Reading Angry Dune Comments About Our Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 2024
- Here's our review:
• Dune Part 2 Was BAD an...
Support!
► / jeffholiday
►www.paypal.com...
►brave.com/jef125
►www.brainforces...
►amzn.to/2GtWd9J
►13PTN52PQajkeP5zgoP9oEWDnvfdXr6tBY (Jeff)
►363qHCWwREoqgFrH8i6VUWJM2YJ9j5VPZd (Matt)
Connect!
►jeffholiday.com/
► / realjeffholiday
► / discord
► / @mind4lease554
► / mind4lease
► / mind4lease
Email (Business or Personal)
►jeff@jeffholiday.com
#DUNE
#PART2
#SUCKED
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[1/2] เปิดแคมป์หลอนต้อนรับ 2 ตัวพ่อแห่งวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2uPuHYHgwiI/mqdefault.jpg)
Frank Herbert's Dune used many intricate parts to get to his core idea that people shouldn't trust a charismatic heroic leader.
You can't get rid of all those parts, have a character shouting the message out loud like she's your mouthpiece, and then pat yourself on the back thinking you've preserved the book's message.
That's not how "being true to the source material" works.
I agree, but on the other hand I would also say that if the core message of the entire story is supposed to be that, I personally think that's a very uninteresting message, and on top of that Frank Herbert actually did a terrible job of conveying it himself. At least in the original novel I never got that impression, because when I read it (granted, almost 20 years ago) it really did feel like Paul was this amazing heroic character and I think most people loved the book when they simply took it at face value (me included). I actually hate the idea that we're supposed to actually distrust or dislike the protagonist, or that the author wants to trick us into liking him only to pull out the rug from under us and go: "ha! You were supporting a genocidal tyrant this whole time, you fool!"
@@Estupendomagnifico1 I guess the spirit isn't "we don't like Paul", but "We don't want someone like Paul in our real life." After all, "heroes" in real life have few of Paul's abilities but all of Paul's weaknesses.
@@Estupendomagnifico1 That and he goes on to hand the universe to a God Emperor with the moral imperative to save humanity from an outside force. So yes the source material undercuts this notion itself.
Also, that message was a lot more obscure in the original novel…everything Paul did was justified, and we saw humility and reticence in him…which was appreciated by the reader. Dune is not Dune Messiah!
DV is pretty over hyped by faux intellectuals trying to impress others with their supposed big brain movie tastes. Sicario was decent but Bladerunner 2049 and Dune 1+2 are pretty big fuckups of other people's IP's. Sy-fy miniseries is still best screen adaptation, no contest.
The Sci Fi series holds up better than expected, Dune 1984 is the best adaptation tho. And its Extended edition is great too.
Arrival and Sicario are good. Blade Runner 2049 and Dune were terrible, imo.
😂😂😂😂
Villeneuve is fantastic when he does things he understands.
Incedies, Sicario - outstanding cinema.
His narrative competence is not well suited to scifi.
One thing that is worth mentioning, is that between parts 1 and 2, Denis Villeneuve had almost 6 hours of screentime to tell the story, witch is more then the miniseries. Even with all this time, there is far less world building and character development than the miniseries or the Lynch movie. No need to butcher the characters as much as he did. Of the 3, is by far the most disappointing in my opinion.
This is easily the most important way to look at these two movies. And the most disappointing thing to realize. Six hours of wasted time, skipped or glossed over the coolest parts of the first novel.
100% agree. people keep saying we need dune as a tv series or that we need the extended cut of dune part 2, and they're not wrong, but let's not act like nearly 6 hours of screentime isn't sufficient to create a vast universe and well-written characters. it's completely on villeneuve for dropping the ball and changing up major parts of the story for the sake of spectacle or "fixing" Frank Herbert's ending, whatever that means.
@@samirsadaf2145 The ending of Dune was the best part of the book. That and the banquet scene.
I don't understand how Herbert fandom hate Lynch's version so much because it changed some things from the book but they are all falling over themselves to love this one when Lynch's version stayed WAY more true to the book than this set of movies. It's as if they devoted themselves into the belief that this was going to be amazing and their holy grail to what they wanted so badly that they were going to say they liked it no matter how complete a failure this is.
I don't think the people who were going to like this no matter what are the book fans. I know a few people who enjoyed the second movie because they had read the books and understood what was happening and were able to just go with the flow. As for the people who are instantly gushing over it who haven't read the book, I have no idea why they like it so much when they don't even understand half of the story.
Since watching the movie I've looked up videos on the lore and I find it absolutely fascinating and now I'm even more disappointed that so much was not properly shown in the movie itself. It's not as he didn't have time in nearly six hours of film to do it.
I'm part of the Frank Herbert fandom and love Lynch's Dune. I hate Villeneuve's trash.
I absolutely love both these movies but I honestly feel Lynchs was closer to the book and captured a batter vibe of it, but this did hit some notes too very well. All 3 films and the mini-series together you don't need to read the book, but what's the fun of that??
@@doozledumbler5393 There are a lot of channels who are hardcore Dune fans that are calling this the greatest movie and better than Empire Strikes Back. That's what is really making me wonder what the heck is going on. One is Quinn, who is all about the books and lore and he's loving it and there's a few others here.
You're exactly right about the non book readers. The whole film is disjointed and makes very little sense as there is nothing to bind it all together like it would if they followed the books and source material. I'm beside myself with the raving reviews everywhere.
@@dustinneely I have read the books a few times and grew up with Lynch's version and always liked it but one day I read the book and immediately watched Lynch's version and was very surprised how close to the book it was. A lot was omitted but what they kept in to make the movie flow was pretty spot on. The weirding modules was a big change and very different but I also understand a bit how they took something mystical and actually told very little in the book about what it actually was and made it into something tangible.
Some people said they hate the thoughts being overdubbed out loud into the movie but that literally is how it was in the book. We constantly were given thoughts as actual lines. After that viewing following the book, I became an even bigger fan of the movie.
I went back and watched the Dune Miniseries, I bought it along with Children of Dune. Its very well made for a Sci Fi Channel show. Dune 1984's theatrical cut is the best adaptation as it focuses on what makes the source material fun and enjoyable and the inner monologues make it feel very unique, while the Extended Edition is really awesome too. The additions to the weirding way voice stuff was really cool. Lynch's 1984 film knows what makes the source material click, Paul being a hero to the audience, the cool factors of the weirding way, the Houses, the vile and perverted nature of the Harkonnens, the attempt to bring paradise in a Dystopia. The Dialogue is really fantastic in the Lynch film. Very memorable. Some of the Sci Fi stuff seems downplayed in the later adaptations while Lynch honed in and included it. Making it rain once in the Dune film is neat.
I agree. Personally, I think Dune actually works best when it's just a cool space opera about a young nobleman avenging his father, befriending the locals and rising up to become the new emperor: a straightforward, old-fashioned heroic tale but told in the context of an amazingly original and deeply though-out universe. I know that's not what the author intended, but I believe it's why the first book became such a big success. Then Herbert tried to "fix" that with the sequels, and that's where I completely lost interest.
No banquet though.
