I've always loved Dune (books, HBO's adaptation, and even the older films!), but I think it is a good example of where we can go wrong with our characters and overused tropes. What did you think of Dune Part 1?
Many of the tropes in Dune weren't tropes when the book came out, so it's not really a trope, when the movie is just being faithful to the original, which many other stories have tried to imitate. Dune has been one of the most influential pieces of fiction in Hollywood, while many consumers didn't know the origin. Ofc the Dune books have their own influence, so did LotR, but saying LotR is full of tropes also feels like a weak arguement, as the movie series is one of the most influential together with Star Wars, that btw got most of its inspiration from Dune.
I totally agree with you. And honestly I cut a portion of this videos where I explain that. The main point I was making is that when it comes to adapting something, there is a time and a place to deviating. Paul’s whole arc is a bit bland in the current era of writing and storytelling. A big thing I want other writers to understand is that if they are going to use these trope that they should do so in a fresh way.
@@wrestlingwithwords Paul's arc is so hard to adapt because it's all about the battle he has in his own mind, the sacrifice of his humanity in exchange for being able to view the Now is something that is not easy to convey as Herbert often told us these things by sharing their thoughts whereas Denis has to show this and I think he manages to pull it off fairly well.
I loved the series. I feel as if each time I go back to them I find something new. The language and writing can sometimes be hard to get back into, but I'd say the books hold up pretty well!
I think one of the core aspects of the novel is the environment and how it affects the mind of our characters, Arrakis is the centre of the story and it is through this world that we see how Paul, Jessica and Leto adapt to its harsh environment. I don't think it's entirely fair to criticise the setting over characters as the point of Part One is to set up where the whole story will take place and how society, climate and nature works; this allows Part Two to focus more on character development, action and reaction as we are now familiar with where they are and importance can be emphasised on what they do.
It's also a really false equivalency to compare the deaths of Ned Stark and Leto as Ned was the protagonist for a whole book whereas Leto was a side character for 1/3 of a book so if you have an issue with more character development being devoted to Ned over Leto that is not entirely the movie's fault.
I really agree with your point about the environment and its being a core element to Frank Herbert's books. Herbert has even said that the story began when he observed the sand dunes in Oregon. Even though this movie was setting up the character stuff for part two, I still believe that each movie should be able to stand on its own. Wouldn't it have made sense that in this movie we'd see how the characters feel and think about this new environment? Again, I see your point and in some ways totally agree. I just don't think this film did an A+ job of illustrating those things.
As a fan of the Dune series, I think your critique is fair. I agree with most of it. At the same time, I don't know how Denis Villeneuve could have made a very different film given the conditions under which he was constrained in making this one. He gambled that he could make it successful enough at the box office to convince the studio to green light Part 2. And to do that, I think he calculated that it had to have sufficient action and subtle enough world building to get it past that obstacle. He could have included a lot of other scenes that would have provided more character development, but at the cost of other elements that were included to make the film the blockbuster that it is. The dinner party scene in particular was useful in the book for the way it introduced more characters and gave them an opportunity to interact, like Paul and Irulan or introducing other characters who would have illustrated the politics and conflicts both on Arakkis and within the Imperium. How long that would have taken and how effective it would have been we will never know. The SciFi channel series did include it and I didn't think it was all that good. As well, Paul was not a compelling character at all in the miniseries until the final episode. As it stands, I think this film is the great introduction to the Dune universe that was needed but not much more than that. I totally agree that the tears for the dead was a huge missed opportunity at the end of Part . It doesn't have to be in the funeral of Jamis. It could have been Paul's immediate reaction and it would have given a lot more power and anticipation to the promise of Part 2. Great job. I like your video very much.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment! I appreciate your perspective and as much as I thought Dune Pt. 1 fell short, I also thought it was a fantastic film. Dune has always been tough to adapt, and I am still surprised they didn't make it a mini-series as I feel like there is so much to explore. Regardless, let's hope for an even better Part 2! Also, thanks for watching! I really appreciate it!
2:19 Spot on. This was the problem with Baxter, and to a much lesser extent Asimov. For me the grandmaster of character as well as sci-fi richness is Iain M Banks
Thank you! Yeah, and honestly, I really liked the film but I think there are a few things that could have made it better. And honestly, I feel like this could have been the perfect series to adapt into a mini-series.
