Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

SandChigger wrote:... is there any way they can still get it into the theaters before the end of 2010?

Not a chance in hell. The odds would be better on Kevin J. Anderson learning how to write.

Script by a still largely unknown writer, unclear who the director will be, no cast signed on yet ... how can this succeed?

Yeah, that would be like that director and writer of some low-budget, unsuccessful, forgettable movies, like
"Bad Taste," getting Rudy, Sallah, Magneto and Dracula together, and making something epic... like Lord of the Rings or something.

Careful about couting those chickens.

RedHeadKevin wrote:

Script by a still largely unknown writer, unclear who the director will be, no cast signed on yet ... how can this succeed?

Yeah, that would be like that director and writer of some low-budget, unsuccessful, forgettable movies, like
"Bad Taste," getting Rudy, Sallah, Magneto and Dracula together, and making something epic... like Lord of the Rings or something.

Careful about couting those chickens.

Totally agree with that - I'd like to see a good Dune film made, and Berg (or whoever) might be the man.

BUT - have you read all of his interviews?

DuneFishUK wrote:

RedHeadKevin wrote:

Script by a still largely unknown writer, unclear who the director will be, no cast signed on yet ... how can this succeed?

Yeah, that would be like that director and writer of some low-budget, unsuccessful, forgettable movies, like
"Bad Taste," getting Rudy, Sallah, Magneto and Dracula together, and making something epic... like Lord of the Rings or something.

Careful about couting those chickens.

Totally agree with that - I'd like to see a good Dune film made, and Berg (or whoever) might be the man.

BUT - have you read all of his interviews?

Yeah, Berg is clearly a simpleton on at least the level of KJA's simplemindedness, and obviously thinks Dune is more or less exactly the same as The Chronicals of Riddick. Glad to see him go, hope he doesn't come back.

RedHeadKevin wrote:Careful about couting those chickens.

I will have you know, sir, that I have never couted a chicken in my life.

A duck or two and a small dog, once, but never ever a chicken.

Ahem. Yes, anyway, hey, why not The Chronicles of Dunedick?

"Dunedick?" Are they getting Giger to design the worms again?

I was watching this the other day and couldn't help but wonder about the change in actors. I was wondering which actors other people on here preferred from one series over the other. I liked the Stilgar from the first series better than the last second series. I thought he was more contemplative in Dune, whereas he appeared as a mere mindless thug in the second. I want to say that I preferred the first Jessica as well, but both series made her character much too irrelevant to matter. Who else?

I did quite like the second Duncan, but I thought the first one would have made Hayt a bit more interesting - he had a Duncan-ness about him.

Re-casting him also cocked up the "perfect ghola" scene. Looked nuffin' like him!

I absolutely hated the Dune miniseries. In fact, I'm not entirely sure if I even finished watching it... But, this interview is making me want to reconsider seeing the Children of Dune half. Unfortunately, this interview is having the opposite effect.

Some of the things that really distanced me from the first miniseries are the costumes. They sickened me. If Lynch's adaptation did one thing right, it were the costumes. I really enjoyed all the costumes, except for those of the Harkonnens and the Fremen stillsuits were half-bad.

The other thing was the atmosphere. Again, I felt that Lynch captured the epic and moody feel of Dune, whereas the miniseries was too bright. The cartoony special effects didn't help, and only made the Arrakis seem smaller to me.

So, does anyone recommend me giving Children of Dune a second chance? Were either of those problems significantly improved? What other things that bothered any of you were improved? I'm eager for some more Dune, and this is really the only thing I've avoided.

Redstar wrote:So, does anyone recommend me giving Children of Dune a second chance?

Nope.

You've already decided to hate it, so why waste your time? What if you are "sickened" again?

Plus, it's the weaker of the two. If the first one made you sick, the second will actually kill you.

I haven't decided to hate it at all. I just didn't want to risk more of the same. From what I've read here and elsewhere, it supposedly fixed some of the problems of its predecessor and is "stronger" (you say weaker, why?) so my initial reaction may have been too hasty. The above interview with James McAvoy makes it seem like he really enjoyed the role and appreciated the book, so his performance alone might entice me to see it.

Redstar wrote:I absolutely hated the Dune miniseries. In fact, I'm not entirely sure if I even finished watching it... But, this interview is making me want to reconsider seeing the Children of Dune half. Unfortunately, this interview is having the opposite effect.