@@Estupendomagnifico1someone didn’t read the books 😂😭
The greatest irony is that Herbert is warning us about idol worship yet here many people are giving Denis Villanue the mantel of "idol". Don't get me wrong DV is a fantastic film maker but to me he's been off since Sicario. That's not saying he sucks it's just that the works after that have not been as solid to me.
he sucks, it's ok to say it
He tries, but in all five movies i've seen by him, he Fails to get the point. Visuals beat story every time.😢
Blade Runner 2049 was boring as shit.
@@emperorsean1 no disagreement here.
So I have not read the books (yet, I do plan to at some point) but I too thought the film fell flat. It's beautiful to look at and some scenes were very intense but ultimately I left the theatre feeling kind of hollow. It came down to the characters and their interactions. Everyone seemed kind of robotic in their motivations and the pacing was really off. And the supposed love story between Chani and Paul had absolutely no chemistry. Style over substance really summarized it perfectly.
Exact same!
Debis Villeneuve promised a faithful adaptation. He lied.
No one even knows the Water of Life is connected to the spice
It's pretty obvious
@@ye11owman29no spice orgy.
@@ye11owman29To Who?
@@thecarter8700it’s the same shade of bright glowing blue. makes sense
@@anaitm8103The same shade of bright glowing blue as what, the spice? Spice is orange red, not bright blue. Try again.
There were a few things that seriously disappointed me about the story. Firstly, the Baron's death was a total letdown and didn't have the impact I was expecting. And can we talk about how the Emperor of the ENTIRE!!!! Universe was portrayed? It was so boring and lacked any sense of grandeur or importance. His surrender was also super anticlimactic.
Another thing that bugged me was how one-dimensional and pointless Feyd-Rautha's character was. In the scene where the Baron and Feyd kiss, I felt like Feyd-Rautha could have been a lot more "lustful" while returning the Baron's kiss, to make the scene truly obscene. And Batista's acting? His constant and way over-the-top whining felt really forced.
Lastly, I wasn't a fan of how hyper-masculine and constantly angry Chani's character was. It also made zero sense that she would blame Paul for her people's downfall but still fall in love with him. That plot point felt really forced and unnatural.
Holy shit bro get over yourself
Agreed, @a7xcss. I actually felt bored from this film. Dune isn’t about action; Dune is about a complex, character driven story.
It was nice to look at - I liked the production value and good effects - but so many characters are missing from the story that I will never except these films as the story of Dune.
The romance between Paul and Chani was made to appeal to vacuous feminists, who can't seem to figure out that men don't want hard women for a mate, especially when they're in a position like Paul's, where they are being challenged in almost everything they do. These dingbats think that a contentious b!tch is the perfect mate for all men.
And the Baron... I kept thinking "When is he going to get out of the bath?"
And besides agreeing with you, I also just can't figure out why DV thought Christopher Walken in his nightgown was a good choice for the Emperor.
That's why they should have stuck to what Frank Herbert wrote.
@@markburns1990 they’re def not
When I left the cinema all my friends were fascinated with Dune 2 but I just couldn’t share their feelings. Everything seemed rushed for me, the events happens writhing 6 months which is unrealistically quick to become a messiah not mentioning how they travelled from one side of planet to another.
What disappointed me more is massive storylines changes and luck of explaining the role of Guild in it.
I couldn’t make myself love it and take everything seriously even the amazing cinematography didn’t help to change the situation:(
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us it helped me understand that I am not the only one to not like it 😂( I am already tired of explaining why I didn’t like it , so instead I’m sending your videos )
They travelled althroughout the film across the desert on the works and walking. You'd know that if you watched it.
The script was bad. You can tell this movie was rushed and had poor pre-production.
@@emperorsean1From where to where? They explain or demonstrate nothing. As far was we know, the south is as far from Seitch Tabr as Tabr is from Carthage or Arakeen. We aren't told about how a sand worm can go great distances before it tires, and yet the trip to the southern Fremen settlements is *so* far away that it requires 20 thumpers to make it there.
Actually, I recently re-watched the sci-fi miniseries in order to be sure I wasn't influenced by nostalgia and I have to say that the cinematography is beautiful. The colors are so vibrant and vivid and I love the Arabic themed music setting the tone. The new Dune movies look so bleak and washed out in comparison and the soundtrack is atrocious and loud. And even with all the budget, the 2024 sandworms still look awful.
By not explaining the Spice and the metaphysics that go along with it the entire thing is undermined. These movies run longer than the miniseries which does a great job explaining the Spice.
To all the Villeneuve fanboys who're here to spit and waste energy on raging about how somebody doesn't like your "EBIN PERFECT" movie: Move along, this video isn't for you. I've seen a ton of people parrot this braindead narrative how Villeneuve is somehow above Lynch, some even going as far to claim it's a new Lord of the Rings... oh, sweet summer children. Comparing this absolute trite to Lord of the Rings is blasphemy, for one reason only: false advertising. Remember how Legendary tried to sell this Dune as being "more accurate to the books" than the Lynch version? Yeah, well that's completely out of the window with Part 2 being in theaters now. If this was marketed as a non-Dune movie... I'd have been okay with it. But it was marketed as a FAITHFUL ADAPTATION. WHICH IT ISN'T.
Yes, shills like quinns ideas were all over part 1 because it was so book accurate even though even that had changes in dialogue which makes the whole thing sound like its a casual american soap opera, kynes changed to a black woman for no reason other than brownie points for hollywood, etc, everyone is just mesmerized by the theater shaking, the score has no leitmotifs it's just texture and noises to.make the theater shake, and sorry, im gonna differ here, but the cinematography is not that special, and its grey and drab, they even made the sandworms les sinteresting by not giving them lighting storms at their approeach and have them look like big vacuum cleaner hoses, dennis could save us his love for big open spaces and buildings that look like soviet apartments, wasting time in the film fawning over them and instead give us the image and move the fuck along, it snot every imaginative either, the ornithopters look like comanche helicopters or iraq war tech with flapping wings, and there's no air of aristocracy to his big open desolate spaces in part 1. Oof and don't get me started on calling the harkonnens ind eoth characters now, they're just as cartoony, just grey and bald
Villeneuve is very good. Except scifi, and I include Arrival in this.
i love how all the hate comments are just accusing you guys of being contrarians/trolls and have nothing else to say. they can't address the actual valid points of criticism you brought up in your original review and can't fathom that people like/dislike things for different reasons so they just lash out. some people need to get a grip.
The folks who view DV’s Part 1 & Part 2 as peak Dune want us to ignore the fact that there were scenes in 84’ Dune & the SciFi miniseries that should have been in DV’s movies.
1984 Dune hit many of the big points of the book. The miniseries hit nearly all the points. Were there flaws in execution? Yes.
DV’s Dune didn’t even try to hit those points.
- the death of toddler Leto II in an attack is a huge thing to leave out. It sets so much in motion & in DV’s movie could have made the difference of Paul’s reluctance to jihadist revenge.
- Alia should have been born & her killing the Baron is crucial to her future
- they should have done a time jump. How a brand new resistance could stop the empire & get the emperor to Dune in less than a year. It’s absurd.
- Chani’s antagonism to Paul is ridiculous. How are they supposed to have kids in the next movie? At this point Irulan is going to easily seduce Paul. 😂
You miss the part that 84 Dune is just bad. Lynch hated it, and said he didn't enjoy the creation process since the beginning and was selling out immediately before even filming.
@@pieceofadrian That’s irrelevant. Once art is out there others can even disagree with the creators.