I remember thinking, does this guy have any friends he’s leaving behind forever? There’s no humanity in this major life decision. Luke Skywalker indicates his desire to go off planet and he sees his family dead so you can understand why he leaves.
So much of the personality in the book felt like it was on the cutting floor for no reason. Thufir Hawat barely makes an appearance, Piter has none of his sadistic personality, the search for a traitor has no twists and turns, and Paul doesn't cry after the duel. These are all small things that would likely give the story have more character and personality. Why split the book into two parts if not to capture these kinds of details?
More good points. I still think this should have been produced as a mini-series. There is so much material, but I guess the budget wasn't there with the actors they cast.
Wow I disagree with just about every single thing you've said so far. I'm five minutes in and want to leave a comment after I'm finished with some thoughts.
I totally respect that! I didn’t expect everyone to agree and knew this was a bit of a hot take. Regardless, I think there is still a lot we can learn from this version of Dune when it comes to writing and storytelling.
Series do have the benefit of having more time to develop character. I think as well with a non-western director he might not have been able to tease out certain performances because it’s not done in their first language and that might make it harder to spot subtle differences in performances, or spot the need to rework certain lines or moments that can be crucial to a moment working or not. I just found the story incomplete and some dialogue really clunky in parts.
Timothee speaks French. Denis is French Canadian, so English is not a real issue for him. In actuality he's known as being a fantastic director of actors. The performances in all his films have always been at the highest level. This is not an issue for him.
@@pseudonymousbeing987 speaking a language and communicating intent isn’t the issue he would have. But there’s a possibility with things like inflection and the subtleties of language that he might not be as critical of because it doesn’t register. It’s like being white and trying to craft an authentic African American story, you can try and be authentic as you can but there’s subtleties you won’t pick up on in the same way that people from that culture would. He also casts incredible actors that make up for any of those issues but with a weird space drama with stuffy royal type characters there might be less there for even great actors to naturally get right. Having said that he might not have an issue with it at all like you said, I just thought it could be a contributing factor.
a general problem with denis villeneuve. he WANTS to be stately and antiseptic. the characters are essentially types and they're meant to look cool. everyone is supremely laconic. y'know... cuz that's cool. i disliked the movie for the failures you point out and also that all the action was badly staged. that final knife fight between paul and the other dude was like watching a stage play fight. like was everyone just tired that day and they just wanted to get it over with? awful. and duncan's sacrifice scene was just rote phoning it in with more abhorrent action choreography. and the power rangers vision where paul's armored up and flipping around in a battle scene is the exact wrong kind of imagery that needed to be portrayed. it SHOULD have been something like a nazi massacre on a polish village with paul presiding over it all. THAT was what was needed... not choreography from an MCU stunt team. just a lack of basic TASTE.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on Denis Villeneuve's approach to his Dune adaptation. It's always interesting to hear alternative perspectives because I think this movie has mostly only gotten uncritical praise. The movie was a good movie but had quite a few problems that could have made it REALLY good. Similarly, I also felt a similar underwhelming feeling for the final knife fight scene... Fingers crossed for part 2.
For sure! And I think I say as much. What would have been nice to see and what is probably a bigger takeaway for other writers is to try and re-invent or subvert these tropes.
I've always loved Dune (books, HBO's adaptation, and even the older films!), but I think it is a good example of where we can go wrong with our characters and overused tropes. What did you think of Dune Part 1?
Many of the tropes in Dune weren't tropes when the book came out, so it's not really a trope, when the movie is just being faithful to the original, which many other stories have tried to imitate. Dune has been one of the most influential pieces of fiction in Hollywood, while many consumers didn't know the origin. Ofc the Dune books have their own influence, so did LotR, but saying LotR is full of tropes also feels like a weak arguement, as the movie series is one of the most influential together with Star Wars, that btw got most of its inspiration from Dune.
I totally agree with you. And honestly I cut a portion of this videos where I explain that. The main point I was making is that when it comes to adapting something, there is a time and a place to deviating. Paul’s whole arc is a bit bland in the current era of writing and storytelling. A big thing I want other writers to understand is that if they are going to use these trope that they should do so in a fresh way.
