Villeneuve is an amazing director, both visually and story wise. He just might not be your style, slow burning. Check out Sicario for one of his more 'action' packed films. You might like it.

Well thats stupid. In the book HE dies from being abandoned in the desert with no suit on and gets eaten by a Sandworm. That makes more sense, but I guess they went another route with it. As for the shields. In the book it is explained that if the shields are hit with a laser gun it creates a little nuclear explosion killing everyone in range. It also stops projectiles/objects traveling a certain speed. So they adapted by training to fight with swords and knifes. Its also explained that they have to slow down their moves when nearing the shields to make sure it goes thru. Dont know if they explain that in the film since I will be going to see it tonight. But yeah there you go.

@aholejones said:

Though apparently she is not knowledgeable enough of the desert to not let someone sneak behind her and stab her in the back even though she is in a wide open space with nobody else around for miles and in a surface where a footstep and movement would make a very clear auditory signal. Yeah, I'm not a 100% convinced her knowledge of the desert is as good as she thinks.

Hey, at least she wasn't a Marry Sue who suddenly turned around and kung fu'd a bunch of well-armed soldiers that Aquaman couldn't fight off while fully armed with swords.

@aholejones said: Anyways, since I'm here, am I the only one or is this movie like the directors Blade Runner 2049? Meaning both of them were largely much ado about nothing. A bunch of decent looking shots with not much of a story behind it

I loved Blade Runner 2049, and I thought that the stakes were actually super high. Perfect follow-up to the first movie to me.

@mechajutaro said:

Anyways, since I'm here, am I the only one or is this movie like the directors Blade Runner 2049? Meaning both of them were largely much ado about nothing

Denis Villeneuve is one of the most formidable directors working today, so long as he sticks to neo-noir thrillers like Prisoners and Sicarrio. He's not a visual maven on the order of Ridley Scott though, and that's the sort of director required to make a sci fi epic work

I think you got it right. 'Sicario' and 'Prisoners' were good movies, 'Arrival' was still decent and 'BR 2049' and 'Dune' are just rather mediocre with perhaps arguably nice visuals.

@aholejones said:

Though apparently she is not knowledgeable enough of the desert to not let someone sneak behind her and stab her in the back even though she is in a wide open space with nobody else around for miles and in a surface where a footstep and movement would make a very clear auditory signal. Yeah, I'm not a 100% convinced her knowledge of the desert is as good as she thinks.

Anyways, since I'm here, am I the only one or is this movie like the directors Blade Runner 2049? Meaning both of them were largely much ado about nothing. A bunch of decent looking shots with not much of a story behind it. They should might as well have called this one Bladerunner 10191. Heck, it seemed like they had more advanced technology in 2049 than in 10191. In 10191 people have apparently regressed to fighting wars with swords for some reason. And what's the deal with those 'shields'? They kind of shield you from attacks except they don't really seem to shield anyone from anything and everyone seems to die in one sword strike regardless of the shields. Those shields are weak.....powerful weak...like Derringer bullets.

Actually them not having laser guns was pretty bizarre.

@aholejones said:

Though apparently she is not knowledgeable enough of the desert to not let someone sneak behind her and stab her in the back even though she is in a wide open space with nobody else around for miles and in a surface where a footstep and movement would make a very clear auditory signal. Yeah, I'm not a 100% convinced her knowledge of the desert is as good as she thinks.

She did have a thumper active at the time, and she was preoccupied looking for worm sign.

Worth noting here, that book-Liet Kynes, much like book-Jessica and book-Thufir Hawat do not show up in this movie.

These are central figures to the plot, and absolute badasses in their fields, and none of it made it into the movie.

I bet, if they cut the Kynes and Hawat characters entirely, the edit would have been done in all of 2 minutes. No real changes required. Movie plays out exactly the same without them. If that isn't damning, I don't know what is.

@SydneyFife said:

Worth noting here, that book-Liet Kynes, much like book-Jessica and book-Thufir Hawat do not show up in this movie.

