Dune

Originally posted by CC001
So do you guys think that is the reason why dune hasn't been looked at as the next series of sci fi/fantasy films? just far too much material and narative issues? the same would have been said about lotr a decade ago but with a bit of tweaking, a very successful (and i mean narative wise - not financially) set of films was made. i mean a 7 parter would be a mammoth undertaking, but they're doing it with harry potter!

I just hope an ambitious film maker and visionary producer come together and decide to take it on, because i personally was enthralled by the books, and read all 7 in about 8 weeks!

No, I don't think it's not been looked at by film makers. I mean, if you can take a body of work like Lord of the Rings and get the kind of box office figures it got, then Dune isn't a leap.

Must read the books myself but didnt herbert never really finish the story? I mean wasnt there a backdrop about sentient machines or something and that the whole golden path and all that crap was just basically preparing humanity to fight robots? I could be wrong.

h**p://scifiwire.com/2009/08/director-berg-envisions-a.php

[BY FRED TOPEL]Frank Herbert's sci-fi novel Dune—which spawned five sequels in Herbert's lifetime and prequels after his death—has been problematic for filmmakers, but that's not stopping director Peter Berg from developing a new movie he plans to direct.

Director David Lynch famously had problems adapting the sprawling book in 1984. Syfy's 2000 miniseries adaptation did a bit better in terms of audience and critical reception, but Berg feels there's still room for a new feature film.

"I think I had a much more different experience, I think, with the book than David Lynch did," Berg said in an exclusive interview on last week at the Television Critics Association summer press tour in Pasadena, Calif., where he was promoting his Wayne Gretzky documentary for ESPN. "To me, I think my interpretation will feel significantly different from that and the [Syfy] Channel miniseries that aired. I have a different experience than both of those filmmakers did."

Lynch's film focused in part on the politics of the feuding houses of Herbert's novel, who contend while trying to control the flow of melange, the spice that facilitates space travel, which is found only on the desert planet of Arrakis.

Berg sees the story more as an epic adventure. "[The book] was much more muscular and adventurous, more violent and possibly even a little bit more fun," Berg said. "I think those are all elements of my experience of the book that can be brought in without offending the die-hard fans of the Bene Gesserit and Kwisatz Haderach. There's a more dynamic film to be made."

Before Berg can direct, a filmable Dune script just has to be finished within Berg's scheduling parameters. "I'm finishing this [documentary] now, we're editing it now," he said. "I think it's going to be in the Toronto Film Festival. [I'm] working now on getting Friday Night Lights up for the new season and getting Dune up and running. I'm working all the time."

Reading the first book now, Lynch's movie is different in many ways. Hope the new one stays closer to the written works.

Really needs to be a two or three part movie for just the first book.

There have been a number of rumors flying around the last two years about a remake of Frank Herbert’s Dune, first tackled relatively unsuccessfully by David Lynch back in 1984. And thanks to our inside source, The Hollywood Cog, we can officially set the record straight.

First of all, a Dune remake is in the works, and has been since 2007. This we already know. We also know that Josh Zetumer, who is also writing the next Bourne flick, was hired to pen the script last summer, and turned in his epic 175-page draft earlier this year. As recently as May, Peter Berg (Friday Night Lights, The Kingdom) was loosely attached to direct the project — he even spoke about the project with MTV last month, but was mum on casting Robert Pattinson as the lead.

However, we now know that Berg did speak with Pattinson in May about the project, though there was nothing official. But the big news is, Peter Berg completely dropped the project a few weeks ago — his Film 44 production company backed out, and now Paramount is scrambling to find a new director.
The search, however, has run into two issues: 1) they’re looking for a director who can put the movie together for under $175 million, which sounds manageable, but they don’t want anything resembling the crap effects of the ‘84 film, and 2) they want a director who already has a preexisting passion for the novel and is enthusiastic about the project. Right now, Paramount is shopping the script to two directors: They like Neill Blompkamp (District 9), who has the right vision, but the frontrunner, at the moment, is Neil Marshall (The Descent), who was sent the script early this month. However, despite the enthusiasm of producer, Kevin Misher (Public Enemies), the studio is somewhat tepid on Marshall, uncertain about handing over a $175 million film with franchise potential to a somewhat unknown director whose only hit was the modestly successful The Descent.

All of which is to say: Dune is still being developed; there is a script; but as of now, there is no director, and the only connection that Pattinson had to the project was via discussion with a director, Berg, who is no longer on the project. Fortunately, Paramount — in Marshall and Blompkamp — is at least looking at directors who could do the Herbert source material justice, and God knows, it’d be hard to mess this thing up worse than Lynch did.

http://www.pajiba.com/trade_news/dune-remake-update.php

I never liked the Lynch Version.

^
Of the Neils, I hope they go with Blompkamp. Don't care much for the other guy's movies.

Bolkamp would be great.

The Descent is, imo, one of the best horror films of the past decade. Dog Soldiers was pretty good too. Didn't see Doomsday, so can't judge.

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt, though.

Though i do like Blompkamp, and District 9 was an excellent movie.

As much of a mess as the Lynch one was, it wasn't bad for it's time, imo.

My pick would be Peter Jackson, he's done a vast epic before; a fine job at it too. His name would also guarantee massive amounts of money being thrown at the project.

I like Lynch's Dune, though it strayed off from the book, still a solid Sci-Fi flick.