@@pieceofadrianCorrect, the 1984 Dune was bad. So what? It's possible for two things to be bad. The sad tragedy is that DV's Dune is bad *compared to* Lynch's Dune. THAT'S A TRAGEDY!
@@NovusIgnis Nope. DV's Dune is good cinema. If we use objective measuring for results in regards to film business or cinematic impact then the movies are an objective success.
When someone is arguing DV's Dune is bad the "logic" is usually stems from a type of dissociative rumination disorder resembling a mental illness or detachment from reality, as if the senses are pre-muted. Or possibly lacking the ability to be present due to a undeveloped taste required like a handicap disorder. Typically these are a niche Dune book readers who come in hyper critical to the point they're watching through a filter of mental masturbation on "what should" or "how should" the movie be presented. Unfortunately and Ironically these types are also lacking insight in the acquired wealth and richness of what make Dune books great, which is the source material Frank uses and borrows from. And DV does justice to this more than any prior Dune media in a way that is more subtle, immersive and mostly importantly formatted for the medium of cinema. ~ This isn't a book, or your mental perception of your experience with the book. This is a cinematic adaption. And DV made cinema history.
Sorry you were unable to enjoy this good film. I recommended working on your experience of life, knowledge, and having your own creative process to understand what it takes to make art. So maybe one day you develop/acquire some actually taste, and enjoy Part 3.
@@pieceofadrian Nope, completely wrong. The stupidest dog barks the most, so keep barking *dog*
I liked the first movie but thought something was missing but couldn't put my finger on it. Plus I do like the 85 movie a lot more, it had a lot more characters being shown that I'm guessing were left out and some what dry story telling with a lot more running time. Plus Aaliyah being a major key just zeroed out. And now hearing the guys who actually read the books it all makes sense
As the visual spectacle wore off, the plot holes, missing characters, modern audience forced DEI kicks in.
I'm glad people are enjoying it, but it was not created for those who have read the book and know the lore. Some serious casting misses.
I’ve never read Dune and I liked the first Dune and was excited for this one but was really disappointed. But not for the reasons Dune lovers are because I have no context. It’s for the most obvious storytelling mistakes that barely no one is mentioning. They just skip through the story. Paul’s on a solo trip which Chani joins. But never finishes? Now he’s just ambushing the bad guys. Jessica needs to convert people. Now they’re just converted. I feel like showed things but never gave you a story or character development therefore there weren’t any special moments. It was just, scenes. I genuinely thought I’d missed something a couple times but nope, they just skipped stuff.
You know what should be invented? An insurance for the movie, so that when movies like Star Wars 9 or Dune part Two come out, you can ask for the money back for the ticket and for the trauma suffered.
I totally agree with your comment on Christoher Walken. What a waste of talent; in fact showing someone as high profile as he sort of took away from the story. His frailty is propped up by the Sardoukan (I imagined that was the point) however, it was badly portrayed. My biggest gripe in the movie was the lack of great writing, character development. Zendaya absolutely ruined it for me; Josh Brodin can't break out of his type-cast (Sicario) tough guy persona. So glad that Jason Momoa died in the movie because he was ruining it for me too. Imagine that you are part of a close-crop hair psuedo military house (Atreidis) and you are the only one with long hair....for god's sake, get into character and cut your hair. THat the director/producers let him be himself, took away from the story. THis movie was too much of an effort to win my love by throwing money at it, while forgetting the substance (plot/character development). THis was a 4 out of 10.
THis opinion is trash, same as this video.
children of Dune isn't happening. That's why they didn't have a child acting like an adult walking around
You don't need Children of Dune to happen to have a child acting like an adult walking around. David Lynch wasn't making Children of Dune but he still included Alia in his movie. Wanna know why? CAUSE IT'S PART OF THE FREAKING STORY!
Turns out *DUNE* was written by Frank Herbert, not Denis Villeneuve, so DV and his writers thinking that they can just change the story to fit their desires is fucked up and wrong.
I'm gonna see it tomorrow. I know it won't be a good adaptation of the book but it's impossible to adapt the book accurately and make a movie that people would actually want to watch. Some people just want to enjoy movies, though, and I'm one of them.
By the way I am a huge Dune fan. I read all the original books plus some of the Brian Herbert ones.
If you're a huge fan of the books, then this movie won't be enjoyable at all.
I just watch this, and yea, it wasnt that good so you guys have done nothing wrong. Let the haters hate. The film is AAA quality as far as its visuals go. It does not look 'cheaply made'. The story and writing, the pacing, etc, you know, the actual MOVIE, is not really any better in p2 than p1. I thought the gal that played Irulan was by far the best acting and the best cast in the whole film. Chalamet, had the one good scene and that was it. Chani was annoying as ever. A lot of things that happen just....happen and you the viewer, likelly as confused AF about how we got from A > B > C. Oh, there is a big battle happening. Ok, I guess ill watch the big battle whose setup I barely understand. Christopher Walken was wasted. He looked like a tired old man. Not the 200+ year old leader of the greatest of Dunes Great Houses. José Ferrer in the 1984 version is still by far, the best Shadam the 4th imo. CW, barely made an impact on me, unlike his daughter in Dune P2.
I wish you guys had pointed out the character changes and whole changes made to 2021 dune
Frank Herbert was NOT okay with the rain scene at the end of the movie.
Not so much plans within plans as spectacle and ghafla.
I liked the Lynch version, honestly was only hoping for fun special fx and super evil Harkonen sludge planet . Sounds like they made some stoopid romance sludge instead why waste my 10 dollars
I've seen it suggested that Warner steered these films away from the books. That's quite clearly not the case. The adaptation that DV has created, in many ways, closes the door on extension beyond his involvement. He's changed or deleted enough of the character arcs and plot points that it would make it very difficult to film Children of Dune, or anything beyond. In fact, I don't know how he'll approach Messiah at this point. It's not in WB's best interest to narrow the Dune universe. It seems more likely that DV wants to make extension of his trilogy nearly impossible and limit anyone tampering with the completed 3 film arc - by focusing solely on Paul's narrative.
It almost seems to me like he doesn't want to adapt Messiah at all, given what he did to Chani in this movie. Making that movie work would require a reconciliation between her and Paul between movies, which general audiences would find extremely contrived, or a complete change to the plot of Messiah, which book fans would hate. Either way seems like a lose-lose.
@@stephengrant4841 I think there are two things colouring opinions about this film(s)... I think they are NOT intended to be a launchpad for a franchise. AND I think this is not so much an adaptation of Dune, as an adaptation/telling of Paul's arc told across three films. There are clearly some boundaries in place where editing is concerned. If it doesn't significantly impact Paul's trajectory, it goes. AND (although I hate the idea) I suspect Denis may alter Chani's trajectory to present her in opposition to Paul. But, we'll have to wait and see.
@@mathewsandford3796which would never happen in the book because of the spice orgy. They literally became one in soul & mind.
@@dustinneely Absolutely right.
Yeah Paul is a great hero. As much as Hebert tried to ret-con him being the Hero, the audience forever will see him that way - because that is what he is. Media Literacy is dumb, i agree.
They didn't want to make a dune movie, they wanted to make a 'bipoc people are the good guys and everyone else is white and evil movie. 'They wanted to make a zendaya movie. Its really all it is.
just another case of the dumbed down masses falling for the hype and not being able to admit to themselves that theyve been fooled or they'd have to admit to being shallow and dumb. Happens every single time.
