Ok, honestly though, is Lynch version really THAT bad?

KINO

>You need a lukewarm IQ nigga with no original thought to just adapt the book word for word
funny, I thought one of the major problems with Lynch's version was that he followed the chain of events in the book pretty closely. He added a bunch of nonsensical shit of his own of course but by and large the movie was 1 to 1 with what happened in the book in terms of major moments.

Anthony Burgess was a one-hit wonder

It doesn't remotely work as a standalone film. It kinda works as a companion to the book, as there are lots of good scenes. Design aesthetics and production values are generally excellent.
That said, there are some bizarre departures from the original story which make absolutely no sense, and are infuriating to bookfags.

not right now because Yas Forums is in full contrarian mode due based Villeneuvekino on the way. I wouldn't discuss about either movie here for about a year.

The only genius he ever adapted was Nabokov and Lolita was his worst film

Finished the book yesterday. Is it a good moment to give Lynch's Dune a shot?

Attached: 1586829575506.png (680x788, 639.84K)

optimal time

streamable.com/kzwf9

Attached: twin_peaks.jpg (960x640, 144.95K)

No it fucking isn't. Why did they make Paul a whiny little bitch?

too many voice-overs designed to reveal the characters thoughts - it just doesn't work

also, I saw one version where there was like a 10 minute prologue

I don't blame Lynch - heard he washed his hands of the whole thing before release

Lynch gives Paul actual superpowers which misses the entire fucking point of the book, not to mention the baron flying around comically and the fremen being reduced to just some dudes in the desert.

As a movie on it's own it's good, but it's not a good adaptation.

I remember not liking the intro or the voice-overs. The first half was also better than the second, it kind of starts falling apart once Paul and his mother escape the coup.

>I remember not liking the intro or the voice-overs
I love how they keep fading Irulan out in the intro, so they can cut some of the windy bitch's monologue.

No there's some truly KINO moments like the vagina Madison opening. Paul taking the water of life. Paul riding the maker. The problem was it didn't have the passion and budget it needed.

Lynch Dune was better first book adaptation, but miniseries Children was better overall.
Lynch: best Paul, Leto, Liet, Piter de Vries
Mini: best Baron
Tied for cutest Irulan

>he followed the chain of events in the book pretty closely. H
nigga turned paul's apprehension of having a jihad launched in his name to a literal superpower because kungfu in the desert doesn't make sense

The movie nosedives once Leto Atreides is captured. It's a beautiful kind of a mess all the way through though, it just gets way more campy at that moment.

No, it really isn't that bad. I was like 8 when I first watched it, understood it perfectly fine. Great soundtrack, too.

>Great soundtrack, too
Yes, the jazz-rock stylings of Toto were the perfect accompaniment to a sci-fi movie set in the far future.

Lynch version is Kino.

This

Does this sound like jazz rock?

youtube.com/watch?v=9Mt36O2nVkM

It was a bad movie but the set design, costumes and practical effects (aside from the worms) were excellent. The movie itself was incoherent and the dated cgi ruins how good all the practical stuff was.

i can understand why Lynch wouldn't have gone to the expense of actually having god-tier knife and sword fights.. and he dropped that idea for the ridiculous "sonic weapon" shit. on top of that, "Dune" is a difficult text to adapt. also Raffaela De Laurentis made them film it in New Mexico, largely in a place called "Dead Dog Dump".

LOL, you got baited.
Still, Brian Eno's 2-minute contribution is the best part of the soundtrack.
>GEORGY PORGY, PUDDING PIE ...

>>frank herbert
>>genius

read the fucking Dosadi Experiment and let's see if you're still sneering after that.

Attached: Dosadi Experiment.jpg (850x1388, 168.54K)