Jump to content

Villeneuve's DUNE


AC1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Quote

 

“I’m not breaking news today,” Sarnoff said. But the team is more than happy with the $130 million the film has grossed internationally. Kilar pointed out enthusiastically that the film has yet to open in North America, China, or the U.K.

 

“We’re really, really happy with where we’re at 14 days in,” he said. Sarnoff did illuminate what factors will determine whether a sequel eventually gets the go-ahead.

 

“The story in itself sets up for a sequel. The production is so amazing and the storytelling is so compelling that it’s not going to be judged on box office alone,” Sarnoff said, explaining that the green light will be based on “the entirety of what ‘Dune’ can do for the company, including HBO Max.” She also noted that the box office has not fully recovered from the pandemic, which is changing the way the studio is assessing the future box office potential of its movies.

 

 

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/dune-part-2-ted-lasso-warnermedia-jason-kilar-ann-sarnoff-1235094184/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Hey, it's already taken $105,000,000 more than Lynch's version :lol:

 

From overseas box-office.

 

Overseas means less money in Warners pockets...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Venom made more money domestically than it did internationally so it's possible that Dune makes $150 million in the US. And who knows, maybe it will be a mega hit in China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Venom is the kind of movie that makes more domestically, though...

 

 

 

I know, it's because it's a dumb movie. Dune might be too cerebral.

 

 

Hehehehehehe

 

 

 

Maybe we can look at his previous movie as a guideline:

 

Blade Runner 2049:

 

Domestic: $92 million

International: $167 million

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Debating whether I should watch this again this weekend. Feeling oddly uncompelled.

 

It's big, it's beautiful...it's empty...

 

Another friend just watched recently, and described as one big montage. He's not entirely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, KK said:

It's big, it's beautiful...it's empty...

 

I don't think its empty.

 

I have a lot of empathy for Paul, for Leto, for Ducan and especially for Jessica.

 

I really, really liked it. Its NOT the second coming that people are attributing to it, but its good stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was a wonderful cinematic experience but not necessarily a great film. Everything about it is terrific...other than story. But, to be honest, I find it is also the case with the book. The world building is fascinating but I just don't really care about the plot. 

 

I don't quite understand why this needs to be this long. Why can't it be one 3-hour movie? 

 

Overall, though, I did enjoy the experience. 

 

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Villeneuve will never be able to make a cult movie, he simply doesn't push the right buttons. 

 

Change my mind...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoyed it a lot. Happy to have seen it in IMAX. Terrific balance of sound and score and image. There were also a good deal of moments judiciously unscored. Which made Zimmers score that much more impactful. It was practically its own character in the world they built. I think I’ll appreciate the OST more now.


Saw it. Loved it. Gimme part 2 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KK said:

 

... it's empty ...

 

 

You're talking about Blade Runner 2049, don't you?!

 

 

 

 

 

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are actually similar. Feel like art films but don't really have as much to say as they think. But based on audio-visual experience alone, which is what cinena is anyway, it's still a trip worth taking. It feels a bit like a bizarre dour Disneyland ride, if that makes sense. It's a sensory orgasm. And orgasms are sometimes best experienced without the cerebral. 

 

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, crocodile said:

don't really have as much to say as they think.

 

Movies don't need to "say" things to be compelling.

 

They need to tell a human story that's engaging in its own right, and that Dune does do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose one of the reasons why I had trouble engaging is because I knew this is only part of the story. Let's call it The Hobbit effect. 

 

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non sequitor.

 

I think the film had more than enough it in to justify the split, so fine by me.

 

Die Walküre is also only a part of a story. Doesn't stop my empathizing with Siegmund, Sieglinde, Wotan and Brünhilde.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, crocodile said:

I suppose one of the reasons why I had trouble engaging is because I knew this is only part of the story. Let's call it The Hobbit effect. 

 

Karol

 

Given what it teases for the rest of the book, there seems enough scope to tell a larger story that could be split into multiple films a la LOTR. The whole "Chosen One" thing works best over multiple films anyway. But there is just not enough narrative meat to sustain this opener. It doesn't function well enough as a narrative film on its own.

 

Usually when your story is this thin in a setting like this, you going the artsy-fartsy Tarkovsky route and make this all about the world to say something more meaningful about the human condition (as BR 2049 attempts to, until its third act). But I don't think Villeneuve is that filmmaker. And this is clearly a very literal adaptation, designed for the masses, which is totally fine. But it just doesn't have the punch to be the stuff of iconic cinema.

 

It's clearly no Fellowship, which remains a masterclass in balancing micro and macro stories/conflicts. 