Denis Villeneuve is a very visual director so I knew going in that a lot of the plot nuance would be lost but I also expected a lot more show-don't-tell. I feel like he half delivered on my expectations. There were times where he clearly trusts the audience to make some logical leaps and other times where he unnecessarily spelled things out with dialogue like I was an idiot. I understood why some things were cut and other decisions I did not understand at all.
Finally some sanity, a voice of reason. When all the excitement passes, when people stop being gaga over this travesty, people will examine the movie in a calm rational light and come to see that it's not so great after all. They will recognize its massive flaws. This has begun already, with many reviewers saying, "Yeah, I thought it was great, except for this and this and this and this," to the point that when you add up all of "this and this and this" there isn't anything great left.
Reminds me of the first Hobbit movie in that way. I remember the excitement from almost everyone after it came out, with only some criticism emerging after a few months or so, and of course the floodgates opening after the second and third movies. Let's see how this pans out.
Well yeah every movie has that. Nothing in life is perfect. My favorite game of all time is Halo 3, but I could poke holes in it for hours. If you don't like it then fine but it's a badass movie.
@@ChadAV69 Kind of a conversation killer isn't it, "nothing is perfect". The point I think being made here is that it is very very far from perfect while everyone seems to think its very close to perfect. I don't understand the latter at all. But you're 100% right about halo 3.
These movies will be forgotten very fast, because they're snore-fests that nobody will want to re-visit from time to time.
I hope that once DV's fart odour has left the studio, somebody more talented will try a series.
I think it's hilarious we did this 'The Emperor's New Clothes' circus when the first one came out and we're doing it again now.
These movies are boring, devoid of soul and character, with zero worldbuilding and a flimsy distorted plot. I watched it with two avid movie-enjoyers and they said it was boring.
Nobody should re-watch these because there's no substance, no strong scenes. Just visuals, pretty lights to give off the impression of depth and meaning, while lacking any.
This director is the equivalent of a modern artist who produces trash, but it looks unique and sophisticated so people all pretend it's actually great.
Keep doing your thing brother! I totally agree with your take. The book still tops all.
I knew I wasn't going to like this version of DUNE when they omitted the lines of Paul shedding tears for the Fremin he killed.
"He sheds tears!"
It was taken around the ring "Usal gives moisture to the dead!"
He felt fingers touch his damp cheek, heard the awed whispers."
I really think this scene conveyed so much about the Fremin and Paul and to not have it in the first film was just eggregious to me.
Also watching the "new" DUNE is making me want to go back and watch Lynch's dune. I was a kid when I saw it the first time. But I have to say after all these years it still had an impact on me. The haunting blue eyes and the feel of the film is something totally absent from the modern day Dune. It's unfortunate.
Nothing about the fremen reverence for water, environmental and ecological harmony, harvesting and secretly hiding massive reservoirs of water with the hope of greenifying the desert... So much lost.
No mentat or talk of the importance of spice. Let alone the economics
Oh wow what beautiful mono audio. Great quality
Emperor being weak was intentional. Denis leaned into the BG being in control of everything.
The Lynch Version made these New Version so Amateur and 1 dimensional. Most these Sheeple don't realize the Dept of the 1984 version. Shows this is the sign of our times now...
Lynch version started off with the Guild Navigator (And the reference to Planet IX and Richese) which was just hinted in the Books which I believe Frank Herbert Gave to Lynch as he originally thought of putting in the Books.
Also the Association of the Reverand Mothers and How it was Hinted The Reverend Mother Guise Helen Mohemian ( Who Poisoned The Baron)was Related to Jessica and Could of been her actually Mother (And Aleah's Grandmother) and how she shed a Tear after she Left Jessica after her visit to Caladan.
And how The Worms stopped for Paul after he took the Water of Life which was a pre curser to Sheeana in the Last 2 Books how she controlled the Worms....The List Goes on and On the Depth of the 1984 Version
People have been drinking the kool aid for too long. Everyone hates on powerful white men, which is ultimately going to make the 1984 version anathema to them.
I only watched part 1 and it was unbelievably BORING and amateurish. I will not spend a cent trying to watch any more of the work from that director.
Your opening monologue made me reconsider some of my prior opinions on the original video, mainly the point about "came here to hate but cant hate on fellow book readers," or whatever. It would be nice to bring on someone who likes the film so you guys could hash it out so that way you'd please everyone in the audience, just a thought.
Tom (from Midnights Edge) said hes suspicion is they gonna make Alia as the savior not the abomination.
They will change how the story goes from here on.
I've watched both your Dune review videos, I don't agree with everything you've said, I do think youre unreasonably harsh on part one, but I will say I'm glad I know there are others who I can at agree with on part two, it does leave out a lot of the major setup for what drives this story and the later stories and I'm pretty bummed out about it
I like both Villeneuve and Nolan.
Just not EVERYTHING they do.
But their fan boys are so cringe 😵💫
The funniest part of Dune was also not really understood in the DV films: that the whole thing revolves around worm poop.
I actually agree with your take on the batman. Loved the first 3/4ths but was really disappointed with the ending. The whole movie was building towards something and then fell flat.
Get YMS on the Drunken Peasants again and debate the film.
I didnt like dune 2 . I like tv mini series dune . Thanks
Me too.
Me too!
9 minutes in, I want to say I watched your review, and I’m glad you and your friend gave your honest review of the film.
I’m a book reader (of all 6 - 1-4 twice) and you two keep up the good work.
I’m seeing the film today. But I know what’s missing; so I know Dune 1&2 are not the true story of my Dune.
I liked part two quite a bit but I agree with your criticisms!!
I agree that the Lynch film and SciFi tv series are better than these new films. Both feel more alive, vibrant, and authentic to the story.
Dune 1&2 are soulless and not faithful to the themes of the source material. They are spectacle over substance. And of course, modern takes from Denis Frenchy baguette the feminist. Who wanted to make sure there was a brown girl boss in every other scene and it's tiresome.
The leads are terrible. Timmy Chala-twink and Zendaya are awful. Denis should have just cast Zendaya for Paul. Seems like that's what he wanted to do. The good actors are underused and the bad actors are overused.
More often than not, the soundtrack is just loud blaring noise and from Hans Zimmer no less. One of his worst efforts. Toto's for the Lynch film was better.
Yeah, ZenDuneya 2 Girl boss Boogaloo was trash. People throwing masterpiece around need to get a grip on reality.
Havent seen the second movie but It's funny you go online and everyones a Blade Runner and Dune fan but IRL seems like not too many people seen them. I wouldnt recommend the first one to anyone at all, just a bunch of quiet people standing around in the desert and occasionally some action happens. I know there was more to the movie than that, but it felt like something you should take a nap durring. I remember when I was a kid i found Godfather really boring but as I got older and paid attention more to what was happening I began to like it and wanted to read the book, with Dune I'm not being bored but the long scenes of people talking, I'm bored by the long shots of just scenery
When I realized how much lore I was missing out on from that movie I decided to just sit and listen to long video essays of the lore, and that was great I enjoyed that, wish the movie would've been like that. It's like if this movie was turned into a comic it would be a lot of nice pretty art, but not every much dialogue or actual text to read. Like this movie woulda made for a really good concept art book of a movie we never got like the Jodorowsky's version
I showed my gf my favorite scene in both the David Lynch version and the new version, the Harkon scene, in the new version he talks for a while than starts floating and I'm like "oh he looks really cool and menacing while floating, really good cinematography", in the Lynch version he's getting some face work done which is gross, the acting is over the top than he starts floating, floats over to a dude and rips out a plug that makes him I guess bleed to death or something as he holds him and it's all just very weird and INTERESTING. She liked the Lynch scene more.