Some of the things that really distanced me from the first miniseries are the costumes. They sickened me. If Lynch's adaptation did one thing right, it were the costumes. I really enjoyed all the costumes, except for those of the Harkonnens and the Fremen stillsuits were half-bad.

The other thing was the atmosphere. Again, I felt that Lynch captured the epic and moody feel of Dune, whereas the miniseries was too bright. The cartoony special effects didn't help, and only made the Arrakis seem smaller to me.

So, does anyone recommend me giving Children of Dune a second chance? Were either of those problems significantly improved? What other things that bothered any of you were improved? I'm eager for some more Dune, and this is really the only thing I've avoided.

I hate!!! the first miniseries (I've watched it 3 or 4 times) and still plan on watching Messiah/Children with an open mind. I've heard from others, before I came here, that it was better than the Dune mini.

McAvoy does a good job; he's arguably the best part of the entire production.

CoD is a bit schizophrenic when compared to the original, which at least had a definite beginning, middle, and end. There's times when it feels like CoD doesn't know what it wants to be, and it doesn't help that it covers two books that have as many differences as similarities (personally, I think DM and CoD are vastly different, although that's probably a discussion best left for another thread).

But, back to the point: I really can't fathom someone hating the first series and liking the second. They're too similar. Not identical, certainly, but similar. There's not enough there to make a distinction between "I liked this" and "I didn't like this."

Oh, it's worth it if only for the "Behold me, family! I am Ari, the Lion of the Atreides" scene where McAvoy says "Secher Nbiw"!

The first time I watched it, I thought he was choking or clearing his throat.

"Give da boy with da trout-nipples a Halls, someone, for Maker's sake!"


(Seriously, for all its faults, I did enjoy the Children mini much more than the Dune.)

It's entirely possible I'm in the minority regarding the comparison. Wouldn't be the first time ...

Actually, I'm overdue for a re-watching of CoD. It's been quite a while since I've seen it, and maybe I'll pick up on some new things if I take it in again.

Just watch it and form your own opinion.

Sound advice. But I'm not wasting $10+ without some conviction going into it.

To my mind the best part of the CoD package is the first disc where it tell the story of Messiah, it went down hill after that, but YMMV. It is better than their telling of Dune.

It had the same budget as the first series, but they spent it much better.

DM is excellent, COD is simplified - be warned... but it's still satisfying, which I my mind is good adaptation. The acting is noticeably better too.

TheDukester wrote:It's entirely possible I'm in the minority regarding the comparison. Wouldn't be the first time ...

Actually, I'm overdue for a re-watching of CoD. It's been quite a while since I've seen it, and maybe I'll pick up on some new things if I take it in again.

Ulp! There 'ya go with the winged cod-piece. I actually told myself it was probably only a matter of time.

Omphalos wrote:

TheDukester wrote:It's entirely possible I'm in the minority regarding the comparison. Wouldn't be the first time ...

Actually, I'm overdue for a re-watching of CoD. It's been quite a while since I've seen it, and maybe I'll pick up on some new things if I take it in again.

Ulp! There 'ya go with the winged cod-piece. I actually told myself it was probably only a matter of time.

Lynch wanted Sting to be nude, but he chickened out. That cod-piece was made the night before the shot.

Isn't Dune trivia just so fun?

You know what I realized last night? I really, really dislike the Baron in Lynch's film. At first I thought it was just the acne and spittle, but then I started thinking about the miniseries' Baron and became more and more disgusted with how comically childish and absurd Lynch-Baron was... I'm starting to prefer the miniseries for its subtleties, something Lynch didn't have.

Redstar wrote:I really, really dislike the Baron in Lynch's film.

Truly, you are a gentleman and a scholar. With a fine eye for cinema, I might add.

God, how I loathe Lynch's baron. Calling him a "cartoon" is an insult to cartoons everywhere. Words fail in trying to describe the sheer depth of my loathing.

And, yes, Ian McNeice (from the SciFi series) is a vast improvement. He's one of my favorite character actors. He even made the part of "The Newsreader" from Rome fun to watch.

I never really noticed just how bad he was until my recent viewing because I always put so much effort into "overlooking" the pus-boils, and didn't pay attention to the acting as much. Eh.

The amount of unnesecary stuff Lynch added is appauling. That time could have been better spend on scenes they didn't even do.

I liked the mini-series baron much better too.