@@wrestlingwithwords Paul's arc is so hard to adapt because it's all about the battle he has in his own mind, the sacrifice of his humanity in exchange for being able to view the Now is something that is not easy to convey as Herbert often told us these things by sharing their thoughts whereas Denis has to show this and I think he manages to pull it off fairly well.
I bought the whole book set back in the early eighties…still have them stored. I might read them again. It is a fantastic epic universe.
I loved the series. I feel as if each time I go back to them I find something new. The language and writing can sometimes be hard to get back into, but I'd say the books hold up pretty well!
Herbert's characters are always complex, but kinda stiff.
That’s a really good way to describe them. I think they each have a very distinct voice and are full of agency.
I think one of the core aspects of the novel is the environment and how it affects the mind of our characters, Arrakis is the centre of the story and it is through this world that we see how Paul, Jessica and Leto adapt to its harsh environment. I don't think it's entirely fair to criticise the setting over characters as the point of Part One is to set up where the whole story will take place and how society, climate and nature works; this allows Part Two to focus more on character development, action and reaction as we are now familiar with where they are and importance can be emphasised on what they do.
It's also a really false equivalency to compare the deaths of Ned Stark and Leto as Ned was the protagonist for a whole book whereas Leto was a side character for 1/3 of a book so if you have an issue with more character development being devoted to Ned over Leto that is not entirely the movie's fault.
I really agree with your point about the environment and its being a core element to Frank Herbert's books. Herbert has even said that the story began when he observed the sand dunes in Oregon. Even though this movie was setting up the character stuff for part two, I still believe that each movie should be able to stand on its own. Wouldn't it have made sense that in this movie we'd see how the characters feel and think about this new environment? Again, I see your point and in some ways totally agree. I just don't think this film did an A+ job of illustrating those things.
As a fan of the Dune series, I think your critique is fair. I agree with most of it. At the same time, I don't know how Denis Villeneuve could have made a very different film given the conditions under which he was constrained in making this one. He gambled that he could make it successful enough at the box office to convince the studio to green light Part 2. And to do that, I think he calculated that it had to have sufficient action and subtle enough world building to get it past that obstacle. He could have included a lot of other scenes that would have provided more character development, but at the cost of other elements that were included to make the film the blockbuster that it is. The dinner party scene in particular was useful in the book for the way it introduced more characters and gave them an opportunity to interact, like Paul and Irulan or introducing other characters who would have illustrated the politics and conflicts both on Arakkis and within the Imperium. How long that would have taken and how effective it would have been we will never know. The SciFi channel series did include it and I didn't think it was all that good. As well, Paul was not a compelling character at all in the miniseries until the final episode. As it stands, I think this film is the great introduction to the Dune universe that was needed but not much more than that. I totally agree that the tears for the dead was a huge missed opportunity at the end of Part . It doesn't have to be in the funeral of Jamis. It could have been Paul's immediate reaction and it would have given a lot more power and anticipation to the promise of Part 2. Great job. I like your video very much.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment! I appreciate your perspective and as much as I thought Dune Pt. 1 fell short, I also thought it was a fantastic film. Dune has always been tough to adapt, and I am still surprised they didn't make it a mini-series as I feel like there is so much to explore. Regardless, let's hope for an even better Part 2!
Also, thanks for watching! I really appreciate it!
I agree. DUNE looked stunning but it didnt make me care about the characters
True! I have been holding out to see Dune part 2…. I’ve heard it’s better, but we will see!
2:19 Spot on. This was the problem with Baxter, and to a much lesser extent Asimov.
For me the grandmaster of character as well as sci-fi richness is Iain M Banks
Yes! Ian Banks was a favorite of mine too. Some of Asimov’s stories were so interesting but man were his characters forgettable…
great video.
i love this movie, but i agree (partially) with you.
no movie is perfect. 😊
Thank you! Yeah, and honestly, I really liked the film but I think there are a few things that could have made it better. And honestly, I feel like this could have been the perfect series to adapt into a mini-series.
