free counter with statistics Dune Remake Update | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

robert-pattinddason.jpg
Pajiba Exclusive: An Update on the Dune Remake


No. Robert Pattinson Is Not In It. Yet. / Dustin Rowles

Trade News | October 27, 2009 | Comments (47)


There have been a number of rumors flying around the last two years about a remake of Frank Herbert’s Dune, first tackled relatively unsuccessfully by David Lynch back in 1984. And thanks to our inside source, The Hollywood Cog, we can officially set the record straight.

First of all, a Dune remake is in the works, and has been since 2007. This we already know. We also know that Josh Zetumer, who is also writing the next Bourne flick, was hired to pen the script last summer, and turned in his epic 175-page draft earlier this year. As recently as May, Peter Berg (Friday Night Lights, The Kingdom) was loosely attached to direct the project — he even spoke about the project with MTV last month, but was mum on casting Robert Pattinson as the lead.

However, we now know that Berg did speak with Pattinson in May about the project, though there was nothing official. But the big news is, Peter Berg completely dropped the project a few weeks ago — his Film 44 production company backed out, and now Paramount is scrambling to find a new director.

The search, however, has run into two issues: 1) they’re looking for a director who can put the movie together for under $175 million, which sounds manageable, but they don’t want anything resembling the crap effects of the ‘84 film, and 2) they want a director who already has a preexisting passion for the novel and is enthusiastic about the project. Right now, Paramount is shopping the script to two directors: They like Neill Blompkamp (District 9), who has the right vision, but the frontrunner, at the moment, is Neil Marshall (The Descent), who was sent the script early this month. However, despite the enthusiasm of producer, Kevin Misher (Public Enemies), the studio is somewhat tepid on Marshall, uncertain about handing over a $175 million film with franchise potential to a somewhat unknown director whose only hit was the modestly successful The Descent.

All of which is to say: Dune is still being developed; there is a script; but as of now, there is no director, and the only connection that Pattinson had to the project was via discussion with a director, Berg, who is no longer on the project. Fortunately, Paramount — in Marshall and Blompkamp — is at least looking at directors who could do the Herbert source material justice, and God knows, it’d be hard to mess this thing up worse than Lynch did.


Damon and Brolin in True Grit | Short Circuit Remake Steve Carr



Comments

"they don’t want anything resembling the crap effects of the ‘84 film.."


Do you deliberately get up in the morning with the intent to rag on classics?

You sir are an asshat.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 27, 2009 11:03 AM

Hrmm...

This is a bad idea. I just don't think Dune translates well on screen. The beauty of Dune is the plots within plots, the cool characters, the dialogue, the ideas, the details, the richness of the world and history. It's the little things that really make it great. There's no way you'd be able to get all of that across adequately in a 2 hour movie.

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at October 27, 2009 11:07 AM

Slim already said it.

Posted by: Jay at October 27, 2009 11:13 AM

Agreed with Forbiddendonut. However, if they have to make it I will have to see it. If Sparklenuts is attached, I will travel to Hollywood and shove my Kindjal dagger so far up the director and Pattinsons asses, they will pray to Shai Hulud for release. But I shall take their water for my tribe via deathstill.

Posted by: admin at October 27, 2009 11:14 AM

Alright, all you brilliant internet movie critics, what was wrong with Lynch's version?

Specifics, please.

-Ralphie

Posted by: Ralphie at October 27, 2009 11:23 AM

the studio is somewhat tepid on Marshall, uncertain about handing over a $175 million film with franchise potential to a somewhat unknown director whose only hit was the modestly successful The Descent.

Dear producers of movie-type things:

Watch Dog Soldiers, you fucking jackasses. The man did that with a roll of nickels and some empty soda cans.

That said, y'all might be right. Dune may simply be un-adaptable. What it needs is a 12-part HBO miniseries (NOT that shitty sci-fi channel version).

Posted by: TK at October 27, 2009 11:26 AM

Don't be so hard on Lynch. He had a lot of interference and he didn't want the job in the first place. (He took it because DeLaurentis promised to finance a project of Lynch's if he did. Dune led directly to Blue Velvet.) All things considered, he did a fine job. I still find the movie fascinating, if heavily flawed.

I agree that Dune may be one of those stories that is simply unfilmable no matter how much CGI you throw at it.

Posted by: Jerce at October 27, 2009 11:34 AM

Ditto Slim.

There's lots of things wrong with the original, but it's a classic nonetheless. Sloppy, yes. Poorly edited, yes. Fucking shitballs awesome? YES!

If the words "Efron" or "Pattinson" are mentioned in conjunction with this project, I will cut a bitch, I shit you not.

Posted by: logar at October 27, 2009 11:36 AM

Dune is a classic, but its themes are dated and the whole thing really does need a rewrite to bring it into the modern dynamic. While the plot is acceptably rich with many intriguing science-fiction elements that have become timeless, the characters are, unfortunately, mostly one-dimensional and trite.

