From: rdd@cactus.org (Robert Dorsett)
Subject: Re: Dune - speilberg lucas?????
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 09:59:00 GMT

In article <890707p.40.721627581@ace.acadiau.ca> 890707p@ace.acadiau.ca (GLENN G. PARSONS) writes:
>Maybe Lucas would 
>have been better, but I'm inclined to think he would have radically changed 
>the spirit of the novel.

Why? 


> If nothing else, Lynch preserved the most important 
>aspect - the drama and tragic sense of high history surrounding Muad Dib's 
>ascension.   

Not really.  There was no sense of the jihad around him or the action.
Kyle M. was a poor choice for this role. 


>AS for a mini-series, are you serious?
>I'm sure the ascension of a prescient genetically aware demi-god to the 
>throne of the universe 8000 years in the future as part of a Biblical 

Biblical?  Greek influences, definitely. Islamic influences, yes.  Biblical?  
they exist, but I think they're secondary.  Herbert wasn't quite THAT obvious.


>Historical allegory for Western history would really snag viewers away from "
>America's Funniest Imbeciles".

Give them a chance; it's been done.  Quality (ala "Roots") "works"; mediocre 
historical-epics don't.


>Most people I spoke to about the movie either didn't understand it  or  just 
>remarked "I'm glad I didn't pay full price", or both.

Having both paid full price AND having frozen my *ss off for the privilege,
here's a post which I wrote the last time this came up, but didn't get around 
to posting:


Eric Troup wrote:

> > This really pisses me off, mainly because IMHOIO (Over Inflated), Dune is
> > one of the best films ever.  And seeing as Frank Herbert said that it was
> > the best screenplay he had ever seen for the novel, and he had seen many,
> > and the screenplay surpassed anything he had written.

Original or final screenplay? :-)


> > So go figure.

> Well, I don't know about what Frank Herbert said or didn't say about
> the original screenplay.  I do know, however, that I saw the movie and
> hated it.  It seems (based on the opinons of peole I've talked to)
> that those who read the book before seeing the movie found the movie
> quite good, but those (like me) who had never read the book found the
> movie difficult to understand and basically boring/confusing.
  
Something I've noticed over the years since, is that people who haven't
read the book before (or after) seem to think that those who have done so
liked the movie.  However, I've personally yet to find one Dune fan who liked 
the movie as an adaptation. :-)

The movie pretty much has to stand or fall on its own merits.  It is NOT very 
similar to the book.  All the buzz-words are there, but their meaning 
have been mostly redefined; essential plot elements are also missing.  
As its OWN artistic entity, it might work; as an adaptation, it does not.

Faults?  From memory, since I've tried to avoid seeing it again, since
'84:

1.  The STUPID voice-overs.  I'd like to see an "Un-dubbed" Dune; make
it an artsy flick NOBODY can understand, and it might work. :-)

2.  The lack of any real message or theme.  As one critic put it, it
came across as "a couple of drug lords fighting over their turf.  Who
cares?"

3.  The genetic-memory aspect of the Kwisatz Haderach was all but ignored,
as was the true interest of the Bene Gesserit in Paul (and, indeed, their
function and reason for being).  The bastardization of the very real
human and political purpose of Paul, turning him into a super-Guild 
Navigator, in human form?!  Give me a break.

4.  The introduction of the sonic weapons, as if they were even remotely
significant or credible.  This diluted the real impact of the *religious*
overtones (intentionally?) of Muad'Dib.  I.e. the pitting of
a couple million unexpected, fierce Bedouin types against the fully armed
and feared Sardaukar, on *even terms*: blades and personal combat, all under
the leadership of an Alexander/Mohammed type.  Slide the Islamic expansion
forward 500 years, and pit 'em against the Romans at their military and pol-
itical peak, and you have a good idea where Herbert was coming from (at least, 
that's how *I* see it :-)).  I guess the producers had to have their laser 
beams: a technological solution, rather than a human one.

5.  The book had a rather obvious, Arab-seeming aspect to the Fremen: this 
was largely ignored in the movie, as was the critical need for water conser-
vation (no hoods: had to have Kyle McLaughlan's thoroughly contemporary 
hair-do visible, I guess).  We never saw Paul really turn into a Fremen.

6.  The "greening" of Arrakis at the end was nonsensical and self-indulgent. 
I suspect it was provided to provide an "emotional" payoff for those viewers
who didn't understand the rest of the movie.  "Ah, a definite climax!
Everyone's happy!  I guess it was worth it!  The fans are probably very
happy." :-)


Nice parts?  BEAUTIFUL set and costume design.  Good casting, all around
(except Paul: he was a 15-year-old child in the book, and I think they 
should have cast a 15-year-old, or at least someone who didn't look like he 
was in his late 20's, in the part; for me, that was part of the magic of the
book).  Jose Ferrer was a nice surprise as the Emperor, even though, in the 
screenplay, his role was somewhat insipid.

I'm disappointed--but not really suprised--that the translation to the big
screen failed so badly.  As for Herbert's comment, I can certainly read 
it as a back-handed compliment. :-)

How could it have been done better?  Well, a coherent story would have been a 
start. :-) If you want to see a good Dune, go see "Lawrence of Arabia,"
undoubtedly one of the many sources Herbert plundered.  Even the
Tatooine scenes of "Star Wars" have a nicer "desert" ambience to them. :-)

IMHO, even given the difficulty of adapting Dune to the big screen, and 
allowing for producer/director idiosyncrasies, I think Lynch did a sub-
standard job at it.  It's two-star fare on its own merits, one star as an
adaptation.


I wonder what Francis Ford Coppola would have done with it, with, say,
$200 million. :-)




---
Robert Dorsett
rdd@cactus.org
...cs.utexas.edu!cactus.org!rdd
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies