Streaming muddies the water. We have no idea how it translates to profits or metrics unlike the box office. Im curious how it works for the execs?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
That being said, I saw Dune the other day. I was fortunate enough to see it on a friend's ridiculously large TV screen, so it was almost as good as seeing it in the theater.
I have been meaning to read the book for decades, I finally bought a copy last year, and it's currently on my to read list. I didn't enjoy the David Lynch version much, but this one I loved and I'm looking forward to the sequel. Hopefully I'll have read the book by then lol.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have been meaning to read the book for decades, I finally bought a copy last year, and it's currently on my to read list.
As someone who's read the book several times over the past few decades, I say....HUZZAH!!
In all seriousness though, I do hope you enjoy the book (and perhaps its many sequels, eventually). And if you do happen to like it, I can always suggest other works by Herbert. I've read most, if not all, of them.
|
|
Streaming muddies the water. We have no idea how it translates to profits or metrics unlike the box office. Im curious how it works for the execs?
That water's probably going to be muddied for a good while. I'm guessing most of the major players have some kind of game plan in mind. Time will tell which game plan (or plans) work best.
I find the whole thing fascinating. We've gone from my grandmother, who lived a large percentage of her life without a TV, to having new movies streaming directly into our homes. Cool.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have been meaning to read the book for decades, I finally bought a copy last year, and it's currently on my to read list.As someone who's read the book several times over the past few decades, I say....HUZZAH!!
In all seriousness though, I do hope you enjoy the book (and perhaps its many sequels, eventually). And if you do happen to like it, I can always suggest other works by Herbert. I've read most, if not all, of them.
I'll third this notion. The novel Dune is excellent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I may have to bump it up on my list then. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Down 62% from last weekend pulling in only 15.5 million. So yeah, DP’s prediction that it would drop off significantly was pretty spot on. Boom!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll third this notion. The novel Dune is excellent.
Just for s*+&s and giggles, I started reading it again. About fifty pages or so from being done, and I'm reminded just how much they cut out of the film. There was a lot of good stuff with the Baron I wish they'd have put in. There's also one scene in particular, between Yueh and Jessica, I really think they were idiotic for not including.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just for s~@!s and giggles, I started reading it again. About fifty pages or so from being done, and I'm reminded just how much they cut out of the film. There was a lot of good stuff with the Baron I wish they'd have put in. There's also one scene in particular, between Yueh and Jessica, I really think they were idiotic for not including.
I'll third this notion. The novel Dune is excellent.
I agree. I think Yueh's betrayal in this iteration was completely out of left-field. There were several scenes where an additional line or two could have been added that would have made that make sense and more impactful. Like when Jessica asks him about his wife and he's clearly keeping a secret.
You think they may add more about the betrayal in the second movie?
No. They already explained it (after the fact) in his scene with the Baron. There's nothing left to explain that's going to be relevant to what is going on any more. Explaining something like this after the fact is the entire problem.
Think of it like this. A good detective story gives you clues. Some are good clues, some are bad clues. But all the clues you need to solve the puzzle are presented. You just have to be smart/lucky in how you pay attention to them. When the final answer is revealed, you can go back and reread/watch the story and see the details you missed. This is what makes a reveal interesting and impactful.
When a story presents no clues or only false clues (think the recent BBC Sherlock series), then the reveal is meaningless. It has little to no impact, it's just an info dump about how much smarter the character/writer/director is than you. Now, I don't intend to be that mean to this version of Dune, but rather I think that the director got too close to the subject material and forgot that his audience needed those clues in order to make a good story. He had already internalized them... and so forgot to put them in for the audience's sake. In fact, I think this is the largest failing of Dune (2021). All the loving attention to the parts the director loved show through, but the parts he isn't as enamored with (but are still important to the story) get left behind. It's an incomplete work (and I don't just mean Part 1/Part 2 incomplete). Many aspects of the movie are actually very good, but it's those forgotten details that make it feel narrow and not epic IMO.