Same complaint with Blade Runner here: Visuals are at 10, but story telling is just a mopey protagonist flying around a pretty landscape and occasionally he whispers at another guy who doesnt talk much either.
Blade Runner is way better movie imo if you play some music over it and turn it into a music video, I imagine i could do the same with Dune.
reminds me of this meme th-cam.com/users/shortsub1BAokgj9s?si=Y16O_8ZjBcBoAsNa
I've listened to your Dune reviews and am grateful to have found people who understand that the story told within the books was not reflected on film. Certainly the films were not flawed, but they failed to capture the true grandeur of the books. Personally, as cheesy as The Sci fi channel series were they were better and true to spirit of Herbert's story. I loved What you have to say and applaud you for it period
But ouch. You guys had me in the beginning, a hundred percent! And then the last part... 😬. Yeah, I don't share your positivity about a transhuman Utopian, and I'm sure you don't share my spirituality.
However ... Truth is where One finds it regardless. I appreciate your honesty and willing to meet the Detractors face on and argue your points cogently with facts and with emotion. You've earned a follower--not a hate follower--but someone who is interested in hearing what you have to say.
Well doone! /typo left intentionally
I feel like it was more of a Dune interpretation/revision, not a good book "adaptation". I truly feel like if you didn't read the book(s), the movie would be A LOT more enjoyable imo.
I couldnt stand zandaya as chani their clearly setting her up to take down paul as a strong female feminist character. Chani is not a feminist in the dune story . The dune miniseries is better and more accurate. Still no guild navigators and Ailya. Instead she was a talking foetus. No spacing guild either.
This movie was hollow and soulless. Hollywood creativity is mostly dead. People are so used to being bombarded with bad entertainment for so many years coupled with a mostly empty lifestyle that is common in today's culture, it seem they have forgotten or never been exposed to good entertainment so the bar is set very low for what is considered good. Denis Villeneuve films are overrated imo.
Orrrrrr you are hollow and soulless ? The movie is good , you are just depressed.
@fixo5132 Not in any possible way Villenueve fanboy. I loved Bladerunner 2049 but Dune was awful...it was soulless and boring. Anyone who hasn't read the book won't know what the heck is going on in it and why.
@@AshrafAnam Why is everyone singing praise over it then ? and most people didn't read the damn book. If you didn't understand the movie, that's a you problem. If you want to critique a bad movie go do it on actual bad movies... (Ie: Madam web...).
So if we liked the movie we’re above you but you said if we liked the movie we were sheep. What?
Look at their view count. He is desperately trying to milk Dune hate for all it's worth. Barely gets 500 views but his contrarian Dune hate videos get him thousands... Lmfao.
When every major critic says it's a masterpiece, when audiences say it's a masterpieces, when all the big TH-cam movie reviewers say it's a masterpiece.... Lol. Dude just wants to be different to stand out and bring eyes to his small, trash channel.
Subbed because of the vid. Finding a video to explain what was wrong with it from the perspective someone who has read the book is what I was looking for.
Not only was he the Emperor of mankind he was the emperor of the known universe and the Emperor of a million planets
They will never have Alia be possed by the Baron. I can bet the next movie is going to focus on Margot Fenrings daughter and Alia. Mind you Margot's daughter is a plot point Frank Herbert never followed up on. Brian on the other hand does so its gonna be a means to shoehorn in Brian's writing. Its why they compressed the timeline.
i subbed only because I liked your Dune Part 1 review so I trust you guys when you say the new one is bad too.
IMO: Blade Runner 2024 is hard to STAY AWAKE for, Arrival is meh, and I actually liked Enemy, havent seen Sicaro so cant say fully how I feel about this director but going by Dune and Blade Runner, I'm really not a fan. As an artist I feel I need more than landscape paintings to keep my interest, and that's what the first dune felt like a really pretty landscape painting, not much happening, not much to talk about it, just nice wide shots of cool landscapes. Sucks I gotta hear from you guys and video essays all the lore I missed from that movie.
Dude totally agree with your taste. But you missed the best one. Go watch sicario.
Can anyone tell me where the power from these bene gesserit stems from? And what their goal is setting up this prophecy and intergalactic war / genocide??? The movies dont tell us but perphaps the books do?
This is part of the movie's problem. It sets them up as powerful, but they never explain why. They gain their power from spice, just like everything else in the universe. We're *told* that spice is important, but we never find out why. It might as well just be a maguffin.
The Bene Gesserit use spice to induce prescient vision in themselves so they can get limited glimpses into the future. In addition to that, they also combine an insane training discipline where they manage to achieve total and perfect control of their bodies. If they become pregnant, they could choose to have a male or a female. If they get poisoned, they can transmute the poison into a harmless substance. They can control their voice in such a way as to make hypnotic suggestive commands that people would be urged to follow, and so on.
As a result of this regiment, they're also extremely disciplined fighters. They can essentially urge their body to secrete adrenaline and put itself into a battle state, and due to their extreme control over themselves they can tense and spring their muscles so much that they can cover short distances extremely quickly, almost seeming to teleport out of the way of attacks or into favorable positions. You combine that speed and reflexes with their ability to see a limited amount into the future and you have an extremely formidable person.
@@NovusIgnis And how did they find that out? Just went to Dune one day and sniffed some spice? Or did they originate on Dune? How did they form their order etc etc so many questions and no answers.
And still no idea why a galactic genocide is good for humanity in their eyes.
@@henkhenkste6076 Nope, people were just exploring the planets and basically found that this one had spice for whatever reason. I won't go into all the details as the books cover it better than a summary does, but essentially that's what it is. Spice is discovered on this planet and people experiment with it and find all of the properties that it conveys on them. Different groups use it for different purposes. The Fremen use it to extend their lives and vitality, the Bene Gesserit and Spacing Guild use it as prescience, the Tleilaxu basically use it to heal, etc etc.
@@NovusIgnis so the bene gesserits where a thing even before the spice, then what were they before that point?
@@henkhenkste6076 I could be wrong but I don't believe they were. They emerged from a different sisterhood that operated in a similar manner before integrating spice into their practices, thus merging into what we know the Bene Gesserit to be now.
Since that time, they've been crossing bloodlines and following a path in order to manufacture their own version of a messiah, one with the right training, genetic makeup, and origins to be able to see across all space and time.
It's hard to determine what the last straw is that takes someone from being cool with an adaptation to suddenly hating it with every fiber of their being. I think the transition from love to hate is either instant, or a very steep decline. I read Dune in 1995, for the first time, and it has become my favorite fiction series of all time. I've even read all of Brian's books. I was initially disappointed with Part 1, because there was so much they left out. But then I came to the realization that this is the best possible MOVIE adaptation. They HAVE to leave out all the underlying action, because once you start adding it in, the floodgates open and you have to add it all in. This is, imo, impossible. So I accepted this and viewed the film as a surface level story, as seen from a bystander, but knew that what we see is just the tip of the iceburg. I accepted this and I'm perfectly happy with Part 2.
