Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Dune Movie Confirmed

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the mouse-shadow dept.

Sci-Fi 482

bowman9991 writes "Peter Berg will be directing a new big-budget Dune movie from Paramount. SFFMedia reports that 'although there were some doubts that they were going to get it,' the producers have secured the rights to the Dune novel from Frank Herbert's estate and are looking for writers to provide a screenplay that is true to the original text. Can't wait!"

cancel ×

482 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

multiple sequels usually don't work too well (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22962808)

they've already ruined the dune series- lets hope the trend reverses like Batman Begins did for Batman.

NEVAR 4GET JEWS ARE THE ENEMY! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22962942)

JEWS CAUSE ALL THE WARS AND SEQUELS.

Jews are greedy and steal land and water, but at least the mostly steal from Mudslums.

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well (1)

ichthyoboy (1167379) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963058)

This isn't even a sequel...it's a remake of the first novel of the series. Have there even been movies made from any of the other Dune novels?

Re:multiple sequels usually don't work too well (5, Informative)

vecctor (935163) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963130)

They made Children of Dune [wikipedia.org] in a tv mini-series sequel to Dune [wikipedia.org] on the sci-fi channel.

Not technically a movie, but only because of length and presentation format. It had the production values easily - so it was pretty much a 4-5 hour long movie (and was sold on DVD that way).

Why not do another book in the series (4, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962822)

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22962856)

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.

The first Dune movie sucked. Maybe you never read the books, but it didn't capture much of anything good from the book. The made for TV mini series was amazing. That's how to do Dune.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (5, Insightful)

JesusPGT (624264) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962954)

It may not have been incredibly faithful in terms of storyline, but its visual style is just on a completely higher level of awesomeness compared to the sci-fi miniseries. If they can make the story more like the book, but try to keep at least some of the design elements of the Lynch version, I will be happy.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (5, Insightful)

halivar (535827) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963010)

The first Dune movie is some of the finest cinema ever made, IMHO. It may miss the book at many significant points, but it does capture the tone and atmosphere of it. The costumes, set design, and dialog were all very true to the book. I also loved the Toto soundtrack. My only real beef is the removal of lasguns and the addition of "wierding modules." This is not enough to make me hate the movie, however.

I don't need another remake of the first book, anyway. I'd much rather they made a movie on the second or third books.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (2, Informative)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963080)

I'd much rather they made a movie on the second or third books.
Actually the "Children of Dune" mini-series is of the second and third books combined. Personally, I'd rather have a proper version of books 4 through 6 :).

Re:Why not do another book in the series (1)

eean (177028) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963270)

Don't forget about book 7 and 8 written by his son from notes. They were OK books, and would certainly make for epic movies.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (5, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963210)

My only real beef is the removal of lasguns and the addition of "wierding modules." This is not enough to make me hate the movie, however.

I would agree with you in that I much prefer Lynch's version. However, the addition of the weirding modules (and the complete avoidance of the lasgun/shield interaction problem) almost ceompletely undermined Herbert's intended mockery of religion...

In the book, Paul (and Jessica) basically exploit the natives' superstitions to use them as pawns in a mostly-political game (although in fairness they do eventually "go native"). Lynch makes it out as more of a tune-in-turn-on-drop-out messianic fairy-tale.

Both have their merits, but I'd hardly even call them the same story.

Lynch mob (1)

Dr. Cody (554864) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963078)

The first "Dune" movie was camp for nerds. I read the book, and, as much as I liked it, I can't get worked up about David Lynch's ( and Frank Herbert's) less-than-faithful adaptation. It was just too great. Sting in a knife fight? A flying, boil-covered fat man as the antagonist?

That movie had everything but the Log Lady.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (4, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963160)

The book is near-impossible to transfer accurately to film; there is waaaay too much internal dialogue and extremely dry politic-ing.