The next movie has to be concerned with things like how it handles Alia. I'm mentally preparing myself for them to pronounce it ah-LEE-a.
Im curious how much cut material might be able to flesh out more of the missing elements. I heard a rumor that the dinner scene was filmed and cut. I'd love to see that as I think its a very impactful scene to cut from the story. Director's cut?
There being 20 to 40 minutes of cut footage does not guarantee that the Dinner Scene is among them, so at this point it would still be a rumor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah YouTube Entertainment Vloggers commenting about film and television are always spot on. I personally loved the Steve Rogers and Fantastic Four cameos they confirmed for us in Falcon and the Winter Soldier and WandaVision. Who can forget the platforms epically accurate reporting about the release date and content of the Spiderman: No Way Home Trailer.
Have you seen the footage to be able to confirm everything that was cut? Have you read a shooting script?
So it’s still a rumor until Warner Bros, DV or access to the material itself confirms it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Im curious how much cut material might be able to flesh out more of the missing elements. I heard a rumor that the dinner scene was filmed and cut. I'd love to see that as I think its a very impactful scene to cut from the story. Director's cut?
I'd love to see the dinner scene. I want to see Liet Kynes scare the s*%$ out of the water seller.
Yeah YouTube Entertainment Vloggers commenting about film and television are always spot on. I personally loved the Steve Rogers and Fantastic Four cameos they confirmed for us in Falcon and the Winter Soldier and WandaVision. Who can forget the platforms epically accurate reporting about the release date and content of the Spiderman: No Way Home Trailer.
Have you seen the footage to be able to confirm everything that was cut? Have you read a shooting script?
So it’s still a rumor until Warner Bros, DV or access to the material itself confirms it.
lol. It's true usually I'd take this with a grain of salt, but there was an image that clearly looked like the dinner/banquet scene. Maybe its photoshopped, but I've heard from multiple places the scene exists and even Bautista mentioned it.
lol. It's true usually I'd take this with a grain of salt, but there was an image that clearly looked like the dinner/banquet scene. Maybe its photoshopped, but I've heard from multiple places the scene exists and even Bautista mentioned it.
There is a difference between something having been shot and something existing as a cut scene that could be reconstituted in a directors cut or as material for a Blu-ray release.
It’s possible that it was shot and abandoned after dailies were viewed without every having been assembled, meaning it would only exist as raw footage.
It may have been abandoned on set before all coverage of the scene was shot making it impossible to assemble after the fact because there is only about 25% of the total footage necessary to cut it.
There are a lot of different ways that it could not exist while still having been performed on set. I’ll give you an example from another franchise. Several days worth of footage on Halloween H20 was shot with the actor Charles S. Dutton hunting Michael Myers. The actor was let go and the rest of his footage never shot, none of the footage of him would be considered a cut scene from the finished version of Halloween H20 because the film was drastically reshaped between him getting fired and the film being edited. Another example from the same movie, a scene was scripted at the end of that film and was intended for use in which Michael Myers puts a paramedic into his clothes, they ended up not shooting it in its entirety but cast and crew members talked about it as if it existed, though the bulk of it didn’t get shot. When the next film was shot they had to go back and shoot the footage they had failed to shoot in 1998
We’ll know if it was a completed sequence removed from a prior cut of the finished film at some point, but for the moment it’s just been takes about as a possibility not confirmed as a definite.
As for the dinner scene in particular, it was not only shot but finished. It just didn't make the final cut for 2021.
Do you have a source you can cite this time, or is it yet more guesswork?
Did you miss one, or is Orville’s direct antagonism acceptable where my response to it for some reason is not?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree. I think Yueh's betrayal in this iteration was completely out of left-field. There were several scenes where an additional line or two could have been added that would have made that make sense and more impactful. Like when Jessica asks him about his wife and he's clearly keeping a secret.Just for s~@!s and giggles, I started reading it again. About fifty pages or so from being done, and I'm reminded just how much they cut out of the film. There was a lot of good stuff with the Baron I wish they'd have put in. There's also one scene in particular, between Yueh and Jessica, I really think they were idiotic for not including.