I don't disagree with any of your comments, I AM disappointed on how they did Alia, I AM bummed out that my wife doesn't understand half of the movie because it IS disjointed with out so much of the context. But I'm ABSOLUTELY HAPPY that I was able to thoroughly enjoy Dune Part 2. I STILL hate a lot about LOTR that I can't let go, and I regret that I just can't accept it for what it is and enjoy it. Thankfully, I don't have to live that way with my favorite story. Lynches film set the tone right to me (or do I only THINK it did it right because it was the first film we saw, I admit, I DID see the lynch film before I read Dune), but I absolutely HATED the sound weapons lynch gave us after reading the book, and I can't forgive Lynch for that. I'm sorry that you didn't like it, that's a rough hand to be dealt. Here's to Messiah giving us what we wanted with Alia... Cheers.
There's no reason that those things can't be left in. I keep seeing people come up with this lie that movies *need* to change the source material in order to fit, but that isn't the case. And even if it was, what you *don't* need to change is the story itself, and that's exactly what happened here.
Fact of the matter is that the Sy-Fy miniseries from 2000 covered *more* than DV's adaptation did, even though DV had 55 extra minutes of runtime than the Sy-Fy series.
Think about that: Denis Villeneuve have almost an extra hour of runtime to tell the story, and yet he covered far *FAR* less than the Sy-Fy show did. This basic pact puts to rest your entire assertion.
@@NovusIgnis Did the miniseries change anything? Yes they did. THAT basic fact puts to rest your entire assertion.
OR MAYBE we shouldn't just cast aside other people opinions JUST because someone else did things in a certain way that we prefer. That is rude ;)
There is also a reason why Lynch's Dune is only a cult classic, and the Sy-Fy series (while great in my opinion) didn't go mainstream, and it is more than just budget. It is EXTREMELY difficult, and most would say impossible, to correctly portray the full novel of Dune as a movie. There's just too much internalization. This fact hurt both Lynch's dune and the miniseries. It's off putting, and kills visual timing, because you have to pause time to get the point across. Think of the dinner scene in Dune, one of my all time favorite scenes in any book. If you filmed it, it would be just a bunch of people eating dinner while you play whispering voice overs. What happens while Paul isn thinking? Is Jessica just staring off into space? How would you film this while giving it it's due impact? but not becoming the most boring visual in cinema history? You either cut it out completely, or heavily modify it. Unfortunate fact of life. Maybe someone could do it. But apparently DV just wasn't good enough of a director. Do you have the answer?
You're entitled to your opinion, so is with author of this Angry Dune response video. I'm sorry that DV's Dune didn't do it for you. I would hate to be in your shoes right now, because that feeling of disappointment seems to be more and more common now-a-days with modern cinema and television. But in my opinion, and thankfully so, DV's dune, while not perfect, was a home run. Thank you for reading ;)
@@NotQuiteGuru Yes, the miniseries did change things. And yet *THE STORY AND CHARACTERS STAYED TRUE TO WHO THEY WERE!*
They weren't reinvented in the directors' image. This is what you people never fucking get! I *don't care* if you like the Chani change: that's not who Chani is. Zendaya didn't portray Chani, she had it changed to fit her political ideals and feminist beliefs, just like she did the same with MJ in the Spider-Man movies. The emperor looks useless, the Harkonnens aren't intimidating or threatening, the Spacing Guild is *still* necessary to the core narrative and yet has no mention whatsoever, and so on and so forth.
It's an extremely simple rule that fans ask: if it doesn't belong to you, don't change it. That's it. Frank Herbert owns Dune, not Denis Villeneuve. As an author myself, my characters represent a part of who I am. I pour my soul out into the ink and the pages. To change any of them is to change and invalidate me, and I will not tolerate it. I'm sick and tired of lesser talents climbing on the shoulders of giants to proclaim themselves tall.
@@NovusIgnis LOL dude, you're mostly preaching to the choir dude. I'm pretty sure I've been reading these books longer than you, and I've read more of them than you (assuming here). And I believe you won't find anyone more passionate about the series than I. So I feel you. But unfortunately it's you who is being too rigid. Nothing will ever replace the books. So don't expect them to.
Strangely you shoot yourself in the foot by holding the miniseries up as some sort of gold standard, and THEN being so un-self-aware to say _"if it doesn't belong to you, don't change it."_ LMAO, my friend. The miniseries changed a lot. Re-read the book and then re-watch. They dropped entire plot lines, the characters don't stay wholly true to the book as you claim either, only mostly true. But somewhere along the line you chose to accept that interpretation and not DV's. That's totally your prerogative. But it changed. Things MUST change, it is unavodable. The question is what changes, and can it be forgiven. That determination is different to each person, you have a different line than I do, and I can respect your opinion on the matter, I don't have to agree with you and you don't have to agree with me.
But, for you to be so arrogant to proclaim, _"This is what you people never fucking get!"_ like you're some kind of authority and everyone else is some kind of idiot, or like we haven't already gone there, considered it and just decided to let it go, is just laughable, and sad. It actually says a lot about you as a person. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the DV movies, I really am. But DV clearly tried his best to stay as true as he felt was possible, and frankly, as long as he's not injecting his personal politics into the movie, I'm willing to forgive a lot.
@@NotQuiteGuru Except he *is* injecting his personal politics into the movie, and Zendaya did as well, and you're too blind to see both. I've led you to the water, but I can't force you to drink it.
Yes it's true that *some* things have to change, but the story as a whole shouldn't. Some things have to get taken out in order to let others breathe more, and that's fine, but the things that should never be messed with are the things that make the actual story what it is. You're being disingenuous by deliberately assuming myself and the other detractors don't know this.
I've said my peace. You're unwilling and incapable of seeing modern politics being injected into the story, so I can do no more for you.
its almost like the people who's job is to review movies judge them on their own merits, not the source material, not the people's understanding of that material, or the assumed guise of that material. let the boy watch.
The first dune film by villeneuve was unimaginative disney crap. I watched some of the clips on youtube from the new one and it looks just the same. It starts off with an artistic vibe with the soliders landing in the desert but then immediately gets silly and dumb when Timothy Bieber has that ridiculous clichéd swordfight with one of the soldiers and then gets saved by his mum (another cliché). This film really seems to appeal to the feeble-minded, just like villeneuve's pointless and awful bladerunner remake. In terms of French/French-Canadian filmmakers that are fixated on adapting other property, i would put Villeneuve on same level as Christoph Gans
"I watched some clips" aaaaaand that's when your opinion becomes absolutely meaningless trash. Thanks for putting it so early, so I could avoid reading that slop.
Imagine thinking anyone should give a damn what you're writing when you straight up say you haven't seen the film. Lmfao. So glad it's obvious the only people that don't like this film are braindead, hipsters who want to he different, or people like yourself who hate something popular without even seeing it.
I loved it. Saw the sting one in theater at 13. Loved that one too. Read first 3 books and 1st book multiple times. Looking forward to part 2. But I appreciate the reasons people dont care for it.
