Dune (2020): The Remakes Must Flow

[Caledonian]

I'm so often disappointed by mass media products, and especially by remakes. Still, I'm actually excited about this version of Dune. Primarily because it's only covering the first half of the novel.

There are many reasons why Dune is quasi-impossible to capture on film, and one of the biggest reasons is that the protagonist is supposed to go through puberty and mature from a boy to a man in-between the two sections of the novel, which are some years apart. You can't really accomplish that with two different actors, and trying to create the illusion with a single actor is frequently ridiculous. But having two films (assuming this one is successful) might make it possible.

Sandworms! Melange! Levitating pedophile villains! Zendaya! I'm very hopeful about this.

[Darth Credence]

I'm looking forward to it as well - there was some noteworthy things in the first movie, like Sting, but it can be so much better.
I don't think it's impossible any more to make an adult seem like a kid, though. What they did with Chris Evans in Captain America by making him into a short scrawny guy was pretty believable to me, so I could see something similar being done to make a 20 year old look 10.

[Eldan]

Villeneuve has done two of the best Sci Fi films of all time already, one epic and one a lot smaller in scale and both vîsually overwhelming, so I'm definitely down on the "hype" side.

[Dire_Flumph]

Cautiously optimistic to see what Villeneuve can do with the book, though the rush to turn Dune into a Star Wars level franchise from the start has me worried.

[Caledonian]

I do see your point. I think the difference between this and, say, the Hobbit trilogy, was that The Hobbit was never written in three sections and had to be artificially split. Dune actually comes in two 'books' from the beginning; most adaptations have tried to squeeze the two together.

[Narkis]

Villeneuve is perhaps the only director currently active in Hollywood I would trust for this without reservations. It's been a while since I've been this hyped about a movie.

[Mechalich]

I do see your point. I think the difference between this and, say, the Hobbit trilogy, was that The Hobbit was never written in three sections and had to be artificially split. Dune actually comes in two 'books' from the beginning; most adaptations have tried to squeeze the two together.

Dune is also, quite literally, twice as long as the Hobbit. The Hobbit has a word count of 95,356 words, while Dune is 188,000 words, putting it within a couple of pages of exactly twice the length. For additional perspective, Dune is approximately 11,000 words longer than Fellowship of the Ring (the longest of the LotR trilogy by a substantial margin) and that novel made for a particularly lengthy film even with the complete excision of the very lengthy Tom Bombadil section.

As a hypothetical rule of thumb you can convert prose to film at a rate of around 40,000- 50,000 words per hour, which lands most 100,000 word novels in the 2 - 2.5 hour range. Dune, however, would end up pushing 4 hours, which you just can't do, so two films is a must.

[Caledonian]

I'd just like to note that someone made a fan trailer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZXB4aAIJcw - posted it to YouTube, and didn't mention that it was a fan-made trailer and not official.

Received 38,000 negative votes.

[Azuresun]

Considering how....David Lynch the David Lynch Dune was, can you really call this a remake? I mean, Lynch's Dune is an interesting and endlessly quotable movie, don't get me wrong, but not the best adaptation.

[Tyrant]

Considering how....David Lynch the David Lynch Dune was, can you really call this a remake? I mean, Lynch's Dune is an interesting and endlessly quotable movie, don't get me wrong, but not the best adaptation.

I wouldn't consider it a remake. It's a new adaptation of the source material. (I assume) similar to the two Total Recall movies. The Colin Farrell version (again, I assume, as I didn't watch it) isn't a remake of the Arnold version. This will just be another attempt to adapt the material. Not sure if there is an easy term for that though. New adaptation maybe? Although I wonder how many people know there is a book* and that this isn't a remake of the 80s movie (or SciFi Channel series).

As far as the movie, I have high hopes (moderate expectations though) for the movie. I liked the Blade Runner sequel so I'm willing to allow myself to get hopeful for this director's attempt.

*I know it's a fairly well known book, in general. I mean among the average movie going populace and younger people who may not know of the book.

[Rodin]

Dune is also, quite literally, twice as long as the Hobbit. The Hobbit has a word count of 95,356 words, while Dune is 188,000 words, putting it within a couple of pages of exactly twice the length. For additional perspective, Dune is approximately 11,000 words longer than Fellowship of the Ring (the longest of the LotR trilogy by a substantial margin) and that novel made for a particularly lengthy film even with the complete excision of the very lengthy Tom Bombadil section.

As a hypothetical rule of thumb you can convert prose to film at a rate of around 40,000- 50,000 words per hour, which lands most 100,000 word novels in the 2 - 2.5 hour range. Dune, however, would end up pushing 4 hours, which you just can't do, so two films is a must.

