*** DUNE: PART TWO ***
154,265 Views |
1415 Replies |
Last: 6 mo ago by oragator
#DuneMovie will be presented entirely in IMAX’s exclusive Expanded Aspect Ratio so you can be fully immersed in Denis Villeneuve’s vision of Dune. Experience it in IMAX, March 1. #FilmedForIMAX pic.twitter.com/Vb5dv8cAZQ
— IMAX (@IMAX) January 24, 2024
DUNE: PART TWO tickets on sale - or no later than, at least - 11:10 a.m. EST on Friday.
— Johnny Sobczak (@JohnnySobczak) January 24, 2024
Also going on sale… Fan First Screenings in IMAX, taking place on Sunday, February 25 at 7:00 PM local time.
Availability/showtimes are going to vary, so keep an eye out! pic.twitter.com/tKn3h2Eatr
Denis Villeneuve’s DUNE: PART TWO screened for exhibitors this week and is being hailed as a “masterpiece” (via @EmpireCityBO)
— Reel Updates (@worldofreel) January 24, 2024
“I can say without reservation that it is INCREDIBLE, a true modern sci-fi masterpiece by Denis Villeneuve.”https://t.co/sYXsIYJVcg pic.twitter.com/oT2nUT1Xli
I purchased tickets for 2/25 on amc
This is within moments of tickets going on sale for DUNE: PART TWO. pic.twitter.com/r2FvIAPRgn
— Dan Marcus (@Danimalish) January 24, 2024
This. Add more nights!
Spice is life.
— Exhibitor Relations Co. (@ERCboxoffice) January 24, 2024
Maybe WB should reconsider…one night only…just a thought.
Exclusive DUNE 2 preview as well… pic.twitter.com/rSlgRD1Qah
In Austin, Dune 1 tonight at liemax is pretty much sold out. Last I checked this morning there were a couple seats on the front row and a few wheelchair spots without seat.
I just wandered over to look at the most real IMAX in town for Dune 2 tickets and noticed they are reshowing Dune 1 from Feb 9-13 (Dune: Part One | Bullock Texas State History Museum IMAX (thestoryoftexas.com))
I just wandered over to look at the most real IMAX in town for Dune 2 tickets and noticed they are reshowing Dune 1 from Feb 9-13 (Dune: Part One | Bullock Texas State History Museum IMAX (thestoryoftexas.com))
Very weird to put a super obscure character on the movie posters, but this franchise has made some bad decisions already.
Souheila Yacoub as Shishakli, a Fremen warrior. Originally a man in the novel and barely a character at all. I'm sure this iteration will bring a much needed female perspective which will provide additional value.
Souheila Yacoub as Shishakli, a Fremen warrior. Originally a man in the novel and barely a character at all. I'm sure this iteration will bring a much needed female perspective which will provide additional value.
And what "bad decisions" would those be? If you're someone who can be so offended by a head on a poster, I can't wait to hear your critiques of the movie itself.
Sometimes Hollywood does random stuff that ends up of no significance. I remember one of the Transformers movies had a scene were some military guys were getting ready to go base jumping with those winged flight suits to fight, and the camera focused and lingered on this random, small character for a weird amount of time. There might even have been some promotional stuff at the theater (or maybe in the credits) that said "introducing so and so." I can't remember if it ended up being an actor that went on to bigger things or not.
Maybe more well recognized on the entertainment board is the trailer for Age of Ultron that focused on a random women with some cleavage running into a building. She ended up being a nobody.
Maybe more well recognized on the entertainment board is the trailer for Age of Ultron that focused on a random women with some cleavage running into a building. She ended up being a nobody.
Maybe he's referring to changing Dr. Kynes was changed into a woman. The book character was also the father of Chani.
That's the only thing I really haven't liked
That's the only thing I really haven't liked
But what makes that a "bad" decision? Especially when she gave a great performance/played the role effectively.
The reality is, Warner Bros has to try and reach a massive, diverse audience in order to justify the extreme budgets. So these movies can't just have the same two female leads in both of them (Zendaya and Ferguson). Especially when the franchise already has a sh*t ton of testosterone outside of those two characters, trying to carve out a third female role (Kynes) in the first movie, and then elevating Princess Irulan and carving out Shishakli in this one - makes perfect sense. I've said it a thousand time before in other threads, but changes like this aren't meant to be "woke" or arbitrary. They're simply trying and get more women to show up to the theater. It's about $$$ and nothing more.
The reality is, Warner Bros has to try and reach a massive, diverse audience in order to justify the extreme budgets. So these movies can't just have the same two female leads in both of them (Zendaya and Ferguson). Especially when the franchise already has a sh*t ton of testosterone outside of those two characters, trying to carve out a third female role (Kynes) in the first movie, and then elevating Princess Irulan and carving out Shishakli in this one - makes perfect sense. I've said it a thousand time before in other threads, but changes like this aren't meant to be "woke" or arbitrary. They're simply trying and get more women to show up to the theater. It's about $$$ and nothing more.
IT IS HAR-CO-NAN, NOT har-key-nin!!!!TCTTS said:
And what "bad decisions" would those be? If you're someone who can be so offended by a head on a poster, I can't wait to hear your critiques of the movie itself.
To double down on what Wangus said, for starters, it's like a bad pitch meeting where they say "Let's talk about Chani's father" and someone says "How about we cast a black woman?" The fact that Kynes reveals he's fathered a daughter on Dune is a big reveal to the Atreides that clearly there is more to the planet than sand and spice; for someone from the Empire to have "gone native" and learned the customs, fathered a child - he didn't have to do any of that to do his job, but that takes us to the reveal of the grand plans to reform Dune into a green paradise with water.TCTTS said:
But what makes that a "bad" decision? Especially when she gave a great performance/played the role effectively.
Beyond the fatherhood though is the fact that Kynes is the de facto leader of all the Fremen at the point that House Atreides takes over, which is a huge deal because they definitely don't trust off-worlders. They do however, run as a patriarchy; the highest a female can hope to achieve in Fremen society is a Reverend Mother. So while it might not be a big deal for a movie crowd; for people who have enjoyed the book over the past 60 years, you're tossing one of the biggest tenets of Fremen society into the trash in the first hour of the movie.
It doesn't help that Max Von Sydow was one of the top 2-3 performances in the original production as Kynes. book character carries the weight of decades on Dune - seeing and learning everything. So that they know this massive wasteland like the back of their hand. von Sydow as 56 or so when the original came out, Duncan-Brewster was 45. I like the actress fine - she's been a lot of thing I like (Rogue One, Bad Batch, Enola Holmes), but the gender switch definitely was irritating and one that screws with the infastructure of the society on Dune.
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
740
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
This is another example of adaptation being its own art form, IMO. Since the movie is way more compressed, the character was never going to be able to accomplish all that without exposition dumping all the time, which essentially is all that character does in the movie now anyway, but has way less to do without all the other weight you described.
In all likelihood they were writing it and realized the character couldn't be everything he was in the book and required some changes. They just went ahead and made him a woman to underline the changes.
I think at some point with adaptations you have to appreciate the major beats and themes of the story and not expect every bit of mythology or character detail to get fleshed out.
In all likelihood they were writing it and realized the character couldn't be everything he was in the book and required some changes. They just went ahead and made him a woman to underline the changes.
I think at some point with adaptations you have to appreciate the major beats and themes of the story and not expect every bit of mythology or character detail to get fleshed out.
IF they did it just for diversity, then black people and women should be pissed off that the character is less significant than in the book and gets straight up killed really quickly. Why couldn't Gurney be a Vietamese she-male or Duncan be a cross-dressing American Eskimo to really show we care about all people?
I guess I don't understand how any of that is undone by the character being female. Kynes can still have given birth to Chandi, "gone native," learned the customs, etc. Even though she's dead, for all we know it's revealed in the sequel that she was Chandi's mother.
As for the whole patriarchy thing, why is that undone by the change as well? Isn't Stilgar the one charge? And wasn't Kynes in more of an intermediary position (i.e. not a leader)?
Either way, there simply isn't room in the movie to explore most of that. It's not like if they would have kept the character male they'd have suddenly had the time to go down that road. So I just don't get what the issue is.
As for the whole patriarchy thing, why is that undone by the change as well? Isn't Stilgar the one charge? And wasn't Kynes in more of an intermediary position (i.e. not a leader)?
Either way, there simply isn't room in the movie to explore most of that. It's not like if they would have kept the character male they'd have suddenly had the time to go down that road. So I just don't get what the issue is.
Because it's PAUL's story. In a movie you can't ever lose focus of the main character's arc. Again, going down any Kynes road more than we did not only would have added to an already long runtime, but would have taken the focus off of Paul. Villeneuve already had to cut so much just to make sure that focus didn't stray and the movie could stay under 2h 45m.
I know you well enough to know you love this movie to death and you're going to counter any thing that anyone says about it, and that's cool. I dig the passion.
You asked for opinions and I gave mine. It's trite at this point to say you'd feel differently if you'd read the book, because the movie is a different thing from the book, and we've been around and around on that enough times, mostly for humor.
But when you take really cherished source material and alter it for the sake of a movie, it makes generational fans sore about it.