People are desperate to pretend to like woke slop or big budget checklist garble because they are desperate for anything remotely good. Even if its garbage like Dune 1 and 2 remakes. Lynch's film rose above the source material to make an entertaining piece of 80s style sci fi that was mainstream enough to gain a cult following with other generations. They are releasing the extended version again soon. Younger audiences have given up on new movies for good reason and everybody else should do the same. Stop paying to see this slop. Lol. Let the cinema go under until they are willing to start making great movies again. Movies have been on a downward spiral since 2010.
First, Bravo Applause, Ovation.! THIS is my key issue - if you want to use the book instead of creating your own book product then FINE! But to change another author's material is not acceptable - ie having Paul kill the Barron instead of his sister! Changing/beefing up Chani's role was ok- sort of a pothole that was a sign of the author's time - well ok. I am a fan of this author's books! To take advantage of that to get my money for your movie... I have a BIG issue about that!
See that's the thing though: it's *not* okay. Not even the change to Chani is okay. Why is that change okay but changing it so Paul kills the Baron is not? All you're doing is choosing based on your own standard, but everyone has their own standard. Better would be to have the standard be that it's *NEVER* okay to take someone else's story and twist it to your design.
The fetishism of the book purists versus Art house cinema - who is going to win? Cinema on its original purpose is present an entire new form of art, not to tell a story actually, but to put your sences in a different timeline. Bergman, Tarkovsky, Bela Tar, Kurosava - they all will tell you this. Cinema is not a literature, it is not a theatre either. If people disagree with changes and movie adaptations at all, then let them better read and listen audio books. What is more funny is that the scene with Paul and Chani where Paul explains what he knows from the audio/film books about sandwalking ... and then he realizes is... "Nevermind"... because he hasn't really experienced it - feels like a little troll of Villeneuve, but we can only speculate it. Dune has two sides - the experience and the education. Certainly Villeneuve delivers the experience which feels so real and analog. Education is sacrificed so to pay attention in details of being actually on Arrakis. I hope most of the radical Dune readers try to understand how hard is to make such an adaptation and dont be too harsh as many Trekkies and Star Wars fans. If you include mentats, doctors, navigators, economics, then you will get one big nothing in the end. I am actually shocked when I see arguments from people who pretend to know the books and disagree with the adaptations with all their right to disagree, but when they scream thatn space guild navigators are not mentioned and showne in the Villeneuve adaptation, then he does not respect the book. Well... the navigators actually appear in Messiah. Not in the original.
In many ways it was not also my Dune. But I wanted to see the artistic perspective of the Book in a Movie. This is why we love great cinema. And mostly important - there are people who have recently read the Dune book after watching Part 1. This is what matters - to make the book more popular.
Tolkien hated his books being “popular”. It corrupts them.
massive disagree. Films are gesamtkunstwerk. They are a combination of many talents and techniques to show, tell and hear a story. If there is no story, it's just the mental masturbation of the camera man and the editor. Btw, most arthouse films are vastly inferior in visual work to non-arthouse films.
Lastly, all the people you sited... they all told stories with their films. Every. Last. One. Of. Them.
Sure, some of them weren't completely straight forward, and needed more effort from the viewer, but each still told a story.
It's just the mutated fish like "late stage" navigators that didn't appear in Dune 1.
Paul did have a face to face talk to 2 guild navigators after he defeated the sardaukars.
I'm very disappointed that you didn't read my comment, it was probably the most hateful of all the comments people sent you on your dune review; I spent a lot of time conjuring it up for you. You disappoint me.
No audio on the right channel
Rating as a movie: 9/10
Rating as an adaptation: 6/10
My left ear likes this video but my right ear doesn't agree.
It will about as much as Part 1, maybe even less at the box office. Don't let Dunerds bully you
I really hope the new Dune movies direct people to the books. I read the books up to God Emperor and as a Dune nerd was impressed with them. They aren't perfect and certain key plot aspects are not so well explained. Someone said these movies are like a tone poem - the story is mostly conveyed through the visuals and music. I think Villeneuve could've trimmed some scenes to allow space to address spice, the Emperor and more Harkonnen plans within plans.
On the contrary it repelled me away from anything Dune
@@AshrafAnamthat makes me sad. Now I hate Villeneuve even more.
I went to the books because of the first movie and now I didn’t like the second movie very much. The book lore is fantastic and they basically rushed and butchered it.
I actually think the movie was more for fans of the books because they have more information and context. Just because it’s not shown or mentioned we know the guild is there and might be introduced in the next film.
Why in the world would they wait until the third movie for one of the most foundational and powerful factions of the universe (whom EVERYTHING is based around) to suddenly show up?
I mean sure, they can. But it seems bonkers.
@@WorldofHolidaywhere was the spice orgy? Chani & Paul's relationship in the book was so strong because they literally merged minds & souls with each other. The whole tribe shared a collective consciousness after drinking the water of life. These tribal differences in the film are ridiculous.
@@WorldofHolidaythey show up in the first part right at the start bruh 😂
@@matyasspevacek286No they don't. Everything we know about that is that they're agents of House Corinno, serving the empire not the Spacing Guild.
The dude literally says he's the "herald of the change", not a guild navigator. I struggle to even recall the Spacing Guild being mentioned at all in either movie.
LOL "Quick little video" 😂
I was vibing
Well, the part on the angry comments was indeed quite short 👍😁
I just saw dune 2 it sucks. Dune 1 sucked but half of the sucking was based it was a to be continued. Chani is terrible and Paul acts like a regular shmoe.
I can understand someone who read the books are obsessed with the books could see this movie "sucking" because it does have moments where they changed it up for "cinematic" and appealing to the typical "non book reader". I actually loved this movie but I also only read the first book. Now with that said, I am a lord of the rings fanatic and have read all the books, every single one of them and I liked some parts of the Amazon's Rings of Power but there were parts that I thought absolutely sucked because they took so many creative liberties that differentiated for the books. Amazon did not have rights to The Silmarillion in the first season and they do for the 2nd season so hopefully the 2nd season is much better and true to the source material.
They changed more than a few things. What they took out of Dune is more akin to if they removed Aragorn's lineage and past as a plot point for the LotR trilogy. It's THAT profound what they removed. I hope as a Rings fan you can understand with that example why we're not very happy.
@@WorldofHoliday Yessir, Like I said, I understand why book fans would say it sucked. I guess for me, I'm a big movie person and I'm not critical when it comes to movies. I loved the special effects of Dune 2. I thought they did a phenomenal job as far as that goes. I do wish they would have stayed closer to the source material though. I am going to go back and watch the 1884 film now. I would love to dive into the books more too.
Is not even the changes. There are serious problems with pacing, continuity because of a weak script. You can tell they rushed to produce it.
“I’m a socialist” that alone was worth watching your videos 😂.
Big fan of dune books (first two) and Dune part 1&2 movie. I think the authors message is consistent in both
No right channel audio giving me a headache
The Batman was bad.
Not bad but too long and so slow. Acting is good, story good but this movie could have been better
You liked Gerald's Game.
No! You did not explain which parts you did not like. You just said that you disliked them, but no clarification.
Honestly I would love to have your gripes with the movie(s) explained and detailed to be able to understand your point on the movie.
It would be great to challenge my love for it but without any details that‘s hard to do.
Also yes, you two are allowed to have different opinions but in a vid about two guys who try to tell that a movie is bad because this and that and then constantly disagreeing on which parts are bad. That is odd and makes me wonder if the movie was that bad after all or did you just not like it because it was not exactly as written in the book.