Any movie that is actually going to be worth watching is going to have to hack out big chunks of that stuff.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963372)

The "recently" released extended version has some of the internal dialogue. It extends the story but is very boring to watch indeed, no wonder it was cut from the theatrical release.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (2, Funny)

skuzzlebutt (177224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963380)

It had its moments, but I'm just curious to see if Slimer from Ghostbusters is asked to come back and reprise his role as a Guild Navigator.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (4, Insightful)

Ctrl-Z (28806) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962864)

I suspect that if the film does well enough at the box office that the studio would be interested in creating sequels. They need to create interest from somewhere, and Dune is a great place to (re)start.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (2, Interesting)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963178)

Having actually read the entire series, I can't imagine that any movie studio would be interested in making the whole thing...As you get farther and farther in, things get more and more abstruse.

I can imagine some of the later books made into movies, but I can't imagine actually wanting to watch them.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963332)

WIsh that Peter Jackson would do something other than the Hobbit. Can't he stretch his muscles with something like SNow Crash to be this generation's Kubrick?

I say, if it's been mocked by Jay and Silent Bob, that's the end of it; move along to other things.

Dune is been there, done that, bring us other worlds. There's much from sci-fi lit to choose from.

You know what you guys are doing? You're forcing me to read some more.

Did they show Dunshine here? or Cypher?

Re:Why not do another book in the series (2, Interesting)

stevew (4845) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962874)

I tend to agree - the first Dune movie was horrible. The mini-series was GREAT - very much like the book. You understood a pretty complex story line (unlike the first movie which felt like it was on fast forward IF you had read the book.)

There are so many other good yarns in this story - why go to the first one a third time?

Re:Why not do another book in the series (1)

totallyarb (889799) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962924)

Fair point, but nobody's going to turn up to a film with Kyle MacLachlan in the lead, surely?

If they wanted to continue the series, it would have meant doing a made-for-TV God Emperor. Actually, I'm suprised they didn't, since accordind to TFA it's the same producer as the Sci-Fi miniseries.

Given the choice between a small-screen God Emperor and a big-screen Dune, I know what I prefer...

Re:Why not do another book in the series (1)

residieu (577863) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963016)

The Sci-Fi network got through Children of Dune, after that the books get less interesting. (Though I'd like to see how they'd make Leto the worm look, I don't see how you could make a movie out of God Emporer)

Re:Why not do another book in the series (3, Informative)

cerelib (903469) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963110)

The current Dune is a great film anyway.
You didn't read the book, did you? Many people liked the Dune movie because it had great visuals, but they look past the fact that there are huge gaps in the story. If you read the book, it at least make sense to you, but if you didn't than the story really doesn't work. For example, in the movie, in no time at all and for no apparent reason Chani falls in love with Paul. There is no explanation, it just needed to happen, so it did. Dune is one of those books that completely transcends the format of a 2-4 hour movie. A mini-series can work, but you can't quite portray the many "feint within a feint" aspects of Dune in such a short time.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (2, Interesting)

dslauson (914147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963166)

Why redo the first book in the series when there are many more in the service. The current Dune is a great film anyway.
The first movie was pretty cool if viewed as a David Lynch movie (with a hilariously dated Toto soundtrack). I own it on DVD and still bust it out from time to time. My wife hates it because she doesn't know the story, finds it boring and difficult to follow, and hates all the corny internal monologue. All valid criticism, but I still love it in that same weird way I love the rest of Lynch's catalogue.

Still, as a whole, it's totally clear to me that there's room for another movie. One that's more cohesive and sticks to the original source better than the Lynch version, and with a bigger budget, and better acting and effects than the miniseries. If done well, a Dune movie could be epic.

As someone who was NOT a fan.. (1)

Gewalt (1200451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963282)

As someone who was NOT a fan, having simply never read the book, or watched the first movie, I have a rather clean impression of the Sci-Fi version. Here's my quick and dirty review of something that I saw several years ago, and only once.

My first impression was "wow! this acting is terrible, it totally destroys the suspension of disbelief."

