Going back to the interview, I'm still curious to know which actor it was who went all ballistic on her while they were on the set? I have my suspicions it was the actor who played the Baron.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know. I also thought it could have been Dean Stockwell.

That would really surprise me since all of the interviews and commentaries I've seen for Battlestar Galactica which mentioned Dean were all very positive.

So, I watched the movie on HBO Max, and while it was a well-made movie, it didn't really grab me. I kept waiting for things to get moving and it just seemed a little slow. I didn't realize it was "Part 1" so maybe that's why, and more interesting things will happen in Part 2.

Full disclosure, I have not read the book, and have only seen the 1984 movie. Having seen that, and significant parts of the story, might have made it seem a little slow-moving to me, since it's stuff I already knew.

Judging by the preliminary opening weekend box office numbers, it's unclear right now if Part 2 will even be made. It will all depend on how well it does internationally and how much is made from streaming rights.

Very good article here:

https://variety.com/2021/film/box-o...ng-weekend-timothee-chalamet-1235096320/

Thanks for the link! I am hoping that this means there's a better chance of part 2 getting made, but I wonder how long it will be before it's out, even if it's approved:

In an interview with Variety this week, WarnerMedia chair Ann Sarnoff said plans for the sequel will be based on “the entirety of what ‘Dune’ can do for the company, including HBO Max.” She added, “The story in itself sets up for a sequel. The production is so amazing and the storytelling is so compelling that it’s not going to be judged on box office alone.”

This is absolutely correct and it reflects on the fact that this is now a "new normal" when it comes to whether or not a film is financially successful. How a film does on streaming is actually more important than how it does at the box office because unlike the box office, the studio doesn't have to split the revenue with any other party.

Sometimes less is more.

As a writer one of the hardest lessons I have had to learn is compressing scenes and dialogue. Every writer goes through this. We lover our characters and their voice and want to see them animated and lively, what they have to say and share and play out the scenes in great detail. The readers and watchers, however, want to see the plot and story move forward and continue to behold interesting and intriguing events. So what we find is there's a balancing act--when to cut dialogue and when enough has been shared or even too much as to cue when to move on. I love slow burn movies, but even in these sorts of films you'll notice a commonality among them in that they do not linger too long.

Over the weekend I saw a 70s horror movie that committed many crimes of stretching a scene. Say, for example, two characters are speaking of meeting somewhere and are in the process of signing a document. In the dialogue one asks for a pen, the other fumbles through their pockets or purse, produces a pen and we focus on the implement as the signature is signed and the paper is passed and then they say they'll meet up later, of which directions are shared to the location and the address and other intricate details and then they share pleasantries and walk out of the room, carefully closing the door behind them. Sounds exhausting, right? Then, picture the same scene with maybe a quick shot of a hand signing a document and then one says, "See you at 8 at Acme Hotel," scene fades out and then a new shot merges in with one of them opening the door to the the hotel. In fact, you could even drop them saying "Acme Hotel" and leave it at "See you at 8," and when the camera pans(or the writer describes) them opening a door there's a sign above or even inside the lobby that says Acme Hotel.

See what I did there? We turned an exhausting sequence into something compressed, full of information and kept the plot moving while omitting the mundane.

When a filmmaker chooses to turn a single film into a two-part or three-part series, there's usually one reason:

1) More money

The audience seldom benefits, especially when the material is written for a one film journey. "Fellowship of the Ring" is about 187,000 words. Frank Herbert's "Dune" is also about 180,000 words. "Fellowship" was a film unto itself and while pretty close to the book, there actually were some scenes omitted, albeit minor in effort to fit it all in Peter Jackson's three hour picture. They did a pretty good job. Jackson's "Hobbit," on the other hand, was a disaster.


To me, there's only one reason to turn a single film into a two-part or three-part series:

Because it is absolutely necessary!

If a follow-up to Villeneuve's "Dune" is never made, then we all lose. I don't have HBO Max so I have not watched yet. When I can and pay fairly to watch, I will. Perhaps this artificial lengthening of film is hurting us more than helping. Far too many modern films approach or pass the two-hour mark and often they're filled with senseless action fluff or padded with slog. From the scant few posts I've read about this new film, to me it sounds like they could have condensed much and moved things along for the benefit of the audience.

I still struggle with shrinking and cutting scenes, by the way. It ain't easy.



p.s. That long run-on sentence was written as such to express my point.

How many pages does the Tom Bombadill plotline take in the book? I've not read it so I'd be curious to know and as I'm sure you are well aware, Peter Jackson completely took that plotline out of the movie.

I don't know what the running time is for this new Dune film but even a 3 hour film is not enough to do justice to Herbert's book. The SyFy Channel Dune miniseries is very faithful to the novel and that had a total running time of 295 minutes (so almost 5 hours).

So in short, I disagree with your notion that "Dune" can be faithfully adapted into one film unless of course you make it a 5 hour film which for obvious reasons would not be practical.

My point was what happens if the sequel is never made?

Often less is more. If only the producers didn't screw over Lynch...

Oh, I am 100% convinced his film would have been even better if he had full creative control. Unfortunately Dino De Laurentiis didn't have a reputation for giving up control. In many ways he was the Italian George Lucas.

The new movie is visually amazing but its heavy on very Frank Herbert style dialogue.

So in other words, people who are fans of the novel will like the movie but people who have never read it might find the movie boring.

My oversimplified guess at opinions:

people who haven't read the book - too long & overly complex.
People who read the book - not long enough & too much missed out.



But back on topic, I haven't seen it yet and I have not seen trailers or watched reviews, but from the titles & headlines from people that I enjoy, it gets a good rap so far.

I WAS going to see it this past weekend but my wife had to work so I'll be seeing it this coming Saturday. I really NEED to see this on the big screen.

It is definitely worth seeing on the big screen.
I saw it last week, and found it amazing. The 1984 film is fun, but this one is much better - it does leave out some bits from the book, but I think they were fine to leave out. In my group were a couple of people who had seen the 1984 movie but not read the book, and someone who hadn't read the book (but is smart and doesn't need things to be super fast). They all enjoyed it a lot, and understood what was going on.

This is certainly great news. Apparently the streaming numbers were good enough to offset the mediocre box office performance.

It was the biggest box office success for Warner Brothers in 2021, so not particularly mediocre. It's also number 13 worldwide in box office takings, and has only been out for a short time (variable based on location).

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/

Interesting that the biggest movie there seems to be a Chinese only release.