These are central figures to the plot, and absolute badasses in their fields, and none of it made it into the movie.

I bet, if they cut the Kynes and Hawat characters entirely, the edit would have been done in all of 2 minutes. No real changes required. Movie plays out exactly the same without them. If that isn't damning, I don't know what is.

Agreed. No subplot with Hawat that he suspects that Jessica is a spy for the Harkonnens. So pretty much nothing for him to do. Or dinner scene with Kynes and how they interact with the upper class. I dont see why they wouldnt bring him back for Part 2. He has a whole bunch of manipulating to do from the inside. But honestly they may just cut it all out and say he died so they can focus on other stuff.

@OddRob said:

Villeneuve is an amazing director, both visually and story wise. He just might not be your style, slow burning.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you there. When it comes to story, he's actually rather sloppy. More "style over substance".

@Tsavo said:

@OddRob said:

Villeneuve is an amazing director, both visually and story wise. He just might not be your style, slow burning.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you there. When it comes to story, he's actually rather sloppy. More "style over substance".

Really? What did you think of Enemy and Prisoners? That seems like less style over substance to me. But I do agree that he def has a certain style, and that it might hurt the story when he decides to go a certain way. But I still think he is an amazing director that deserves more recognition.

Just finished watching this, I still have to think on the whole experience BUT I have to say I was slightly irritated by everyone's pronunciation of Harkonnen! I know it's a little thing but...?

@bratface said:

Just finished watching this, I still have to think on the whole experience BUT I have to say I was slightly irritated by everyone's pronunciation of Harkonnen! I know it's a little thing but...?

When I read the books a few years ago I kept saying Har-Conan-In while reading.

@OddRob said:

@bratface said:

Just finished watching this, I still have to think on the whole experience BUT I have to say I was slightly irritated by everyone's pronunciation of Harkonnen! I know it's a little thing but...?

When I read the books a few years ago I kept saying Har-Conan-In while reading.

Well for all I know that might be what Herbert intended (this version) but since I have seen Lynch's version that's the pronunciation I am used to. I don't remember how they said it in the abysmal tv version.

@bratface said:

@OddRob said:

@bratface said:

Just finished watching this, I still have to think on the whole experience BUT I have to say I was slightly irritated by everyone's pronunciation of Harkonnen! I know it's a little thing but...?

When I read the books a few years ago I kept saying Har-Conan-In while reading.

Well for all I know that might be what Herbert intended (this version) but since I have seen Lynch's version that's the pronunciation I am used to. I don't remember how they said it in the abysmal tv version.

Honestly it dosent really matter. As long as you get the point they are the bad guys. Which is pretty easy to see. Looking forward to Part 2 in hopes we get to see more and also who they cast as Feyd-Rautha.

@OddRob said:

@bratface said:

@OddRob said:

@bratface said:

Just finished watching this, I still have to think on the whole experience BUT I have to say I was slightly irritated by everyone's pronunciation of Harkonnen! I know it's a little thing but...?

When I read the books a few years ago I kept saying Har-Conan-In while reading.

Well for all I know that might be what Herbert intended (this version) but since I have seen Lynch's version that's the pronunciation I am used to. I don't remember how they said it in the abysmal tv version.

Honestly it dosent really matter. As long as you get the point they are the bad guys. Which is pretty easy to see. Looking forward to Part 2 in hopes we get to see more and also who they cast as Feyd-Rautha.

I was disappointed in the Baron (not creepy enough), same with the worms, I expected MORE! & the time changes seemed (at least to me) unnecessary. I wish I had watched it sooner as I didn't realize that it was only available on HBO for a limited time. But I was happy that Duncan Idaho was in the movie a bit more than in the Lynch version. But the whole thing was just so different, I'm not really sure if I liked it? I'll wait & see after part 2 drops. I'm hoping that Villeneuve doesn't go too over the top with the casting of Feyd.