Then I got over that and suspension of disbelief was restored by the excellent job that was done with props and scenery.

Then I got to the end of the movie, and thought "well, there was certainly a very good story there, too bad they did such a terrible job telling it."

I bet you can guess why I never watched it again.

Re:Why not do another book in the series (1)

Plugh (27537) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963390)

I wish someone would pick up on Herbert's other work. The Dosadi Experiment [wikipedia.org] , for example, is IMO a much better story than anything in the Dune saga.

Hope it's not like the mini series (1, Interesting)

boris111 (837756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962824)

I only made it halfway through it. I couldn't believe how pretentious it was. David Lynch's version was good, but I'd like to see a modern adaptation closer to the book.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series (2, Insightful)

kyofunikushimi (769712) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962854)

Well, luckily this one stands a decent chance of sticking with the book's plot. HOWEVER, having purchased the rights certainly doesn't guarantee this will ever see the light of day. I'll hold my enthusiasm until they tell me they've got a working script.

Re:Hope it's not like the mini series (5, Funny)

Trent Hawkins (1093109) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963240)

I only made it halfway through it. I couldn't believe how pretentious it was. David Lynch's version was good, but I'd like to see a modern adaptation closer to the book.
You mean a Dune movie staring Will Smith?

How many times are we going to do it? (4, Insightful)

vecctor (935163) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962832)

I mean, I like Dune, but how many remakes is enough?

Ok ok, the first one [wikipedia.org] was a bit off (but it had Patrick Stewart and Sting!).

But the Sci-fi Channel version [wikipedia.org] was pretty good.

I just wonder what is to be gained by doing it again.

Re:How many times are we going to do it? (1)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962886)

Well hopefully third time is the charm and the grass fuckers in Hollywood will finally get it right. Not holding my breath.

Re:How many times are we going to do it? (1)

lancelotlink (958750) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962980)

The first one may have been a little off, but the actors actually ACTED. The SciFi channel one, from what I remember, the actors just had that glossy eye style that many actors do these days. Not a great trade off. I like the "True to the original" take as many people do, but if the acting is supurb, and they're telling a good story, then I'm happy.

Reading the book can ruin the movie ... (4, Insightful)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963318)

... but if the acting is supurb, and they're telling a good story, then I'm happy.

Maybe, if you have not read the book. The 1980s theatrical movie had good acting and a good story but plot elements really knocked the movie down a notch, for example for many who read the book the sound based weapons were a strong negative. The Fremen won fights because their environment and culture made them tough, it was not a technological gimmick. The movie discarded a major element of the book, people adapting to and being influenced (culturally and physically) by their environment.

Re:How many times are we going to do it? (4, Funny)

WarPresident (754535) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963044)

I mean, I like Dune, but how many remakes is enough?

I don't know, but I hope they find a group of musicians on par with Toto!

Re:How many times are we going to do it? (1)

jagermeister101 (766257) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963280)

The best (or may just the coolest/weirdest) version of Dune will never see the light of day. It was supposed to be directed by cult hero Alejandro Jodorowsky with contributions with equally amazing underground and cult artists like illustrator Jean "Moebius" Giraud. I read somewhere that he even had Salvador Dali on board.

The project went way over budget and the few script and storyboard advances took ages to complete. Here is some info [duneinfo.com]

Re:How many times are we going to do it? (1)

eean (177028) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963308)

Really the mini-series is the only way to really adapt a book like Dune and have any chance to do it justice.

I'm currently half-way through the Dune miniseries, it's looking good indeed. ^.^

So yea I agree, at the same time I won't turn down more Dune.

Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22962852)

Dune is incredibly relevant to our times because it shows how an oppressive power structure exploits a people's resources and make enemies of the natives on Arakkis, it is completely analogous to how we handle oil today. Even more so Dune provides insight into what makes an extremist and their motivations.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture (2, Insightful)

boris111 (837756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962992)

I see how you correlate the examples you provide for the power struggle for resources, but I don't see how they're specific to Islamic culture. Provide examples that are specific to Islamic culture.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963102)

Freemen = Arabs. Simple as that.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963226)

If you read the novels they all follow strains of Islam from Sufi to Sunni. Eventually sand worms become the ``prophet''.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture (1)

BodhiCat (925309) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963194)

"Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture"

Duh.