 

Also, for all its star power, a lot of these characters felt mostly disposable. Rebecca Ferguson and Charlotte Rampling were the only dynamic/memorable characters really.

 

Hate to say it, but this could probably work better as a TV series, to better invest in these characters.

 

And I think the score has a lot to do with why the film ended up feeling kind of anemic to me. It's just ALWAYS on, and it's always playing one beat...so the film doesn't really move anywhere emotionally or dramaturgically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, crocodile said:

Feel like art films but don't really have as much to say as they think. But based on audio-visual experience alone, which is what cinena is anyway, it's still a trip worth taking.

 

Just like David Lynch's Dune. 

 

 

Alex - fully ready for Richard's wrath

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, KK said:

Hate to say it, but this could probably work better as a TV series, to better invest in these characters.

 

maxresdefault.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, KK said:

But there is just not enough narrative meat to sustain this opener. It doesn't function well enough as a narrative film on its own.

 

It felt fairly comfortable at its length to me. A kind of deliberate "this is important and you will sit there and wait for this beat to happen, and then for that to happen and we're going to let it play out." The slow tempo really fits the nature of the movie, I found.

 

The ending point does strike one as rather arbitrary, but I don't mind. We were going into this as a two-parter from the get-go. The only real letdown is that the action at the 90 minute mark is meh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news for everyone who is hoping for the sequel!

 

Quote

Legendary and Warner Bros.’ Dune (review) earned a robust $17.5 million on Friday. That’s Warner Bros.’ biggest opening day since Joker ($33 million) in October 2019, and obviously their biggest pandemic-era single-day gross. It’s also the second biggest “day and date” opening day of the year behind Halloween Kills’ $22 million Friday last weekend

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2021/10/23/friday-box-office-dune-nabs-spicy-18m-as-french-dispatch-impresses/

 

That doesn't mean the movie's already a hit though. Black Widow had a great opening day but a lousy weekend overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AC1 said:

Just like David Lynch's Dune. 

Alex - fully ready for Richard's wrath

:lol:

No wrath, here.

I hope to see the new DUNE, if I can, even though I'll be comparing to Lynch's version, as I watch it.

I know that @crocodile was referring to BR2049, when he posted, which I find a huge borefest!

Richard - not bothered about anybody's wrath :lol:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KK said:

 

Given what it teases for the rest of the book, there seems enough scope to tell a larger story that could be split into multiple films a la LOTR. The whole "Chosen One" thing works best over multiple films anyway. But there is just not enough narrative meat to sustain this opener. It doesn't function well enough as a narrative film on its own.

 

Usually when your story is this thin in a setting like this, you going the artsy-fartsy Tarkovsky route and make this all about the world to say something more meaningful about the human condition (as BR 2049 attempts to, until its third act). But I don't think Villeneuve is that filmmaker. And this is clearly a very literal adaptation, designed for the masses, which is totally fine. But it just doesn't have the punch to be the stuff of iconic cinema.

 

It's clearly no Fellowship, which remains a masterclass in balancing micro and macro stories/conflicts. 

 

Also, for all its star power, a lot of these characters felt mostly disposable. Rebecca Ferguson and Charlotte Rampling were the only dynamic/memorable characters really.

 

Hate to say it, but this could probably work better as a TV series, to better invest in these characters.

 

And I think the score has a lot to do with why the film ended up feeling kind of anemic to me. It's just ALWAYS on, and it's always playing one beat...so the film doesn't really move anywhere emotionally or dramaturgically.

 

Was the score always on? I thought at least half the movie there was no score. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mephariel said:

 

Was the score always on? I thought at least half the movie there was no score. 


It was pretty felt like wall to wall from what I remember, and fairly monotonous at that.

 

6 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

It felt fairly comfortable at its length to me. A kind of deliberate "this is important and you will sit there and wait for this beat to happen, and then for that to happen and we're going to let it play out." The slow tempo really fits the nature of the movie, I found.

 

The ending point does strike one as rather arbitrary, but I don't mind. We were going into this as a two-parter from the get-go. The only real letdown is that the action at the 90 minute mark is meh.

 

Yea, it’s not the pacing that bothers me more than what it’s saying or doing with that pacing. And I think it’s mostly that third act that undoes a lot of what was set up before it.

 

And to be clear, I actually like the film. I just don’t love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, KK said:


It was pretty felt like wall to wall from what I remember, and fairly monotonous at that.

 

 

Yea, it’s not the pacing that bothers me more than what it’s saying or doing with that pacing. And I think it’s mostly that third act that undoes a lot of what was set up before it.