I'll third this notion. The novel Dune is excellent.
I disagree.
I read Dune more decades ago than I wish to remember so my memories of it are pretty darn blurry and incomplete.
Went to see the movie yesterday. I thought that it did an absolutely superb job of telling the audience what they needed to know quickly without getting bogged down into details.
I don't remember anything about the betrayal right now (I'll be rereading Dune once I finish my current book) but the movie version gave me enough information to go on. Its just not really important enough to spend significantly more time on.
With a book like this you have exactly 2 choices
1) Do a mini series or a whole series of movies per book
2) Cut lots and lots out. Decide what is key to the story you're telling and focus only on the parts relevant to that story.
They chose the second route and I think the result justifies that choice. The movie is ALL about Paul, everything else is peripheral to that. All the other characters are pretty much significant only in how they impact on Paul. His father was betrayed by the emperor and from within. The details beyond that aren't really all that important
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my post, did I say the movie needed numerous lengthy scenes to do it? Or did I suggest a couple of lines of dialogue in already existing scenes, which would probably add at most 30-90 seconds of runtime?
An efficient script writer and director could have done it extremely easily with negligible effect on the run time (or just cut some fat somewhere else).
I personally feel the movie suffers by being ALL about Paul. It becomes a very standard Chosen One narrative when that happens, and retaining details helps smooth that out and make the story feel larger. Making it ALL about Paul makes the story feel smaller to me, and not in a good way.
But these are nitpicks, I still enjoyed the movie overall.
In my post, did I say the movie needed numerous lengthy scenes to do it? Or did I suggest a couple of lines of dialogue in already existing scenes, which would probably add at most 30-90 seconds of runtime?
An efficient script writer and director could have done it extremely easily with negligible effect on the run time (or just cut some fat somewhere else).
I personally feel the movie suffers by being ALL about Paul. It becomes a very standard Chosen One narrative when that happens, and retaining details helps smooth that out and make the story feel larger. Making it ALL about Paul makes the story feel smaller to me, and not in a good way.
But these are nitpicks, I still enjoyed the movie overall.
It sounds like Dr. Yuel had a scene or two cut. One with Jessica discussing his wife. Not sure how long they were but I agree with you that just a little more exposure would have made better sense. I also agree that its an enjoyable movie and this is just nitpicking.
|
|
I personally feel the movie suffers by being ALL about Paul.
I'll let you know if I agree after I reread the book :-). At the moment I'm judging the movie almost entirely on its own merits and not on what it could have been. On its merits, I thought it an excellent movie.
But I tend to be more forgiving than many with the liberties that screen adaptations take with their source material. Due to the medium being different, due to the necessity of removing material, and due to the necessity of being a sufficient commercial success so the next one actually comes out. For example, I hate parts of the Lord Of The Rings adaptation but those same parts were likely necessary to get enough seats into chairs to actually make the whole trilogy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not even about comparing it to the book for me.
I think the metaphor of Leto's father was a really good addition. A bullfighter being killed in the ring is a great analogy to what could happen to house Atriedes on Arrakis. The problem is that the bull needs to be established. It's a movie about a bullfighter in which we talk about bulls but never see them.
The Harkonens are vicious and cruel, and they are definitely part of the opposition, but they are not the only ones. The Spacers Guild, the Bene Gesserit, and the Emperor are part of it too... but we barely see them. The Emperor doesn't make an appearance at all, we have no clue that the Guild is opposed to him, and the Bene Gesserit seem to be on his side so far.
And, I could see an argument that this stuff will be in the second movie. My point would be that the second movie would be better served by setting up context for these things.
And if these things are not in the second movie... what is the point of Paul's journey? Paul's journey of freeing Arrakis is freeing it from these forces. Otherwise it's a petty revenge movie against the Harkonens.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not even about comparing it to the book for me.