Re:Dune is rooted in Islamic Culture (1)

esocid (946821) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963412)

Then how would you explain the concept of the Kwizatz Haderach which unites the masculine and feminine, explicitly with the water of life which is a profoundly feminine symbol in literature. I don't see Islam as having such an instance as that.
It does have religion rooted into it and religion's subjugation of the Freman, but I wouldn't say that is Islam, more Christianity. The correlation of spice and oil today may seem good, but oil is not a hallucinogen that also allows a greater perception and awareness. Dumbing it down to oil and Iraq does no justice to Frank Herbert.

Go Read A book (1, Flamebait)

spribyl (175893) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962876)

I am so sick of seeing bad movies being made from good books hell from bad movies from bad books.
Just go read a book any boot will do.

Re:Go Read A book (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22962990)

any boot will do
Usually a fitting size matters :)

Re:Go Read A book (3, Insightful)

Teflon_Jeff (1221290) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963114)

But then we'd ruin Hollywood's tradition of messing up good book-to-movie transitions!

Seriously, you would think they learned from peter Jackson that the closer to the book you hold, the more popular it is.

Besides, there's enough nerds out there, that if you get it close enough, they'll be chanting "The DVD is life!"

The problem is not the director (5, Insightful)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962880)

I happen to think David Lynch is a genius. Some will not agree. That's fine. However, I think hopefully we can safely agree that Lynch does know how to direct (he's been nominated for several Academy Awards). The problem with the original Dune in my opinion is that the story is vast. It was just impossible to do justice to the story in a 2.5 hour movie. I don't personally consider the differences between the film and novel to be significant and for those who do, well, just wait until you see this film. If you think that in 2.5 to 3 hours that Peter Berg will somehow be able to produce a more faithful version of Dune , well, that's a rather interesting thought that surely will be proven false. Lynch had to leave out large sections of the first book to save time and Berg will operate under the same conditions. That's why the SciFi Channel filmed Dune as a multipart story.

Re:The problem is not the director (1)

zehaeva (1136559) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962970)

I agree, the time constraints are just too much for something like dune. I personally loved the David Lynch version of it, it may not have been the more perfect adaptation and it does leave out a lot, but the feel of the movie and the acting is, at least to me, far superior to that of the mini series. there was, to me, something just a bit off in the mini series. I was happy that they were able to take their time with the story but it just felt off. The book is far superior to either version. hopefully this next telling will be the best version yet.

That was my problem with it, basically (4, Insightful)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963328)

Well, that was my problem with David Lynch's movie, basically. It's like an abbreviated summary of the book. Actually, probably a better way to explain it, would be Woody Allen quote: "Woody Allen I took a speed-reading course and read War and Peace in twenty minutes. It involves Russia." That's just about it.

If you had already read the book, I guess it wasn't a bad movie. It had just enough visual clues to let your memory do the rest. So you can look an go, "ooh, I know, this is the Gom Jabbar sequence", and you'd already know what led there, where it goes from there, and why is that important. While the movie would move to the next scene and give you yet another piece, and again, it would be mostly up to your memory to fill in the gap and put the new scene in context too.

I, however, must have been one of the few who saw the movie before reading the book. In fact, I got the book only because the movie didn't make that much sense at times, and certainly didn't leave me with the awe for Dune that everyone else semed to have. (I know, I know, I'll hand in my nerd card now;) It wasn't a _bad_ movie per se, but in retrospect it just wasn't Dune. It was a mildly SF-themed action movie, where some guys fought for some desert planet, for some resource those guys had. And not only it was just as superficial as any other action movie (it could have been "Rambo Does Iraq" just as well), but the plot seemed a little bit condensed and rushed through even by action movie standards. Everything that made it... well, made it _Dune_, was at best hinted at, and sometimes it came via short scenes that didn't seem to make that much sense or have much relevance for the rest of the movie.

Again, in retrospect I can see how you'd figure it out if you had read the book already, and only used the movie as a visual summary. Without that background, I wasn't impressed much.

Can someone else do better? Heck if I know, to be honest. One can only hope. It's certainly impossible to do justice to the whole Dune story, you're right in that aspect. But maybe he can make a movie that at least makes sense on its own.

Re:The problem is not the director (1)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963342)

The David Lynch version wasn't just bad because it was compressed, it was simply a bad movie. The SciFi channel's version was actually pretty good.

Re:The problem is not the director (1)

omega_dk (1090143) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963354)

I dunno, Peter Berg did a decent job with Friday Night Lights... and then did it again with the TV show as a producer.

While it may not be a perfect movie, he captured the 'feeling' behind the book. If he can do for Dune what he did for Friday Night Lights, I would call that a good translation.

Then again, to me the main point of books like Dune isn't exactly what happens, but the message behind what happens. I would be more okay with them changing the plot than changing the message (not to say that I want him to change anything, but just if I had to choose one).

Obligatory (3, Insightful)

Bootle (816136) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962888)

The spice is life!

Re:Obligatory (1)

Missing_dc (1074809) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963036)

But it is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

It is by the juice of saffu that thoughts acquire speed,
that lips acquire stains, that stains become a warning.

It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

Re:Obligatory (1)

Bootle (816136) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963420)

that lips acquire stains
Whoa buddy, keep your lips to yourself!

Re:Obligatory (1)

daVinci1980 (73174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963186)

Did you actually read Dune? What on earth are you talking about?

Did you mean 'He who controls the spice controls the universe?'

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963392)

Baron Harkonnen says that in the movie, is it in the book?

Re:Obligatory (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963402)

The cake is a lie!

Lets hope they.... (1)

goobermaster (1263770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962896)

Don't screw around too much with artistic license. I still shudder when I watch Lynch's version and see Harkonnen as a screaming-crazy diseased pus bag instead of a sociopathic-sadist-scheming bastard.

Re:Lets hope they.... (1)

Punko (784684) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962996)

Except in the book he was diseased and overweight.

Joomla favicon (-1, Offtopic)

LotsOfPhil (982823) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962908)

I think the Joomla favicon is kind of tacky. Anyone else have an opinion?

Oooh, oooh! (4, Funny)

realmolo (574068) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962910)

A new sci-fi movie? Have they checked the availability of the "Official Sci-Fi/Fantasy Actors of the 21st Century": Patrick Stewart Milla Jovovich Wesley Snipes Toby Macguire Christian Bale Liam Neeson Natalie Portman Hugo Weaving Samuel L. Jackson Hugh Jackman and, of course, Ray Park I mean, you can't make a sci-fi movie without *at least* 2 people from that list!

Re:Oooh, oooh! (2, Interesting)

totallyarb (889799) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962968)

If they cast Tobey Macguire as Paul, we may all have to kill ourselves. :)

On a more serious note, I do hope they remember to cast a serious actor as Duncan Idaho... you've got to plan for sequels.

Re:Oooh, oooh! (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963206)

On a more serious note, I do hope they remember to cast a serious actor as Duncan Idaho... you've got to plan for sequels.
Not really. IIRC, the Duncan that appears in the first movie is pretty old. He doesn't become "young recurring Duncan" until the sequel comes around ;).

Re:Oooh, oooh! (1)

nicolastheadept (930317) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963208)

Duncan does get the most mileage out of the series

At last (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963148)

It has been too long reading Slashdot without a Natalie Portman mention!!!

Yes but... (2, Funny)

EricR86 (1144023) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962912)

Will it have Sting?

Please be LotR (1)

xzvf (924443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962932)

The only decent recent translation of an adult SciFi/Fantasy novel has been the LotR trilogy. A decent job was done with pre-adult Potter series. Considering how studios have butchered other children books recently (Golden Compass, Earagon, Spiterwick, etc) it will take a strong hand to keep it on the correct path. Maybe they should try to tell an "original" story written to be visually presented in 90 minutes.

Re:Please be LotR (1)

Robber Baron (112304) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962984)

You forgot The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe...
Excellent depiction IMO...Tilda Swinton was brilliant as the White Witch.

Re:Please be LotR (1)

daVinci1980 (73174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963062)

Are you serious? I thought TLTWaTW was a terrible, terrible adaptation. And that book was short, there was no excuse.

Now, the first and second Harry Potters were shockingly faithful to the books (although they've diverged as they get further and further along).

Re:Please be LotR (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963264)

Excellent depiction IMO...Tilda Swinton was brilliant as the White Witch.
My friends think it's weird that I find her sexy, but I do :). You can definitely tell that Edmund is pre-puberty though - when she first meets him and gives him the "you can have ANYTHING you want" line I almost expect the "bow chicka bow wow" porno music to cue - then he asks for candy.

Re:Please be LotR (1)

MacColossus (932054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963346)

You should remember The Lion, Which, Wardrobe was written by Christian theologian CS Lewis. Probably not going to see that in the movie unless the apocalypse is at hand. Of course, it very well could be one of the four horsemen. :-)

Re:Please be LotR (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963048)

I was just about to say that Dune doesn't make for good movies because there's just too much back story and narration to have a decent screenplay adaptation. Then you had to go and remind me ove LoTR, a fantasy novel with possibly more background and narration that was made into an awesome movie that even fans of the books enjoy.

I honestly don't know how they did it. I guess part of it was not trying to explain the background in depth; the fans of the book already know it and the rest don't care. Another way was to represent as much information visually as possible (the settings in LoTR were fantasticly matched to the book, atleast in spirit if not some details). Still, I don't see them spending tens of millions for a new Dune movie; which is what it would take to make it really work.

Re:Please be LotR (4, Insightful)

cerelib (903469) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963310)

I honestly don't know how they did it.
There is an important difference between how Dune was written and how LotR was written. Frank Herbert was spinning a complex plot that required quite a bit of internal dialogue, narration, and back story to let the reader understand the characters and their motivations. LotR on the other hand is a much more straight forward black and white, good vs evil story. Much of the back story parts are almost completely superflous to the story and instead are used to immerse the reader into the world. These things include historical descriptions of places and societies and of course songs/poems. Much of this can be skipped while reading LotR, but makes for a less enjoyable read. The advantage Peter Jackson had is that, with enough good cinematography and special effects, the format of a movie is good enough to provide the immersive experience to the audience. LotR is what is good because of Tolkien's style, and Dune is good because of Herbert's style, but they are quite different especially in regards to their ability to be translated to a feature film.

the film by Lynch is awesome (1)

Chutulu (982382) | more than 6 years ago | (#22962976)

I do think that the film by Lynch is awesome. One of his better movies. But i would love to see a remake by Peter Jackson for example.

It is by fanboys alone... (4, Funny)

nweaver (113078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963002)

It is by fanboys alone that drool is set in motion.

It is by the news of cool that mobs begin to form, the slash begins to dot, the hype begins to build.

It is by fanboys alone that drool is set in motion.

Re:It is by fanboys alone... (1)

MacColossus (932054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963108)

Hilariously awesome. A Slashdot readers new mantra. Now if I could get the grocery clerk to tell me which aisle the juice of saphu is in.

Re:It is by fanboys alone... (4, Funny)

Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963320)

Now if I could get the grocery clerk to tell me which aisle the juice of saphu is in.

