sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (12/15/84)
I should start by saying that I have never read any of the Dune books,
and can't criticise the movie based on expectations from the books.
I've been very surprised by the mountains of bad reviews which have
come out upon the movie's release, especially after having seen it
this evening--I liked it very much, and find that many of the complaints
about the movie seem to miss the mark.
It is an almost bombastically lavish production, and very stylish. In fact,
it wouldn't be too off the mark to claim that the "stars" of the film are
the sets. If most of the crop of SF movies are high-tech, and reflect a
modernist sensibility, then perhaps "Dune" is the first post-modernist
SF movie. Its sets are H.G. Wells meets Art Deco, and are very very
beautiful. Some $40M was spent on the movie, and it mostly shows.
I was most impressed by the complete realization of these other worlds;
I was drawn in totally by this fantasy vision. Yes, it is a bit tedious
at times. Yes, situations can get a little confusing, at least for those
who haven't read the books (in this regard it reminded me of the Bakshi
"Lord of the Rings" movie, which was similarly incomprehensible.) But
I was so impressed by the force of the film's vision and its sheer scope
that I didn't care to nitpick.
This is a dark, brooding SF-noir film, and almost totally without humor--
some characters are bizarre or funny, but the movie takes itself
VERY seriously. But it is this earnestness which makes it so appealing.
It can be appreciated as a serious myth or as pure camp. Either way,
these would have been destroyed if it self-consciously played with humor
a la Star Wars. Kyle MacLachlan's Paul Muad'Dib Atreides is such a
perfect cypher of a character, someone every techie can imagine being,
that I thought the subtitle of this movie was "Nerd Messiah." The other
characters are wonderfully realized, too.
--
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA