November 21, 2021 at 10:10 pm #27438ZLothModerator
And, on the last day of the thirty day window on HBOMax, I watch this film. In a few hours, it becomes unavailable for a while. Good thing I’m on vacation and not have to worry about work.
Visually, it’s stunning. Storytelling, hmmm…. the pacing is a bit slow. It would have benefitted if my exposure was more than just the 1984 film. I still have the unabridged 21 hour audiobook still unlistened to in my Audible library. Those young people who prefer the faster paced films with plenty of BOOM will probably fall asleep during this film. Still, I’m left a bit wanting, and we are in for a wait as the second film has been greenlit.
“All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can’t get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer.” —IBM Manual, 1925November 22, 2021 at 12:00 am #27439ubikuberallesModerator
I agree, more or less, with your assessment of the movie. It is slow paced. Many of the visual elements reminded me of the director’s previous work: The Arrival. So I re-watched it. OMG, even the pacing is similar. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, it was appropriate for that particular movie. Was the same pacing apropos for Dune? Meh, not so much. During the beginning with the set up and character development, the pacing was fine. However, they should have stepped it up during the battle sequences. When the bombs dropped and the troops landed and there was hand-to-hand combat in the hallways, I expected it to be more chaotic and the pace frenetic. Tat would have been thrilling. It wasn’t and it took some of the excitement out of the film. The pacing reminded me of the movie Dunkirk. For that movie, the pacing was perfect since we were watching a siege situation and impending doom that the British army would be lost to the Germans. Was that the intent in this version of Dune? Perhaps.
Still, in many ways, it’s better than Lynch’s work in 1984. Lynch’s version of shields was a joke. So blocky and chonky. Apologists blame it on the state of the art CGI at the time. I don’t buy it. They could have done better. What killed the 1984 version was the expositions and the inner dialogue. So much exposition! And then the Sci-Fi channel cut of the 1984 version had even MORE exposition! Kill me! Granted, when I first saw the movie, I was OK with the exposition. However, as I matured as a movie-watcher, I’ve grown weary of exposition as it can be interpreted as the film makers are talking down to the audience. Give us some credit. We can interpret facial expressions and content just as well as experienced filmmakers. More so with inner dialogue. The 2021 movie proved you didn’t need inner dialogue to get he message across.
I hated how the Harkonnens were portrayed in Lynch’s film. Villeneuve’s version is much better. Made them much more menacing and much less gross. Blech.
It’s been a while since I watched the Sci-Fi mini series with William Hurt so I won’t compare it to the most recent version. Besides, it was a low budget effort and would be unfair to compare.
I do welcome the latest addition but my mind is not made up and won’t be until part 2 is out…in two years? Nothing about it I hated. Loved the music.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.