Look up a bit. There are signs over the aisles. Look for the one that says: COFFEE

Favorite Dune quotes. (2, Insightful)

MacColossus (932054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963034)

The sleeper has awakened. Long live the fighters. "Oh-h-h, the Galacian girls Will do it for pearls, And the Arrakeen for water! But if you desire dames Like consuming flames, Try a Caladanin daughter!" I also enjoy the Dune references in Fat Boy Slim's "Weapon of Choice"

Re:Favorite Dune quotes. (1)

residieu (577863) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963120)

I liked "My name is a Killing Word", even though it had no basis in the book.

Dune isn't even sci-fi (0, Troll)

kindbud (90044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963046)

It's swords and sorcery fantasy with a slight patina of technology. You have magic psychics, aircraft that flap their wings, space folding (just say teleport, asshole), and weapons that magnify a shout. This is magic, not sci-fi.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi (1)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963138)

what do you think most sci-fi is? Is it hard sci-fi well depends on the books (the later ones delve really hard into genetic research and transfer of consciousness) but it IS sci-fi.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963172)

Who kicked you in the nuts as you got out of the wrong side of bed this morning?

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi (1)

MacColossus (932054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963218)

I would characterize sonic weapons written about in 1965 as science fiction. Folding space isn't the same as teleportation. Teleportation in science fiction usually refers to turning matter into energy or disassembling the matter for transmission and the reassembling on the other end. Folding space is more like traveling through a worm hole although that is a crappy analogy as well. Think of space as a two dimensional plane like a piece of paper. Take the piece of paper and put a dot on the far left of that piece of paper. Say you want that dot to get to the far right of the piece of paper without moving. You fold the piece of paper in half and the dot is now touching the far right piece of paper.

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi (1)

MillenneumMan (932804) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963262)

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Arthur C. Clarke,

Re:Dune isn't even sci-fi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963312)

Being classified as 'sci-fi' does emphatically _not_ require the work to be about technology.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
-- Arthur C. Clarke

Sufficiently advanced technology (1)

uberjoe (726765) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963376)

Shame on you! Has the great Clarke taught us nothing? It's not magic, just indistinguishable from it.

Remember Dune takes place 10,000 years after the Butlerian Jihad, which is 10,000 to 20,000 thousand years from the present day. (in the dune chronology, I know its not real ok). Could you explain the computer you are typing on to a Neanderthal?

You Know ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22963076)

I posted a story about this two or three weeks ago [slashdot.org] and now it's news. Why do I even bother posting stories to this site?

bzudo (1)

bzudo (1151979) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963086)

the only way to do Dune justice is to make it a trilogy. there is no way to cram all of the story into one 3 hour film.

Re:bzudo (1)

esocid (946821) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963244)

Rightly said. I really like the first rendition of Dune, although it did leave a good amount out from the books, but the movie would have had to be 6 hours long to capture all of that. They could have gone with a three movie series or something but this is all hindsight. The new one will be so full of CG it will look ridiculous. I'm still a fan of using something physical over CG, both can look fake in their own rights, but the original did a decent job of portraying everything. Someone else already mentioned this but the Toto soundtrack was awesome, so we'll see what crappy music the new one will be set to. "My name is a killing word" - by Kanye West, remixed by Paris Hilton. If David Lynch does a good job of it, I'll gladly eat my words, but IMO the odds are against it.

Dupe (0, Offtopic)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963090)

Great. Another remake. Too many more of these and Hollywood is going to have as many dupes as Slashdot,... Whatever happened to originality, people?

Re:Dupe (1)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963152)

Whatever happened to originality, people?

The reality TV craze led by Simon "I buy number one singles on Oprah Winfrey" Cowell and Andrew "Sell out" Lloyd-Webber killed it off.

They had to wait until the US was losing in Iraq (-1, Flamebait)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963104)

Dune's notion of desert warfare looked silly after Desert Storm. But now that the ragheads are winning, a sequel might sell. The Iraqui insurgents have figured out a doctrine that works against armor. That's new.