By today's standards you're probably right. However, there are plenty of classic epics that are in that range. Gone With The Wind is 4 hours. Once Upon A Time in America is 3 hours 50 minutes, and that's after they made Leone shorten it. Ben Hur is 3 hours 44 minutes. LOTR: Return of the King is 3 hours 48 mins, and that's the theatrical version. Etc, etc.

I'm not saying it would be wise to do a 4-hour Dune. It's just not outside the realm of possibility.

[JoshL]

I am looking forward to this. I am a fan of both the Lynch and the TV versions, but I think they both got it wrong in different ways. Take another shot, see what you can do.

That said, the TV Children of Dune will be a hard bar to clear, if only for the cleansing of the houses sequence. Easily the most powerful scene in any adaptation so far. Oh, and Lynch Alia >>>>> tv Alia

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Eldan
Villeneuve has done two of the best Sci Fi films of all time already....

Interesting, I hadn't realized he'd done Arrival. That's one of my favorite films in recent years.

Blade Runner, on the other hand, I quit halfway through. So I guess I'm perfectly balanced between interest and non-interest for his Dune project.

[Mechalich]

By today's standards you're probably right. However, there are plenty of classic epics that are in that range. Gone With The Wind is 4 hours. Once Upon A Time in America is 3 hours 50 minutes, and that's after they made Leone shorten it. Ben Hur is 3 hours 44 minutes. LOTR: Return of the King is 3 hours 48 mins, and that's the theatrical version. Etc, etc.

I'm not saying it would be wise to do a 4-hour Dune. It's just not outside the realm of possibility.

Many of those classical films had actual intermissions though, Ben-Hur's, as I recall, occurs about 2/3rds of the way through, and you just get a screen that shows 'intermission' for like 7 minutes straight.

You can definitely do longer films, but there are reasons not too. For one, in the modern (pre-covid) multiplex-based theater model longer films are actually more difficult to monetize in the critical first two weekends because you can't cram as many showings into one day. Peter Jackson's follow-up to LotR, 2005's King Kong, clocked in at 3 hours 21 minutes, and this was noted as a real problem in its ability to generate revenue. Certain demographics, notably young children and the elderly, are also likely to avoid super-long runtimes in the theaters due to the rather prosaic reason of bladder control - if you know you can't make it 4 hours without a bathroom break (and with trailers and a brief early arrival a 3.5 hour movie becomes a 4 hour experience pretty easily) your incentive to see such a film in a theater plummets (I have personally observed many people skip post-credit scenes in Marvel films because they're running for the restroom).

So two films makes sense, it especially makes sense if you can film everything at once and then split the product into two films during post-production, because that helps to minimize costs while maximizing revenue. Anyway, I think the key point is that Dune is definitely long enough that stretching it across two movies isn't going to make it feel draggy. I mean, the 1984 Lynch version was intended to be 3 hours and was brutally cut down to just over two and you can certainly tell.

[Dire_Flumph]

I'm not saying it would be wise to do a 4-hour Dune. It's just not outside the realm of possibility.

My DVD version of the Sci-Fi channel adaption of Dune from 2000 runs at (checks......) .....Five Hours.

Definitely possible. But yeah, you'd have to bypass theaters and go to Netflix or something at that point.

[WinterKnight404]

YES Dune 2020 assuming it does make it out this year with the pandemic running rampant in the USA still. I first watched the Sci-fi channel series (Dune 2000) and was awed by it. I then started reading the novels. God Emperor of Dune is by far my favorite book in the entire series mainly because of the deep conversations between Leto II and Moneo. When Sci-fi came out with the sequel Children of Dune I was SO hopeful they would move on to God Emperor but I guess it just wasn't meant to be.

I really, REALLY, want this Villeneuve version to be awesome enough that it launches a whole series of films to finally see a live God Emperor adaptation. My only concern is the casting of Jason Momoa for the role of Duncan Idaho. For those of you who know the novel series, Duncan Idaho becomes a re-occuring character throughout the entire saga of Dune (at least Frank Herbert's version). I'm not sure that the beefy tattooed wonder that is the former Khal Drogo is really the guy for that role who was always described as the clean-cut incredibly handsome, perfect soldier, Captain America type. The 1980's movie was just terrible to me for many reasons.

[DavidSh]

As a hypothetical rule of thumb you can convert prose to film at a rate of around 40,000- 50,000 words per hour, which lands most 100,000 word novels in the 2 - 2.5 hour range. Dune, however, would end up pushing 4 hours, which you just can't do, so two films is a must.

The film Lawrence of Arabia, to which any production of Dune will inevitably be compared, came out at 3 hours 48 minutes and was a hit. Of course, those were different times.

