fairly closely, so it gets props for that.

The 80s movie was an 80's movie. And you cant insult dune with 2 hours.

I just cant help but think that if its given a proper budget, with proper casting and effects and costumes, and was a good 3 hours long, that it wouldnt be one of the best movies ever created. So much potential wasted.

Maybe in 20 years?

 

[Wallydraigle]

Wasn't the one from the 80's four hours long? It had that really long intro with the drawings, remember? It had to be at least three hours. And Picard looked as old then as he does now.

 

[djheater]

Unfortunately i doubt it'll ever happen. The store is to complicated and there is to much internal dialogue for them to pull it off. I think, perhaps if they did the Blade Runner "narrative voice" thing then it would make sense, but that is hard to pull off without being super-cheesy.

 

[Wallydraigle]

Nope, I was wrong. According to Amazon.com it is 137 minutes long. I guess it just seemed to drag on for four hours.

 

[BD2003]

Well, obviously a lot would have to be cut. But I think theres ample room in the story to be chopped up into 3 hours. They could remove some of the rituals, some of the story towards the beginning etc. They could probably cut out count fenring and rabban altogether. Idaho could go if he had to, but thats kind of stretching it. Most of the internal dialogue would have to go, but thats better left out in a movie to begin with. Most of the politics could be left out as well.

Its too bad. If done properly I could believe it would be up there with LOTR in the box office.

 

[XMan]

Nope, I was wrong. According to Amazon.com it is 137 minutes long. I guess it just seemed to drag on for four hours.

There's an extended version, isn't there?

 

[Wallydraigle]

There's an extended version, isn't there?

Could be I suppose. But that would be like pulling off the bandaid slowly instead of getting it over with right away.

 

[LordJezo]

Originally posted by: Xerox Man

Nope, I was wrong. According to Amazon.com it is 137 minutes long. I guess it just seemed to drag on for four hours.

There's an extended version, isn't there?

Yup.. there is the normal 2 hour version, then there is the 3 hour version that the sci-fi channel plays every once in a while, and there the is the super long version that only afew people have seen.

Check the sci fi channel.. they used to always play the 3 hour version for a week straight.

 

[djheater]

If anyone knows where I can buy the extended version let me know.

 

[BD2003]

Yeah, I'd definitely be interested in seeing the extended version. It couldnt have been that bad, could it?

 

[Ameesh]

its my favorite book too, the sci-fi version is better then the one from the 80s either version the 2 or 4 hour version


its too hard to pull of as amovie.

 

[SWScorch]

Hmm theres an extended version? I want, I want!

Dune is also my favorite book, and if they could do to it what they did to LOTR I would be ecstatic. However, as difficult it must have been to convert LOTR into a movie, I imagine Dune would be even harder. Lots of mental action, and surreal scenes that would be hard to direct and create. Besides, even they pulled it off flawlessly, the book would still be better.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Ameesh
its my favorite book too, the sci-fi version is better then the one from the 80s either version the 2 or 4 hour version
its too hard to pull of as amovie.

Some of us like David Lynch's version much better: Kyle MacLachlan was more spiritual/mystical as Paul, sets and technology design were much more interesting (the baroque technology of a decadent civilization) and sets especially looked more real, and Lynch captured the feel of the book better even if he took liberties with the story. SciFi's version was truer to the letter of the plot, but lacked the spirit.

 

[Texmaster]

Originally posted by: lirion
Wasn't the one from the 80's four hours long? It had that really long intro with the drawings, remember? It had to be at least three hours. And Picard looked as old then as he does now.

That movie ROCKED. The new one SUCKED.