Nope (3, Interesting)

Etrias (1121031) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963122)

Sorry, it can't be done. It shouldn't be done. The first book of Dune can hardly be encapsulated by one movie, and I'm not even sure it can be done in three.

What makes Dune great is it's breadth of subject matter enveloping politics, revenge, society (both tribal and "civilized"), power, religion, hierarchical hegemony and other big words. Plus, it is driven by an inner monologue from all of the main characters. How the hell do you portray inner monologue on the big screen, or any screen for that matter?

Nope, it promises to be another suckfest, a pissing on Frank Herbert's grave. And if the writer Kevin J. Anderson is involved in any way, it will be more bag-loads of awful than you can stuff into a stadium.

one book should be many movies (2, Interesting)

RichMan (8097) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963126)

I wish the studios had the courage to break single books into 2 or more movies. And definitely not try and cram 2-3 books into one movie.

It would give the movies more chance to cover the details of the book. Sort of like StarWars 4,5,6. Where the different movies can end on up or down notes in the overall story.

Re:one book should be many movies (1)

nicolastheadept (930317) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963284)

Sort of like StarWars 4,5,6. Where the different movies can end on up or down notes in the overall story.
Episode 3 is a better example of ending on a down note.

Seriously, stop remaking old ideas... (2, Insightful)

daVinci1980 (73174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963164)

It seems like all Hollywood does these days is re-cover movies they've already made (which were generally adaptations of books in the first place).

Seriously, there's only one of two reasons why these are successful:
1) Nostalgia.
2) The idea was good the first time around.

We're rarely improving on the ideas at all. It's just mindless drivel rereleased again and again.

NBC's fall line up consists of a Jekyll and Hyde remake, followed by Knight Rider, followed by... A movie studio (not sure who) is making another "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure", and yet another is making a sequel to Wargames [imdb.com] .

Seriously Hollywood: stop. Just stop it. You're embarrassing yourself.

There are plenty of other books that you could make into movie that would translate well. For example, the Feist series of books, starting with Magician: Apprentice would translate pretty well to the screen.

Re:Seriously, stop remaking old ideas... (1)

pshumate (1004477) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963374)

I don't see why the movie companies can't consolidate a few of their "ideas". Go ahead and make "Bill and Ted's Righteous Kwisatz Haderach Training" and "KITT and KARR: Two Minds, One Mustang". Save me the trouble of having to miss four crappy movies/shows.

Epic Anime (5, Interesting)

russlar (1122455) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963268)

I've thought for a long time that the only way to properly present Dune on the big screen, and be 100% true to the details of the book, was to make it into an epic Anime.

Why another version (there is 2 all ready) (1)

blanks (108019) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963278)

I don't know why they want to re-do the first book in the dune series. We have the one lynch came up with, and Peter Berg has all ready done the first dune book for the sci-fi channel.

Why would Peter Berg want to direct the same book twice? Seems silly to me.

O and to any hardcore dune fans; if you havn't read sandworms of dune yet do not read it. It will make you angry and comes off like they want to come up with the worst way possible to end the series.

Not every book needs to be a movie, too (1)

acvh (120205) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963326)

Dune, and its descendants, are novels that rely a great deal on narration and inner dialogue to tell their stories. They work great as novels. Not so much as movies.

and for whoever is saying that the TV version was worth watching - shame on you.

maybe Hollywood should look to other genres of art to rape for movies: paintings perhaps, or sculpture. "Waterlilies, the Movie" has potential....

Don't judge any movie by the GREAT trilogy (1)

assertation (1255714) | more than 6 years ago | (#22963358)

I finally got around to reading the Dune trilogy a few years ago. Think of all the books that get mentioned as the crown jewels of sci-fi novels. They are all pure crap fiction compared to the Dune Trilogy.

No movie will ever come close to doing right by those books.

However, taken as separate works I thought the Dune movie in the 80s with Sting and the sci-fi channel's mini series were pretty good.

If you haven't, read the Dune trilogy soon. Don't bother with the Dune books that came after that except for the 4th in the series.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>