Originally posted by Robtard
My pick would be Peter Jackson, he's done a vast epic before; a fine job at it too. His name would also guarantee massive amounts of money being thrown at the project.

I like Lynch's Dune, though it strayed off from the book, still a solid Sci-Fi flick.

agreed on both counts. Peter Jackson can bring any book to life imo. Imagine if he'd done twilight.

sorry.

"Aren't there two extended versions of Dune? I think I own the directors."

Yes... I'm not sure what the current extended version that is available has but I did see an extended version that was a japanese import that was a lot longer. It had a lot of scenes that were cut from the movie that weren't even finished yet... scenes where the special effects hadn't been added and the fremen didn't have blue eyes n' such.

It did do a better job of keeping the story closer to the novel but I guess due to the already long length of the movie the scenes had to be dropped.

I wouldn't mind seeing dune being remade the same way lord of the rings was done with 2 or three movies. 2 would probably work best because you could end the first with the harkonen attack on dune. and the second could focus more on the fremen.

'Dune' remake back on track with director Pierre Morel

by Nicole Sperling

Paramount has found a new director for its remake of the sci-fi classic Dune, after Peter Berg dropped off the project in October. The studio has hired Taken helmer Pierre Morel to oversee the movie. Paramount is currently looking for a new writer to incorporate Morel’s vision of the project into the original draft by Quantum of Solace scribe Josh Zetumer. Morel plans to make a very faithful adaptation of the 1965 book by Frank Herbert. The movie is a high priority for Paramount’s production chief Adam Goodman. Kevin Misher and Richard Rubinstein are producing.

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2010/01/04/dune-remake/

Originally posted by focus4chumps
http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2010/01/04/dune-remake/

Hmmm, of the five movies of his I've seen. I only really liked one, Taken.

Another Dune??? Hmmm... I wonder how that'll pan out.

I love Lynch's Dune, despite all the faults Ush already pointed out. The atmosphere, the look, the feel.... truly magnificent. And it even made Paul quite a sympathetic character. Not so in tv series if you ask me, which also looked appalling, despite being closer to the book.

So will we now get a version that does both, or will politics ruin Dune forever as a filmable project?

Oh, I enjoyed Lynch's film too... but it's still a mess.

There is all thits talk about doing it differently this time... hmmm....

I watched both Lynch's and Harrison's movies, I've read the book itself as well. And I think that the older movie is much, much better, despite of its few disadvantages.

Harrison's film is longer and contains more facts from the novel, but - real paradox - it is washed out of Dune's specific climate and atmosphere. Lynch captured it much, much better. It is felt from the start to the very end.

Other things, that I don't like about the newer Dune movie:
- The acting in this film is mainly a big mistake, mostly due to the fact, that many characters (including Paul) do not reflect their actual personalities from the book
- This film is simply hollow, and, like I said, it has none of the Dune's climate. It is boring as well.
- Costumes they decided to use in this film are one big tragedy. It seems to be a detail, but when I am forced to watch this parody through entire movie, it ruins the whole. The only costumes, that are not a disaster, are the stillsuits, and maybe Atreides' (and Emperor's) uniforms. All others are merely idiotic. Hawat's costume is ridiculous. Sardaukar? When I saw them, the thing, that came to my mind is "OMFG. What is that supposed to be, Picasso fanclub meeting?". Oh, and the Harkonnen, who look like a parody of Japanese samurai. Let's not forget about the Guild members, who do not only look stupid, but behave so as well, waving idiotically with their hands when speaking.

Lynch's movie is much better, although it misses many facts from the original novel. Those that are most important to the main plot, were shown, though. However, there are few things, that I compain about, as well.
The first one is the general appeareance of the Harkonnen in this movie. They are completely disgusting and horrible. They were, of course, cruel and barbaric in the actual novel, but not obscene.
The second thing is the cat's milk as Hawat's antidote.
The third thing is that strange idea with voice-pistols.

great film, loved it

Originally posted by Ushgarak
David Lynch was also slightly a victim of the times, I feel. For example, he completely cut out the martial arts 'Weirding Way' of the books and turned it into a sound-based weapon instead, a significant change to the mythology (which he then extended into a plot point of the power of the Atreides army, changing storyline even more). His excuse, apparently, was that he thought it would be rubbish to have kung-fu on sand dunes.

In these post Crouching Tiger days, that logic doesn't look quite so sound (no pun intended...). Oddly enough, though, the whole sound weapon thing has almost been accepted into the mythology; in particular the computer games all used it.

It's odd for me to say this, but I actually liked the "gun" thing for the weirding ways, much better than the martial arts. It's pretty damn cool and would have looked and sounded much better today. I most especially liked the fact that Paul Atreides "evolved" to the point to not have to use the guns to "focus/amp" his powes, anymore. For me, that was just awesome and reall established his character progression.

As for Lynch's film, I had to give it an automatic 9 out of 10 after having seen it. I had not seen it until June, of this year. After seeing it, I thought it was absurdly awesome and regretted not having seen it sooner. I read the books (or rather, had to, in middle school, for grade assignments...up through Heretics of Dune). I liked Lynch's take on the universe better than the original. I would love to see the first 5 books made into a quintology with today's technology and a good sized budget.

However, if a film is made that is very accurate to the original novel, I can't say that it will be bad, at all. It would be hard to rune Dune as it has so much awesome Sci-Fi goodness just seeping from the pages.

OMG! 😄 nice movie lol