re: Having a hard time getting into Dune

If it is a few things, it is a homage. I think they ended up getting to about 15-20 points of similarity and Herbert said “frick it” because Star Wars had kickstarted the genre, which likely in turn raised the money Herbert was making off the Dune books.

I really enjoyed both part 1 and part 2 but I also did a bit of research in the lore before watching because I never set aside enough time to read the book for myself. However, I will be starting Messiah soon so I don't have this issue for the final film in the trilogy.

I will say, if there is a critique from the first two films, it can be hard to grasp what's happening going in completely blind. However, even if you just scratch the surface in researching the universe that Herbert created, you'll understand how hard of a task it is to actually put these stories on the big screen.

If you want to have a better idea of what to expect before watching the movies, the internet is out there and a 5-10 minute youtube video can help out quite a bit. If you don't feel like doing any research, that's totally fine, but there are going to be some pretty confusing parts.

I just finished reading the first book and watched the first movie. My assessmnet is this: If you read the books and/or have a good understanding of the world and its backstory then the movies are great. BUT they do a very poor job of explaining what is happening without the viewer having a base knowledge on their own.

They should have stolen a page out of the Star Wars book and started the movie with a scrolling dialogue that explained the back story.

I also think this book should have been a series rather than a few movies. Even with book knowledge they are struggling to convey the importance of certain characters and their loyalties. Without this knowledge, the betrayals don't hit quite as hard as they should.

As someone who freshly read the book though, I think the movies do a great job of visualizing the scenes from the book.

quote:

---

just because you don't like it doesn't mean it "simply isn't good"

---

Very true statement, yet part one just isn't a good movie, mostly due to poor story telling. '84 did a much better job.

It’s not for everyone. If it’s not for you, it’s not for you

If you're going to start reading, do yourself a favor and read the first book. No amount of personal "research" will do the book justice.

Starting with the second book is mind boggling and a travesty.

quote:

---

I’ll try to lay out the universe a bit to give some perspective.

---

You have a good, informative post that is long.

Most people going to see "a movie" don't want a homework session assigned to understand said movie, they want to go, experience the film, and then leave (go home, go eat, etc), and then maybe process it a bit.

If you come into the new Dune movies cold, without knowing what's going on, you will miss 90% of what you laid out in the post. You don't, for example, understand what a gigantic and unthinkable betrayal it is for the doctor to turn on Duke Leto.
If you DO know this, it's a powerful moment. If you DON'T, it's like "ok, Doc wants to save his wife, understandable".
You also won't get any info on the Mentats, why they are important, etc.
There's a lot of significant things that are just casually shown, and you need a clue to know when something is important.

That's the hole in these movies. It's covered enough in the old movie that you can watch that, and then watch these and 'transfer' the knowledge and plot twists. And obviously if you read the books, I'm guessing you can follow along.

In a way, it's a very good and refreshing approach. It makes "remakes" relevant, because you can remake a movie to have it look so much better, and ease back on the "story-telling" part. Because you KNOW the story, you're getting an upgraded immersion into the overall world, and you 'see' the story instead of being told or reading it. It can be subtle, because you already know it... so they can focus on making it more real.

I really did fall asleep in the theater while watching the first Lord of the Rings because of pacing and I knew nothing about the lore, etc.

I forced myself to watch it again when it came to DVD and I came to like it — a lot. Viewed the Twin Towers sequel with a different perspective and loved it. And I have never read one of the books.

I can see how some viewers are having a similar difficulty with Dune. I have never read the Dune books but I did love Lynch’s 1984, kinky take on Dune. And I watched several Dune videos on YouTube which helped greatly.

Dune Part 2 is a masterpiece, better than Part 1. That skinny-arse Chalamet kid grows on you.

To the OP, I recommend to just step back, try a YT video or two, maybe the 1984 version, and then try again. Don’t miss out on a new, developing classic.

I love the films but I think it's perfectly fine for people to not care about it. I don't need everyone to like what I like so I can feel fulfilled.

quote:

---

Sure maybe they could understand the basic plot that 2 sides are at war over a planet but a viewer misses out on SO much if all they have is the movie to lean on. They don't explain Mentats at all, they don't explain what makes the spice so valuable, they don't explain the Bene Gesseret's at all. They barely explain why Jessica birthing a boy was an issue. They don't really do a good job of explaining Yueh's betrayal and why it was unlikely. They don't explain why the Atreides were given Dune or where the Emperor fits into it. They don't explain who the Sardakaur are and why they are so feared. They don't explain why Kynes being Liet is important. Hell they don't explain the overarching politics of great houses, minor houses, the CHOAM, the Guild, The emperor or anything like that.

---

I saw part 2 last night and it fixes a TON of the issues I mentioned above. They really do a GREAT job of explaining the dynamics of the situation and the different players. It’s MUCH more palatable for a non reader than Dune part 1 was. I honestly think you could skip part 1 and just watch part 2 and be able to follow the story fairly well.

They hit the main points of the book in the movie but figured out quicker ways to get to those points. My only real complaint was how they changed Chani from the supportive woman in Paul’s life to some liberal she-warrior who protested Paul the entire way. They also made Stilgar kind of a bumbling idiot compared to the stoic leader he was in the book.

Other than those 2 complaints though, I thought Dune 2 was and INCREDIBLE adaptation of the book and I can’t wait for the 3rd movie.

SPOILERS:

Edit: I watched a video of the director explaining why he changed Chani's character and it makes more sense to me now. Basically in the book Chani is very supportive of Paul and even tells him to marry the princess because its for the good of their people but it is easily missed by readers in the book that Paul changed course after drinking the water of life and now intends to use the Lisan-Al Gaib legend to his advantage to get his revenge/get power. I agree that its a little ambiguous as to what his true intentions are in the book. To combat this in the movie, they used Chani to show that someone sees through his BS and can see his true intentions. I agree that this does do a better job of conveying to the audience that Paul may not be pure of heart. My only issue with this is that it does take away some of the "magic" that maybe Paul really is a prophet thats come to save the Fremen.