Dune

The extensive world in Lynch's hands turns into a depressive and simplified pseudo-saga. After just a few minutes, fateful decisions about the future of many people are thrown at me, allowing previously completely unknown main characters to utter heroic wisdom and emphasizing the atmosphere with exaggerated bizarre elements. In other words, Lynch precisely "lynches" his viewer according to the clearest assumptions, but in the sci-fi genre, it is noticeably less functional than in mysterious thrillers or dramas. And the detached and questionable sublimity is saved by the perfectly fitting ideal hero Kyle MacLachlan and, above all, by Dune itself. Visually hypnotic Arrakis, with its huge specters, can completely absorb everyone and, at least for a moment, make them feel that what is happening on the screen actually makes sense. (02/12/2007)

It wasn't so bad until the attack on the base... after that it was. Although I liked the seriousness with which David Lynch and Co. tried to shoot Dune, the often unintentionally ridiculous result of their efforts unfortunately does not quite match. However, I want to add a little gleefully that it is a faithful adaptation of the book after all - the book bored me quite similarly. I prefer not to talk about the confused story and annoying all-explanatory inner voices, nor will I criticize Sting, for example, and I will try to forget about his role. (26/02/2017)

David Lynch is one of my favourite directors and I love science fiction, but this is awful. I haven’t read the book and in the first hour I was unable to grasp who is who, who does what and what is going on… and then I didn’t even bother. One of the very few films where I needed fast-forward to get to the end. A star for the amazing sandworms. Lost Highway, Eraserhead and other Lynch’s films are hard to understand and it’s their strength, but in this case the story should have been more clearly told. Fail AF. (25/08/2011)

From age 15 and 30, I had a period when I was obsessed with sci-fi in any form, but I never got around to watching Herbert's Dune. I already had a dislike for fantasy films that take only the environment from sci-fi, like the popular Star Wars series, and I considered Dune to be an obscure matter. Lynch's adaptation was accompanied by conflicting reactions, and the director himself called the film the only one he would prefer to distance himself from, clearly acknowledging his mistake. However, I was surprised by how it affected me with its desperate lack of art and low quality. It started off nicely with a glimpse of Virginia Madsen's face, who in her youth was among the most charming actresses in Hollywood. But then everything went wrong. Inappropriate casting, terrifyingly overacting villains, and terrible sets. Today Lynch's Dune feels like a parody of itself, even though I would certainly not suspect Lynch of intentional genre parody. In the same year, Gilliam's Brazil was created, which still leaves a great impression thanks to its stylization and originality decades later. Dune is a farce that is lucky it was directed by a cult filmmaker, and the presence of a famous name mitigates audience reactions and allows for rose-tinted glasses to be put on even when it is not appropriate. It is interesting that the three-part television adaptation left a significantly more sympathetic impression on me and is rated worse on FilmBooster than this thing. Yes, you can find a few interesting and impressive images in the first half, two or three actors who fit in, but the negatives outweigh these few minor positives. I don't often waste time on garbage but this was truly a painful waste of time. Even the naive technicolor film Flash Gordon leaves an infinitely more entertaining impression because at least it doesn't bore, and someone like Paul Verhoeven with his film Total Recall could explain to Lynch how to make low-quality sci-fi. Lynch bores audiences with this film, and his lack of skills causes awkward embarrassment. Overall impression: 10%. (09/11/2020)

For fans of Frank Herbert's masterpiece, there is the hyper-serious and impressive adaptation by Denis Villeneuve. For everyone else, this year’s remake of the film opens up the possibility of enjoying Dune in two radically different interpretations, or rather illustrations. As in the case of the new film, it is true that Lynch’s Dune can only be fully enjoyed in the cinema on the big screen and in the presence of other viewers, who this time are not drawn in by the captivating form and devastated by the wall of flawless audio-visual stimuli of the new adaptation. On the contrary, they stare in disbelieving amazement and react loudly to the distortion of a distinctively grasped blockbuster, where every second the screen exudes not only the resources expended, but also the creative vision encompassing the form of the film’s worlds and the adaptation itself as a translation of a literary text to the screen. Lynch, who allegedly did not even bother to read the book (just like Jodorowsky before him), created a narratively delirious spectacle in which, as in his peak films, melodrama, kitsch and trash are blended with suggestively morbid visions and disturbing evil brought to the surface from behind the curtain of reality. In addition to that, unprepared viewers will be surprised also by the obstinate ambition to include not only dialogue but also the inner thoughts of the characters in voiceovers, which often enhance the film’s soap-operatic grandiloquence. Whereas Denis Villeneuve enchants viewers, Lynch rather disarms and, mainly, entertains them (with an appropriately open mind). Don’t believe the embittered fans; Lynch’s Dune is an epic, perversely deviant movie, especially in the shorter cinema version, which is even more breath-taking due to its absurd ellipses and, mainly, the fact that its resulting fragmented and rather psychedelic form was the intention of the producers, not Lynch. (27/10/2021)