Features

Darko · #1

Lately I've taken a huge interest in these books. I'm on Children of Dune right now, soon to move to God Emperor (which I just got for my birthday

). I'm just wondering who else here has read these for reasons of nerdy sci-fi if/then discussion, debating the political/philisophical undertones, talking about the movie/movie series, etc.

Perndog · #2

I'm halfway through Messiah now, though it's been a year or two since I first read Dune.

Let me say that the original movie would have been good if the book didn't exist, but they changed/added/removed way too much for it to be respectable in light of the great novel. I've only seen the first hour of the remake, so I can't comment on that - how was it?

Darko · #3

David Lynch's version was a better interpretation of what the world should be like: dark. It isn't a happy cheery world like they made it to be in the Sci-Fi version. Every little detail was there. Everything down to the Baron's disease (which was apparently overlooked by Sci-Fi). The Baron was incredible in the movie, but in the Sci-Fi channel remake, he was anything but.

In the movie the Fremen are exactly how they are in the book. Noble, practical, to the point. The remake, however, they seem more like paranoid Native Americans than noble desert people. Chani wears headbands with feathers sticking out of them. WTF? Stilgar doesn't even have a freakin' beard! They don't speak with the cold nobility that I got from the book, either. The stillsuits suck balls in the new one, too.

The worms in the remake are fucking incredible though. Exactly how I pictured them.

Paul Atreides is definitely better in the Lynch version. As is the Lady Jessica, Baron Harkonen, Feyd, Chani, Alia, Stilgar and Gurney Halleck. I don't think Duncan Idaho was made into a very important character in the Lynch version, so I can't judge that one, though he wasn't as strong a personality as he was in the books. Chani didn't have that 'elven' appearance about her in the Sci-Fi version. And Alia is so creepy in the Lynch version.

All in all, the original movie is better on how it captures the mood and image of Dune, but the remake has enough time to include every aspect of the book, which is almost necessary when dealing with such a detailed novel.

Once you get into Children of Dune we'll discuss that series, as I have some major beef with it.

Perndog · #4

The world needn't be cheery, but I thought it certainly could have been brighter - the visual style (along with the effects) was the thing that most turned me off about that movie, aside from the discrepancies. It's been too long since I read the book to list the ones I saw, but what irritated the hell out of me was that whole "weirding module" thing, weapons using sound and all that junk. They totally invented that for the movie, and it didn't make any sense. The "weirding way of battle" referred to in the book referred to physical combat, didn't it? And it only had anything to do with Paul gaining respect among the Fremen, it wasn't the big thing they went on about in the movie.

Darko · #5

Well, Paul taught them the 'weirding way' in order to gain their respect. He later took control of the fremen masses after riding the worm. The weirding way of fighting made the fremen even more vicious and unstoppable. I think Lynch needed something visual that could capture how powerful the Fremen were, and the weirding modules was definitely a good idea for that purpose. If I had read the book first I might have thought otherwise though.

One thing that bothered me is how the Fremen embrace Paul almost immediately in the movie. He had to fight to get respect. It wasn't just handed to him. *shrugs* oh well. I doubt Lynch was a fan of the books, else it might have been perfect.

Protoclown · #6

I'm reading God Emperor now. The books are good, but I do think the series tends to be overrated.

I liked Messiah the best so far.

AChimp · #7

I've never read the books, but I will some day, I suppose. I was told that they were very boring.

FS · #8

I've been meaning to check out at least the first book for some time.

I love how (at least, in the movie) the strongest weapons they have in the year 10,000 are atomics.

Darko · #9

Do you really need anything more than weapons capable of planetary destruction?

You also have to take into consideration that man has forsaken computers because they were enslaved by them, which is why there are 'mentats'. Humans conditioned to act out logical computation that computers were once used for. I think this might be why the technology seems a bit primitive, even as advanced as some of it may be because even our most advanced weapons are dependent on computer technology.

Now that I think about it, the Weirding modules in the movie might have been a cheap way to employ the lasguns. If they had used lasguns, it would have cost them a ton more in special effects.