[Clertar]

I was living in Quebec when Villeneuve released Polythechnique. I left the cinema very impressed, not to say floored, with the film. The way he treated such delicate source material (if we'd call it that) and the quality and sensitivity of the final product still amaze me when I think about it. Some years later, when a good friend was visiting me there, we went to see Incendies, an adaptation of a brilliant theatre play by Lebanese-Quebecois writer Wajdi Mouawad* with, once again, an incedibly sensitive topic to address. We left the cinema quite shaken and very impressed.

I have been an admirer of his cinema ever since, and to me he has repeatedly shown that he has the chops to take his strenghts (sensitivity, guts, and superb craftsmanship) to whatever level or scope the script and the movie demand. Nobody is infallible, of course, but if Villeneuve has been allowed to do things his way Dune should be a very interesting film to watch.


*Do yourself a favour and, besides watching this film, read his novel Anima.

[tomandtish]

By today's standards you're probably right. However, there are plenty of classic epics that are in that range. Gone With The Wind is 4 hours. Once Upon A Time in America is 3 hours 50 minutes, and that's after they made Leone shorten it. Ben Hur is 3 hours 44 minutes. LOTR: Return of the King is 3 hours 48 mins, and that's the theatrical version. Etc, etc.

I'm not saying it would be wise to do a 4-hour Dune. It's just not outside the realm of possibility.

As others have said, long films are more likely to have problems with both number of showings and audiences being able to stay in place.

Incidentally, LotR: Return of the King is 3:21 for theatrical and 4:24 for extended. And even the theatrical started showing the problem of feeling a bit too long.

[Tempist]

Dune was my first ever epic fantasy series. I genuinely hope that the film lives up to the legacy that the novels set.

[russdm]

As someone who liked the various Dune Stuff (I liked all the Frank Hebert and Post-Frank Herbert, plus the games), who has watched the Lynch Movie and the Scifi series...

I am looking forward to it. I think that with the right director and the budget, you can certainly get something to the quality of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings movies. Dune is very easy to adapt really, considering it's story is really basically a guy organizing a bunch of natives to fight an empire (Has the plot point moments of Star Wars in several instances) and he takes over. There is some extra bits, but nothing that really removes the potential story-telling.

Heck, Lynch made a story that got really close to telling it, cut out most of the Baron and Feyd material, and it still worked. Which was too bad because i would have loved to have seen that material with Sting as Feyd. (Sting and that J-strap with wings has to be the most surreal Dune thing ever)

The Scifi Series (Dune and Children of Dune) was a pretty close adaption, and showed that Dune can be filmed. Heck, they crammed two books into Children of Dune (Dune Messiah and Children of Dune), with a decent portrayal. And yeah, it totally gets the Funny Hats Version description

Things awesome about it: Thanos as Gurney Halleck; Stellan Skarsgard as Baron; Batista as Rabban; Poe as Duke Leto;

Things not awesome about it: Khal Drogo as Duncan Idaho, I saw the Conan movie that Jason made and was not impressed much. Arnold make look nothing like Conan or not much, but i think he really more nailed the character better. Jason had the look of Conan more, but i just never felt like he was Conan. Like Arnold's felt that he could have fit in some in some of the adventures/books of Conan.

[dps]

As others have said, long films are more likely to have problems with both number of showings and audiences being able to stay in place.

Incidentally, LotR: Return of the King is 3:21 for theatrical and 4:24 for extended. And even the theatrical started showing the problem of feeling a bit too long.

It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World clocks in at 3:30, and that's after the studio made Stanley Kramer cut it after test screenings. I think his original cut was something like 4:20, which is insane for a comedy--not that 3:30 isn't insane for what is essentially slapstick.

4:20 was also the running time of The Greatest Story Ever Told.

[Tyndmyr]

Two hours and change is pretty much the modern benchmark. If you break the three hour mark, that's a pretty unusual choice these days.

Netflix and streaming might provide at least some latitude here, but at a certain point of additional length, you can just go to a mini series instead of a single movie, and that's probably more convenient.

[dps]

in the modern (pre-covid) multiplex-based theater model longer films are actually more difficult to monetize in the critical first two weekends because you can't cram as many showings into one day.

That's not entirely true, because you can have the same film playing on multiple screens at the same time. I've seen it done for big hit movies--I've been to the theater and the same movie is playing on 8 of the 12 screens.

[Vizzerdrix]

I miss the old dune board game. Wish I still had it.

[Noldo]

That's not entirely true, because you can have the same film playing on multiple screens at the same time. I've seen it done for big hit movies--I've been to the theater and the same movie is playing on 8 of the 12 screens.

But you do the same with shorter film and allocate more slots to it. One hour difference in run time can easily mean one additional showing, per day, per screen. So multiple screens may even emphasize the issue.

