Gromit
International Man of Misery
I agree.I call rubbish on that. Where in the book is this?
Feyd has a whole harem of concubines that the Baron makes him kill to teach him a lesson.
Which he does grudgingly for a chance at Emperor.
I agree.I call rubbish on that. Where in the book is this?
After Feyd had tried to assassinate the baron, a talent for treacherous scheming that he admired and thought was a quality that confirmed his belief Feyd was the best choice to inherit his position rather than thick as pig shit Rabban.I agree.
Feyd has a whole harem of concubines that the Baron makes him kill to teach him a lesson.
Which he does grudgingly for a chance at Emperor.
In the film, Rabban is more so brutal + incompetent at crushing the guerillas and cowing the population. Feyd is not the relief from Rabban's rule, but rather very brutally escalates the violence and is very good at it (lots of dead Fremen), in the North at least.(in the book, I've not seen movie 2 yet)
the Baron's plan was for Rabban to brutalise the population of Arakkis to an extreme, so that Feyd would be welcomed as a saviour in comparison when he was put in to replace Rabban. not particularly that either of Rabban or Feyd was truly more or less of a monster in the Harkonnen way.
perhaps that's what he was thinking of.
Not as rushed as the Lynch version, which feels like someone hit the fast forward button.I really enjoyed watching part 2 at the cinema, the sound was amazing.
My only issue was that the last 30 minutes was rushed compared to the previous 5 hours of both films. I was scratching my head about some of the motivations and what was happening (not read the book).
Yeah, visuals are ace and was fond of it but some of the clunkier moments are a bit jarring when you revisit it after the years. That said, it's far better (imho) than the telly adaptation, which was led to believe was a masterpiece. Nope.That was out of his hands, though. I like the Lynch adaptation, despite it being a mess. It still looks lush.
Something I missed from the Lynch version was weaponising the voice. I was disappointed when it didn't happen.
Was it in the book?
No.Something I missed from the Lynch version was weaponising the voice. I was disappointed when it didn't happen.
Was it in the book?
It's proper dogshit imoYeah, visuals are ace and was fond of it but some of the clunkier moments are a bit jarring when you revisit it after the years. That said, it's far better (imho) than the telly adaptation, which was led to believe was a masterpiece. Nope.
Will happily watch it again, like part one. On book four and am smitten with it all, not hugely worried if there's a few deviations.I think you'd only really care about that if you'd read the book so it's not a big deal really.
I'm itching to see it again and might even go back to the cinema which is something I don't think I've ever done.
The teenage mate who got me into Dune had a big crush on Sting. This scene barely played on her VHS copyfun detail - sting apparently still has the power pants from the david lynch movie when he played harkinens evil nephew and according to Austin butler (who plays him in the new version)
View attachment 415955Sting still has the codpiece he wore in David Lynch's 'Dune'
Sting still owns the famous blue codpiece that he memorably wore in David Lynch’s 1984 film version of 'Dune'.www.nme.com
that and his talk about the scripts, how zimmer is already working on the score....Not official confirmation, but this article seems to let slip that Villeneuve is definitely making Dune Messiah:
Legendary, ‘Dune’ Helmer Denis Villeneuve Re-Team On ‘Nuclear War: A Scenario’
Legendary Entertainment has optioned Annie Jacobsen's Nuclear War: A Scenario as a potential reteam with Dune: Part Two director Denis Villeneuve.deadline.com