Cantr II Discussion Forum

This is coming from a thread I recently read about Dune, probably one of the greatest sci-fi epics of all time (you know next to Firefly/Serenity ) written by Frank Herbert. The film version and the mini-series both failed to bring this universe alive. Some say that the book is just to long and others say that the complexity of the ideas are just too complex for the average viewer to understand.

So the question is, can Dune ever be successfully put to film? Do crap sci-fi like Star Wars (though technically it is fantasy and if you don't agree with me then compare Dune with Star Wars) or [enter generic sci-fi title movie] make this impossible since it seems every person now believes that sci-fi movies have to be in space, have to have aliens, and have to have advanced technology in order to be successful?

Now there have been successes in the sci-fi movie industry such as Blade Runner and Serenity.

An idea to bringing this epic to the screen is a trilogy much like Lord of the Rings. You could have the first part be about the Atreides coming to Arrakias and up to after the Emperor's betrayal and the Harkonnen takeover and ending with Paul and Jessica in the desert. The second part would continue with Paul and Jessica being discovered by the Fremen and through their transition into Fremen society to the point where Paul takes the Maker of Life. And the third part would be about Paul coming to realize he is the messiah through the Fremen revolution to Paul rising as emperor.

And if those are successful you could go into the next few books, named Children of Dune (which was also done into a mini-series), which are about jihad, the end of Paul, and his children.

What do others think?

Well, first off I think there's a legitimate debate lurking in your first and second paragraphs about what qualifies something as "good" sci-fi. But that is a matter of pure opinion that will go nowhere so...

...bringing Frank Herbert's Dune to film life. Well, admittedly I haven't read the book, but I have seen the original motion picture. I didn't like it all that much because it seemed to just fly by without developing much character, and allowing the viewer to a) make sense of it all and b) identify with the hero of the tale.

The collector's edition of Dune has been sitting on my shelf for some time now. Perhaps when I am done reading A Feast for Crows by GRR Martin, I will pick it up. Unfortunately, seeing the movie never really enticed me into reading the book.

The trouble is the first version, the David Lean one, made a better film but the mini series, perhaps because they had more time, was far closer to the book, whilst not being a satisfying watch IMHO...

It's a long time since I read Dune and I have read a number of the sequels which frankly suck. Even the ones originally written by Frank Herbet lose the sparkle of the original books, subsequent ghost written sequels that I have read are pants, but I can#t pretend to have read that many of them.

I'm interested in your idea that Star Wars is not sci-fi, not interested enoug to do that goolge search, but interested enough to read an explanation if you reply

On the more general point I have yet to see a film that beats the original book in the sci-fi genre...

I liked Starship troopers as a film but it was only very loosely based on the book and the same with Bladerunner and Do Androids Dream...

trouble is I dont have the time to read as much these days!

Star Wars has elements of sci-fi but it's main elements are fantasy. The original Star Wars are great (especially Empire Strikes Back) but I still don't think they hold up to Blade Runner (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep? is much better than the movie I do admit) or if good sci-fi was translated to film better like anything from Asimov (I, Robot), Heinlein (Starship Troopers), or Herbert's Dune.

Now the newer Star Wars are just disappointing as it is more kowtowing to the culture to have big special effects instead of it being about the story.

But onto the subject of Dune; AoM, if you haven't read Dune yet then you don't really know much about Dune. A lot is left out in the movie and the mini-series. And what you said is one of the main arguments made is that people who have not read Dune can't get the movies because they leave a lot out of it.

rklenseth wrote:Star Wars has elements of sci-fi but it's main elements are fantasy. The original Star Wars are great (especially Empire Strikes Back) but I still don't think they hold up to Blade Runner (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep? is much better than the movie I do admit) or if good sci-fi was translated to film better like anything from Asimov (I, Robot), Heinlein (Starship Troopers), or Herbert's Dune.

Now the newer Star Wars are just disappointing as it is more kowtowing to the culture to have big special effects instead of it being about the story.

But onto the subject of Dune; AoM, if you haven't read Dune yet then you don't really know much about Dune. A lot is left out in the movie and the mini-series. And what you said is one of the main arguments made is that people who have not read Dune can't get the movies because they leave a lot out of it.

OK the prequels frankly suck, I think Goerge Lucas sold out big time my list of why goes on for ever but begins with introducing characters (eg R2D2, C3P0, Jango near enough Bobba Fett) for purely financial merchandising reasons and missing the opportunuty to actually make a decent job of portraying the transfromation from anakin to vader...
I can't see what is fantasy about Star Wars that you couldn't say was fantasy about Dune.

At the end of the day, when it comes to flights of fantasy or sci-fi books will always outscore film. I loved Minority Report, great film in itself but it bore no relation to what is an excellent read.

The need for financial succes destroys risk taking in film making. A great example of this is the Matrix. First film, great, innovative risky, genuinely unique even if the core concept wasnt totally new... The two sequels suck by comparison but they made big bucks!

I know its a different genre but LOTR scored big time because Pete Jackson took risks and made them all at one time, the succes of the first film could only have limited impact on the subsequent films...

OK time to retire behind my asbestos umbrella:

So, you just reminded me of a Dane Cook skit...

A bunch of ranting about the movie Dune being in his chocolately drink.


http://www.danecook.com


You can listen to it there.

Cant find anything about Dune but there is hours of funny stuff on that site.. Great!

I liked Episode III for three reasons.

1)It had pretty good acting from Obi-Wan and Sidious, and even Anakin improved.
2)It had lots of lightsaber battles. Those look cool.
3)It was better than Episode II.

I've never even heard of Dune, but dragging threads off topic is a little hobby of mine.

Nalaris wrote:I liked Episode III for three reasons.

1)It had pretty good acting from Obi-Wan and Sidious, and even Anakin improved.
2)It had lots of lightsaber battles. Those look cool.
3)It was better than Episode II.

I've never even heard of Dune, but dragging threads off topic is a little hobby of mine.

I bet you liked 'Lost in Space' as well...!

I think the question should be not 'Is Dune filmable?' but 'Should Dune be filmed?'

Phalynx wrote:

Nalaris wrote:I liked Episode III for three reasons.

1)It had pretty good acting from Obi-Wan and Sidious, and even Anakin improved.
2)It had lots of lightsaber battles. Those look cool.
3)It was better than Episode II.

I've never even heard of Dune, but dragging threads off topic is a little hobby of mine.

I bet you liked 'Lost in Space' as well...!

I think the question should be not 'Is Dune filmable?' but 'Should Dune be filmed?'

Is it even possible to film all of the dune books?

Not all of 'em no...
not without a massive budget and about 20 years...

I think we were thinking of just the book Dune

Lost in Space sucked. Just for the record.

Phalynx wrote:Not all of 'em no...
not without a massive budget and about 20 years...

I think we were thinking of just the book Dune

I agree. And we are just talking about the first one.

But I think they should split the book up into three parts and film them all at once like they did with Lord of the Rings.

When dealing with long book adaptations it's always better to treat it like one uber movie twelve hours long...the fact that it's going to be three shouldn't effect it much.

I'll admit not having read Dune doesn't give me any ground to stand on in the arguement about whether Dune is any good or not. So I'll leave it alone until I read the book.

But I think the line between Sci-fi and Fantasy is so blurred as to making any distinction between the two irrelevant. All you have is a spectrum of extension of disbelief.

In movies like Serenity, you have to believe that ships can jump to different planetary systems in a matter of weeks, that a signal can be broadcast nigh-instantaneously across the 'verse and that experimentation with human beings can turn people into monstrous fighting machines. And that there are little machines that when turned on can make people spontaneously hemorhage from the inside out. ("Ariel", Firefly)

How much more of a stretch is it to say that people can be born with the ability to be monstrous fighting machines? Or that long distance space travel can occur within hours or seconds instead of weeks? Or that there can be machines that emit a cutting beam of light about .75 m in length?

Until our science can prove otherwise, it's all fantasy. Sci-fi is just a sub-genre.