So after all that. I wanna apologize, I did provoke you with my comment.
But I would really like to have exact explanation and detailing why and what ist bad with Dune by Villeneuve.
I hope there are no hard feelings :)
19:11 Lukes Aunt and Uncle you mean… 🤦♂️How you gonna criticize the Dune movies for its lack of accuracy and then say Lukes parents get murdered? Like come on. Lol
i love your guys review perfect my thoughts exactly
Chani is insufferable. Denis Villeneuve hates male characters. He is the most overrated director of the decade.
Not gonna lie my impulse was to hate your guts but I loved your reasoning at the beginning of this video and it’s a line of argument I often employ myself. Your initial review struck me as a shock value/clickbait-y kinda thing, but you’re right, I do have something over you, so ha ha I win. Also, would be interesting to share your space with someone that did enjoy the book/film changes, since your view is most certainly in the minority and it wouldn’t be hard to find.
But thanks for the engaging content, as much as I disagree. ✌️✌️
@mannylokzzz. Well said. I will say this review of his review was well done.
So you guys think it’s better than part 1, - they perfected the Harkonnenes,
- like what they did with Gedi Prime,
- Like The style and the visuals
- Great scene of Paul addressing the Fremen of the south
- Liked the fractions of the Fremen
- they did the sound right,
- Thought portrayal of Feyd Ratha by Austin Butler was RAD.
- Like how the Bene Gesserits and how they are the power behind the thrones.
- Thought the Sandworm riding scene was cool.
Yet you guys thought the movie sucked?
another braindead villeneuve fanboy
15:43 so honored u read my comment sir.
Art is not subjective and you do not gain something by liking something that sucks.
Art can be measure by both objective and subjective standards. That's the great thing about it.
Nor do you gain something by disliking something that is great.
@@Toddlesification This idea of 'greatness' is completely subjective when it comes to the analysis of this movie and its fan club. I actually think people 'gain' a lot when they turn off this brain rotting Hollywood entertainment. It's so funny how people think they're enlightened because they like a movie. Like they had anything to do with creating it. Cultist mindset. Ironic considering what the source material is about.
Good thing it's an objectively good film then. Cope
@@za-ir5ni Anyone who uses the word 'cope', as an argument. We know who and what you are. Don't you have another thread you need to copy and paste your in-depth review of the movie? 'Cinematic Masterpiece'
DUNE: ...a psycho-schizoid universe reigned by psychedelics-addicted psychic schizoid psychopaths...
IN my opinion the real reason this Movie was released right now was to Join the Excuse to use this Novel's "powerful Woman" as another WOKE film and in the process looked over the actual Plot. As you can see They Squeezed and Squeezed the Life out of this Movie
@jerryjayson67 LOL. Comments like yours are the best. What a waste of life.
I never get upset or angry with people not liking what I love, however I do sometimes engage with people who I feel are potentially doing themselves a disservice in their approach. I myself have been corrected and the older i get the more i can reflect on my previous take. I often find book readers do themselves a disservice complaining that changes were made from a book. I sometimes think they are so nitpicky that anything but a literal translation won’t work for them. If you cannot stomach that stories must change when adapted from another mediumC you should probably just avoid them. Great films like Apocalypse Now were changed drastically from the source material. The question is does the film hold up on its own terms and capture the themes of the original work. I feel Dune 2 does.
I loved 1984 film and both mini series. They both changed a lot. But they both held true to the soul of Dune. Sooo...
I disagree. But hey, that's okay!
💯 percent correct..I have yet to see a movie/TV show adaptation follow the book... see Game of Thrones and House of Dragons as the most recent examples. It just doesn't happen. Dune 2 was very good, and good continuation from the first movie. Sorry, if it's not a word for word replica of the book.
@@WorldofHolidayfrustrating isn't? People are disagreeing with you because of things they "think you said" and not because of what you actually said.
I'm getting flamed for hating this movie.
People really just try to reduce others to strengthen their arguments, instead of having good arguments. Why is everyone that doesn't like this garbage a nitpicky book nerd? Plenty of book readers understand that a 100 percent faithful adaptation isn't possible, but you could shoot for at least 50-60 percent. These movies are fucking lazy, they are not visually stunning masterfully told stories, they left out way too much that they easily had time to touch on. Fucking cinema snobs are ten times more condescending than most book nerds I run into
Greetings from Los Angeles
The look of the lead is wrong, in my opinion. Too fine boned and delicate. Cannot take him seriously as a physical action protagonist, when he needed to be. As for the professional reviewers loving this, I get it: it is solid sci-fi epic, which must be a huge drink of fresh water in the desert that is Hollywood.
The dune book dweeb struggle session continues lmao.
except us Dune book dweebs saw plot points in the ‘84 version & the SciFi miniseries. We know those scenes could have been put in the movie.
@@solomonkane1712 ah yes the riveting successes in Lynch and sci-fis adaptation. I've read the books and enjoy them man but you literally just cannot turn the dune book into an appealing movie without adaptation. You're in the same boat as the people swearing off the lotr trilogy because Tom bombadil wasn't in it. The movies success speaks for itself and it's indifferent to your opinions of arbitrary omissions making or breaking it.
@@VinceHannity Not at all. Lynch’s movie & the SciFi series had some flaws in production value but high resolution in regards to plot points.
Seeing a Bombadil scene in LOTR would have been interesting but I understand it’s absence. However, another half hour or more for the Scouring of the Shire could have been great.
DV had the resources to increase production value & hit the points of the book while also adding his flavor. He took too many short cuts & had too many omissions.
@@solomonkane1712 true, if only Denis had put Austin Butler in a metal thong or an inside out jabba the hutt in a fish bowl that truly would have been a faithful retelling.
What parts of Dune couldn’t be adapted ?
Of course when you have read the books and the movie doesn't live up to what you have in your head you're going to be disappointed. It's one guy's vision.
That's not how this works. Nothing is ever going to live up to what we have in our heads, but when people watch a *good* adaptation they can look at it and say "oh that's not how I saw Gandalf, but yeah I can totally see it now!"
The goal of an adaptation is to take the scattered and isolated individual projections that everyone has from their own different readings of the book, and link them into one vision to unify the collective conscience.
When people think of Harry Potter, they don't think of the book's description or of the alternate but static visuals of Harry Potter on the covers of the books, they think about Daniel Radcliffe. Nobody's thinking about Shaddam IV and seeing Christopher Walken lol.
So far, the Sy-Fy series is the best version in this regard. I was driven to it because of how utterly atrocious part 2 was, and I plan on watching it a few more times until those visuals are what's linked to my brain instead of the horrible actors and bland music of DV's version.
I rarely comment on anything at all, but I do have to say that I disliked a lot of your friends takes. Not specifically what he did not like about the movies themselves but rather that he seemed to almost disrespect people that do enjoy it. At one point he called people sheep, which I dont think is okay.
I've read the book and I really enjoyed both films. They're, collectively, probably my favorite movie. Differing opinions are great, because they invite discourse and debate, but when it devilves into name calling that takes any air of substance from the discussion. I hope this doesn't come across as hateful and yet a lot of people are probably going to take it as such, which is unfortunate.
None is as good as the best movie never made... which is Jodorowsky's Dune... i wish i could see the full storybook adapted to an animated movie.