 

And to be clear, I actually like the film. I just don’t love it.

 

Dunkirk was wall to wall. I don't think Dune was to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mephariel said:

 

Dunkirk was wall to wall.

 

For good reason because the dialog was sparse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

:lol:

No wrath, here.

I hope to see the new DUNE, if I can, even though I'll be comparing to Lynch's version, as I watch it.

I know that @crocodile was referring to BR2049, when he posted, which I find a huge borefest!

Richard - not bothered about anybody's wrath :lol:.


Yeah. I found BR 2049 to be stunning visually, but too long and too slow otherwise. I'm mulling Dune, but fear I'll find it to be more of the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:


Yeah. I found BR 2049 to be stunning visually

 

Sure, but visuals can be stunning without being emotionally moving. If it did that, I would have certainly given it a higher score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes, a film can be worth watching, just because it looks beautiful.

 

For those who have seen the film, a QQ:

what is the sound design like? Who designed the sound? Does it match the visuals? I've read, here, that the music is very high in the mix. Is this an opinion that's held by JWfaners? How does this affect the overall experience of the film?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Sometimes, a film can be worth watching, just because it looks beautiful.

 

 

It's beautiful but sterile and therefore not moved by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

what is the sound design like? Who designed the sound? Does it match the visuals? I've read, here, that the music is very high in the mix. Is this an opinion that's held by JWfaners? How does this affect the overall experience of the film?

 

Its very hard to tell where the score ends and the sound design begins, honestly; and yes, its very prominent in the mix. Sometimes it works for the visuals, sometimes its a bit too much. There were a couple of lines mumbled by Rebecca Ferguson there were lost on me.

 

Its still a wonderful movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/10/2021 at 7:59 AM, Naïve Old Fart said:

 I've read, here, that the music is very high in the mix. Is this an opinion that's held by JWfaners? How does this affect the overall experience of the film?

 

I remember, when I first saw 2049, I was distracted either by the score or the sound fx. I still don't know which of the two is responsible for that loud blast sound when you see a spinner flying over the city. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another minor quibble with the film. 

 

After Paul finds drum sand, they run for the hills and attract a giant sandworm. 

 

I don't recall anyone explaining earlier what drum sand is or why it's so dangerous. It's kind of obvious, but the movie did go out of its way to explain a lot of other vocabulary. That word must've gotten cut. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This movie makes the same mistake as the 1984 movie: suggesting that the year 10,191 is AD, and thus only 8,000 years in our future. 

 

It's 10,191 AG, after the foundation of the Spacing Guild, which itself occurs in 11,075 AD. 

 

So Dune Pt 1 is 20,000 years in our future, not 8,000.

 

6 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Didn't someone plant another thumper?

 

That happened after the events of my sentence. The worm had been lazily following them. The drum sand put it into overdrive. Once on the rocks, the giant Sarlaac mouth sizes them up. The thumper lures the great worm away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Positivatee said:

That happened after the events of my sentence. Once on the rocks, the giant Sarlaac mouth sizes them up. The thumper lures the great worm away. 

There's a Sarlaac, in this movie? Did they film it in Yuma?

 

7 minutes ago, Positivatee said:

That happened after the events of my sentence.

Yeah, it happened that way in 1984. I was just checking.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Positivatee said:

This movie makes the same mistake as the 1984 movie: suggesting that the year 10,191 is AD, and thus only 8,000 years in our future.

If memory serves, no mention of A.D., or A.G., is mentioned in 1984. As I recall, there are four mentions of the word "God", and none of them refer to time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Positivatee said:

This movie makes the same mistake as the 1984 movie: suggesting that the year 10,191 is AD, and thus only 8,000 years in our future. 

 

It's 10,191 AG, after the foundation of the Spacing Guild, which itself occurs in 11,075 AD. 

 

So Dune Pt 1 is 20,000 years in our future, not 8,000.

 

Man that's a mistake that really should not have been made...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Was it really suggested though? Did they say 10191 AD, or did they just say 10191? I can't remember.

 

Neither. 

 

At the 4:18 mark, it says "Year 10191."

 

Which, to be fair

 

To be faiiiiir 

 

To be fairrrrrr

 

Doesn't indicate a scale. But come on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The universe also describes sandworms as 400 meters long. Metric. 

 

Rabban says the windstorm speeds are 80 (or 800, I don't remember) km/hour. More metric. 

 

But on the day the Duke inspects his spice tanks, the weather is predicted to hit 140 that day. 

 

Is that metric, too? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.