I think that you're wrong about that. I'm NOT saying that you're being dishonest or anything, but all of your points make almost no sense to me from the position of only having seen the movie
The Harkonens are vicious and cruel, and they are definitely part of the opposition, but they are not the only ones. The Spacers Guild, the Bene Gesserit, and the Emperor are part of it too... but we barely see them. The Emperor doesn't make an appearance at all, we have no clue that the Guild is opposed to him, and the Bene Gesserit seem to be on his side so far.
From my point of view, the Harkonens are nowhere close to being the primary, let alone only, antagonist. That is CLEARLY the emperor, for as yet very very unclear reasons. The Harkonens are just as much puppets dancing as are the Atreides.
As to the Bene Gesserit, they're very mysterious. Its clear they're very powerful and have their own agenda. Its not at all clear whether or not they're allies, antagonists, or something else entirely.
The Spacers Guild are nothing at all. They have no presence in the movie, no resonance.
And, I could see an argument that this stuff will be in the second movie. My point would be that the second movie would be better served by setting up context for these things.
Again, you're using your knowledge of the book. I don't know what is in the second movie
And if these things are not in the second movie... what is the point of Paul's journey? Paul's journey of freeing Arrakis is freeing it from these forces. Otherwise it's a petty revenge movie against the Harkonens.
No, Pauls journey is to becoming the Mahdi. What that means isn't clear. But the Harkonens are pretty obviously NOT the real enemies
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And if these things are not in the second movie... what is the point of Paul's journey? Paul's journey of freeing Arrakis is freeing it from these forces. Otherwise it's a petty revenge movie against the Harkonens. No, Pauls journey is to becoming the Mahdi. What that means isn't clear. But the Harkonens are pretty obviously NOT the real enemiesIt's not even about comparing it to the book for me.
I think that you're wrong about that. I'm NOT saying that you're being dishonest or anything, but all of your points make almost no sense to me from the position of only having seen the movie
The Harkonens are vicious and cruel, and they are definitely part of the opposition, but they are not the only ones. The Spacers Guild, the Bene Gesserit, and the Emperor are part of it too... but we barely see them. The Emperor doesn't make an appearance at all, we have no clue that the Guild is opposed to him, and the Bene Gesserit seem to be on his side so far.
From my point of view, the Harkonens are nowhere close to being the primary, let alone only, antagonist. That is CLEARLY the emperor, for as yet very very unclear reasons. The Harkonens are just as much puppets dancing as are the Atreides.
As to the Bene Gesserit, they're very mysterious. Its clear they're very powerful and have their own agenda. Its not at all clear whether or not they're allies, antagonists, or something else entirely.
The Spacers Guild are nothing at all. They have no presence in the movie, no resonance.
And, I could see an argument that this stuff will be in the second movie. My point would be that the second movie would be better served by setting up context for these things.
Again, you're using your knowledge of the book. I don't know what is in the second movie
The lack of clarity is my point. Revealing these things AFTER they become important is bad writing. Clues and set up make such revelations more impactful.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's been awhile since my last reread of Dune, but I don't remember the Emperor making an appearance until pretty late. And the Guild is pretty much a non-presence. The BG are more established, but still very mysterious - real motives unclear and Jessica being somewhat rogue.
Yeah, the Emperor doesn’t personally enter the story until the very end. Prior to that, Count Fenring shows up to represent his interests (while he and his wife also work for the BGs). The BGs manipulations are everywhere, but most of it has to do with (a) their breeding program (b) the Missionaria Protectiva, and (c) the inevitable hope of putting a BG on the throne (all as part of their overall focus on politics). There’s a lot more in the book with the Harkonnen, and though most of it doesn’t necessarily deal directly with Paul, it would still be cool to see some of it.
I like the Spacers Guild myself...
Weekend three is about half of weekend two’s take. The legs on this film are not as long as had been guessed.
Back for more, huh?
Yes I am back for more discussion of this film and how it is doing at the box office. A topic broached at multiple points by another poster since this thread was opened.
Only 23 months to go!
:D
What?
They didn't film it all at once.HMPF.