The same thing was true when they had Arwen come rescue the Fellowship from the Ring Wraiths outside Rivendell instead of my boy Glorfindel, who never even got seen in the movies at all.
The books don't equal movies and never will, but to hear that it's just for "diversity' makes it even more annoying.
You asked for opinions and I gave mine. It's trite at this point to say you'd feel differently if you'd read the book, because the movie is a different thing from the book, and we've been around and around on that enough times, mostly for humor.
But when you take really cherished source material and alter it for the sake of a movie, it makes generational fans sore about it.
The same thing was true when they had Arwen come rescue the Fellowship from the Ring Wraiths outside Rivendell instead of my boy Glorfindel, who never even got seen in the movies at all.
The books don't equal movies and never will, but to hear that it's just for "diversity' makes it even more annoying.
I completely understand and empathize with being sore about an element from the book not being in the movie. I totally, 100% get that, and am not at all saying "Don't be upset" in that regard.
My point is, changing Kynes from a man to a woman had next to nothing to do with your complaint. Rather, your frustration should be that this was only two movies instead of, say, a miniseries. Your complaint should be that this story required eight hours to properly tell instead of just under six. Because, again, even if they kept the character male, they didn't have the time to include everything you wanted from the character.
As for "diversity," I obviously didn't mean it in the traditional/DEI sense. I meant, as a giant corporation looking to cover their ass/maximize their profits, they need men AND women to show up for these movies. So in their minds, the more women they can squeeze into a male-dominated action blockbuster, the more women they think will show up. It really is that simple. There's nothing nefarious going on here.
My point is, changing Kynes from a man to a woman had next to nothing to do with your complaint. Rather, your frustration should be that this was only two movies instead of, say, a miniseries. Your complaint should be that this story required eight hours to properly tell instead of just under six. Because, again, even if they kept the character male, they didn't have the time to include everything you wanted from the character.
As for "diversity," I obviously didn't mean it in the traditional/DEI sense. I meant, as a giant corporation looking to cover their ass/maximize their profits, they need men AND women to show up for these movies. So in their minds, the more women they can squeeze into a male-dominated action blockbuster, the more women they think will show up. It really is that simple. There's nothing nefarious going on here.
Actually I thought the movie was kind of long, and yet still left out 2 of my favorite scenes from the novel. I'm sure I'll see the second part at some point, but I've only watched a couple of scenes since I saw it in the theater. It's definitely in my Harry Potter / Game of Thrones realm of if I'm jonsing for the property, I'm definitely going to the book shelf, not the TV.
You read the book?
Wrong thread
Are we doing this again?Brian Earl Spilner said:
You read the book?
Part Two is going to be insane. Those of us who saw Denis Villeneuve's Dune in @IMAX tonight got a special sneak preview of Part Two. We saw a new trailer and the full scene of Paul riding a sandworm for the 1st time. It already looks like a masterpiece. I cannot wait! @dunemovie pic.twitter.com/1Ali1gyEBE
— Yoko Higuchi (@theYokoHiguchi) January 25, 2024
The scene they showed us from DUNE: PART TWO tonight was simply unreal! I have always been in awe of how Denis Villeneuve captures scale in his movies, but this looks to be unparalleled, especially in IMAX. This movie can't get here fast enough! #DunePartTwo pic.twitter.com/RnQ3so7FZD
— Ezra Cubero (@EzraCubero) January 25, 2024
I can tell everyone will fall in love with the Fremen just from this clip. Great humor tied to little character beats without sacrificing a shred of intensity or grandiosity for the ride itself. Zendaya and Bardem are gonna crush it. People applauded at the end. We’re. Back.
— Johnny Sobczak (@JohnnySobczak) January 25, 2024
Just got out of the IMAX special preview of Dune Part Two. You thought Part One was big?? DUNE PART TWO is going to blow your stillsuits off⏳ Say it with me: Denis Villeneuve Did It.
— CalderDune (@CalderDune) January 25, 2024
Brian Earl Spilner said:
You read the book?
You thought Avatar should have won Best Picture?
I wouldn't exactly call that "thunderous applause," but good gosh this looks incredible...
New trailer for #DunePartTwo with a thunderous applause at the end 🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡 https://t.co/badA6Ey81m pic.twitter.com/PIs0WBPYoV
— M28 🌶️ (@varsham214) January 25, 2024
The popcorn buckets for ‘DUNE: PART TWO’ are definitely…something.
— One Take News (@OneTakeNews) January 26, 2024
(via @3CFilmss) pic.twitter.com/ZQ7S5VjDDZ
I don't buy souvenir stuff at the movie theaters but that is rad
btk55
BREAKING: The Dallas #Cowboys and head coach Mike McCarthy have decided to part ways.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
110