@@wrestlingwithwords ♥️
These are good takes. I like your video man I think your channel is going to be massive
I really appreciate you saying so. Thank you SO MUCH for saying so! I only want to see better stories told 🙌.
I remember thinking, does this guy have any friends he’s leaving behind forever? There’s no humanity in this major life decision. Luke Skywalker indicates his desire to go off planet and he sees his family dead so you can understand why he leaves.
That is such a good point. It felt like there was no clarity on the life and world of the characters outside from the plot.
So much of the personality in the book felt like it was on the cutting floor for no reason. Thufir Hawat barely makes an appearance, Piter has none of his sadistic personality, the search for a traitor has no twists and turns, and Paul doesn't cry after the duel. These are all small things that would likely give the story have more character and personality. Why split the book into two parts if not to capture these kinds of details?
More good points. I still think this should have been produced as a mini-series. There is so much material, but I guess the budget wasn't there with the actors they cast.
Dune pt. 1 was a bit confusing… I also really enjoyed it and am looking forward to part 2 coming out this year!
Me too!
Wow I disagree with just about every single thing you've said so far. I'm five minutes in and want to leave a comment after I'm finished with some thoughts.
I totally respect that! I didn’t expect everyone to agree and knew this was a bit of a hot take. Regardless, I think there is still a lot we can learn from this version of Dune when it comes to writing and storytelling.
Dune will never translate to the screen. Desert landscapes rarely do. If all of Star Wars was on tatoonie or whatever it would have failed too.
Read the book, avoid this boring digital art experiment.
The books are fantastic.
I disagree with your points, but I respect them. We can agree to disagree.
Which is great! I think it's good that we can understand and respectfully disagree. Did you read the books?
Series do have the benefit of having more time to develop character. I think as well with a non-western director he might not have been able to tease out certain performances because it’s not done in their first language and that might make it harder to spot subtle differences in performances, or spot the need to rework certain lines or moments that can be crucial to a moment working or not. I just found the story incomplete and some dialogue really clunky in parts.
Timothee speaks French. Denis is French Canadian, so English is not a real issue for him. In actuality he's known as being a fantastic director of actors.
The performances in all his films have always been at the highest level. This is not an issue for him.
@@pseudonymousbeing987 speaking a language and communicating intent isn’t the issue he would have. But there’s a possibility with things like inflection and the subtleties of language that he might not be as critical of because it doesn’t register. It’s like being white and trying to craft an authentic African American story, you can try and be authentic as you can but there’s subtleties you won’t pick up on in the same way that people from that culture would.
He also casts incredible actors that make up for any of those issues but with a weird space drama with stuffy royal type characters there might be less there for even great actors to naturally get right.
Having said that he might not have an issue with it at all like you said, I just thought it could be a contributing factor.
a general problem with denis villeneuve. he WANTS to be stately and antiseptic. the characters are essentially types and they're meant to look cool. everyone is supremely laconic. y'know... cuz that's cool.
i disliked the movie for the failures you point out and also that all the action was badly staged. that final knife fight between paul and the other dude was like watching a stage play fight. like was everyone just tired that day and they just wanted to get it over with? awful. and duncan's sacrifice scene was just rote phoning it in with more abhorrent action choreography. and the power rangers vision where paul's armored up and flipping around in a battle scene is the exact wrong kind of imagery that needed to be portrayed. it SHOULD have been something like a nazi massacre on a polish village with paul presiding over it all. THAT was what was needed... not choreography from an MCU stunt team.
just a lack of basic TASTE.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on Denis Villeneuve's approach to his Dune adaptation. It's always interesting to hear alternative perspectives because I think this movie has mostly only gotten uncritical praise. The movie was a good movie but had quite a few problems that could have made it REALLY good.
Similarly, I also felt a similar underwhelming feeling for the final knife fight scene... Fingers crossed for part 2.
Dune is the origin of most sci-fi tropes. Cmon man.
For sure! And I think I say as much. What would have been nice to see and what is probably a bigger takeaway for other writers is to try and re-invent or subvert these tropes.
Louis ck even didn't like it. But you cannot make a compled book in an film.. or am i crazy? YOU had to watch a 10 our film for the same effecked 😆