[WinterKnight404]

Dune is very easy to adapt really, considering it's story is really basically a guy organizing a bunch of natives to fight an empire (Has the plot point moments of Star Wars in several instances) and he takes over. There is some extra bits, but nothing that really removes the potential story-telling.

I completely disagree with this statement that is a gross oversimplification of the story. I feel that you didn't truly appreciate or understand the power of the original narrative. One of the hardest parts to adapt to film is the "wierding way" which the Lynch movie completely perverted into a "sonic boom" voice weapon that caused explosions. The sci-fi channel series depicted it more accurately as a fighting style where movement speed was increased and virtually gave them the power of teleportation but none of them really explain what it is. Through Dune, Frank Herbert explored political ideologies. He wrote it at the time of the Cold War. Imagine House Atreides as the USA and the House Harkonen as USSR and spice melange as oil and you will be on the right track. I could go on and on about the topics he touches on: Exploitation of religion as a means to control the poplulation. Genetic adaptations and cloning. The dangers of AI and the threat it poses to humanity. Precognition. Evolution and ancestral memories... No single movie or TV series could never dream of covering all of this material.

The reason you feel any similarity to Star Wars is because Lucas borrowed heavily from DUNE and not the other way around. Herbert even threatened to sue over copyright infringement if Lucas didn't change his script. Watch this video for a deeper explanation on that and the multiple other ways Star Wars "borrowed" from Dune

[Azuresun]

I completely disagree with this statement that is a gross oversimplification of the story. I feel that you didn't truly appreciate or understand the power of the original narrative. One of the hardest parts to adapt to film is the "wierding way" which the Lynch movie completely perverted into a "sonic boom" voice weapon that caused explosions. The sci-fi channel series depicted it more accurately as a fighting style where movement speed was increased and virtually gave them the power of teleportation but none of them really explain what it is. Through Dune, Frank Herbert explored political ideologies. He wrote it at the time of the Cold War. Imagine House Atreides as the USA and the House Harkonen as USSR and spice melange as oil and you will be on the right track. I could go on and on about the topics he touches on: Exploitation of religion as a means to control the poplulation. Genetic adaptations and cloning. The dangers of AI and the threat it poses to humanity. Precognition. Evolution and ancestral memories... No single movie or TV series could never dream of covering all of this material.

A big part of the reason that Dune is such a hard adaptation is that on the surface, it's a straightforward "Chosen One seeks revenge and his birthright" story, but is a pretty hard deconstruction of such stories in many ways, from why Paul is the Chosen One, to how he tries to manage that fate and ends up being consumed and made irrelevant by it. So many things in the book are not what they seem if you stop and think for a moment (Leto is not a good ruler, Yueh is not weak, Irulan is not an objective biographer of anybody, especially her father), but so easy to miss in a superficial reading or adaptation.

[Dienekes]

A big part of the reason that Dune is such a hard adaptation is that on the surface, it's a straightforward "Chosen One seeks revenge and his birthright" story, but is a pretty hard deconstruction of such stories in many ways, from why Paul is the Chosen One, to how he tries to manage that fate and ends up being consumed and made irrelevant by it. So many things in the book are not what they seem if you stop and think for a moment (Leto is not a good ruler, Yueh is not weak, Irulan is not an objective biographer of anybody, especially her father), but so easy to miss in a superficial reading or adaptation.

Missed my favorite one. Rabban "The Beast" who gets belittled and insulted as an idiot by everyone who speaks about him, is literally the only one who recognized the fremen threat, and submitted a plan that would have uncovered what Paul was doing.

Only for the Baron to reject it.

[NigelWalmsley]

A big part of the reason that Dune is such a hard adaptation is that on the surface, it's a straightforward "Chosen One seeks revenge and his birthright" story, but is a pretty hard deconstruction of such stories in many ways, from why Paul is the Chosen One, to how he tries to manage that fate and ends up being consumed and made irrelevant by it. So many things in the book are not what they seem if you stop and think for a moment (Leto is not a good ruler, Yueh is not weak, Irulan is not an objective biographer of anybody, especially her father), but so easy to miss in a superficial reading or adaptation.

Also, a lot of that stuff only really becomes explicit in the later books. Dune itself plays things relatively straight (though, of course, things like the Missionaria Protectiva complicate even its narrative). Where it really gets interesting is the later books, which ask what happens after the traditional Chosen One story. In Dune, Paul defeats the Emperor and claims the Princess. But what the later books do is ask "what does that really accomplish?" The Emperor is just a guy, defeating him doesn't magically give you control over the whole of the Empire, let alone reconstruct it in a way you're happy with. Just marrying the Princess doesn't magically make her love you, or make her faithful to you. Your armies don't magically stop as soon as they've avenged your honor and defeated your enemies. Those are the things that make Dune unique, but they're exactly the things that it's difficult to adapt effectively.