The Sci-Fi version did one thing right in that it appropriately fleshed out both Irulan and Feyd-Ruatha and made them both somewhat sympathetic and interesting personalities. Where it went wrong is giving the role of Paul to an uninspiring actor who confuses angst and whinge with pathos and drama.

There is a lot that could be done with Dune in the right hands, as long as those hands were willing to risk fandom evisceration by creatively enhancing the book and adding a lot more dirt and grit, without changing the plot significantly or, especially, fucking up the sandworms.

I'll probably see it anyway, like I'll see The Hobbit regardless of reviews. But it would be nice to see it done well.

Posted by: Neodiogenes at October 27, 2009 11:41 AM

The plots-within-plots are the best part of the book, agreed. But as a long-time fan of the book, I enjoyed the 1984 version because of the set design and costumes -- I take the film as an "illustration" of the novel rather than a substitute. Similarly, to the extent that the director and producer respect the source material, I think that there's a good chance that this will be something worth seeing for all of us who love the novel -- not as a replacement for the novel, but as a representation of it.

Posted by: VampireSlug at October 27, 2009 11:48 AM

TK >> I love Dog Soldiers, but I think the problem might be many more of the producers of the movie-type things did see Doomsday, which Marshall made when given $30 million dollars worth of nickels and soda cans. It didn't turn out too well.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at October 27, 2009 11:54 AM

You know, I can't think of Dune or David Lynch without remembering a dream my boyrfriend had:

He's climbing up a spiral staircase and encounters a pretty woman arguing with a very humanistic android that looks like Ed Norton (imagine Robin Williams in Bicentennial Man but with Ed Norton in the costume). They are arguing about something, and then Capt. Benjamin Sisko from DS9 comes in from nowhere and says "How would you like to hear THIS man talk about OVERSEAS TRADE?!?"

At that point I told him that the only thing keeping this from being a David Lynch dream would be the arrival of a little talking bladder, which would splort onto the scene and say "Fuck, I'm staying out of this one, guys." And then splort back out.

I guess that's how I feel about David Lynch.

Posted by: Cat at October 27, 2009 11:55 AM

Yes Yes Yes. Edward Cullen is Paul, Russel Brand as Gurney Halleck, Jessica Biel as Jessica, Jared Leto as Duke Leto, and Katherine Heigl as the sand worm. Unoriginal score by My Chemical Romance. Is that your block.... it just got bustered!

Posted by: Colostomy Baggins at October 27, 2009 12:00 PM

Wow...apparently Lynch's Dune sucked. I did not know that. It was unsuccessful with crap effects. I did not know that either, and here I've spent 25 years loving the fucking thing. So...horror and science fiction, huh?

No, it's cool...I'll be all ears again when the review of "two youngish slackers sit in a room and stare at the toes of their Chuck Taylors while smoking and prattling on about their angst for 90 minutes" comes out.

Posted by: laredo at October 27, 2009 12:01 PM

Dog Soldiers - Awesome!
Doomsday - Not so awesome. Although I think it was more the fault of the writing than the directing. Visually it was a very interesting film.

I'm intrigued by a Dune remake, as long as Cedric Diggory isn't in it.

Posted by: SAL at October 27, 2009 12:07 PM

I liked both the David Lynch mess, which was...insane... and the SciFi mini, which took its miniscule production budget and blew it all on hats. Lynch caught the right grandeur, and the SciFi mini was more faithful,and also produced the better sequel, Children of Dune, which was moderately awesome & had a great score, despite the same hat obsession. Also, James McAvoy.

Sorry to say it, but Dune is like The Lord of the Rings in its layered complexity and its slavish, detail-oriented fandom; nobody's ever gonna be fully happy with attempts to film it. Just enjoy the bits they get right.

Posted by: Salieri2 at October 27, 2009 12:11 PM

Ralphie:

Two words:

1) LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG

2) BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING

I remember the dialogue as something like this:

mumblemumblemumblemumble spice mumblemumble.

Posted by: , (TCFKAB) at October 27, 2009 12:11 PM

The '84 film is amazing so long as you forget the book entirely. And no, that isn't a bad thing.

Posted by: faze at October 27, 2009 12:21 PM

If they don't get it perfect after the third try, I pray there isn't a forth attempt in my lifetime.

There is now twice as much Dune crap out there then there is quality.

Posted by: Orser at October 27, 2009 12:21 PM

And one more thing...doesn't Robert Pattinson look in that picture like he got hit in the face with a medicine ball as a child? I bet I could eat tasty soup out of his concave kisser.

Posted by: Cat at October 27, 2009 12:28 PM

mumblemumblemumblemumble spice mumblemumble.

How was I able to follow what I found to be a coherent plot when I was 9?

Posted by: Jay at October 27, 2009 12:30 PM

There is now twice as much Dune crap out there then there is quality.

Twice as much? I disagree.

Posted by: Jerce at October 27, 2009 12:34 PM

Ragging on Lynch is fine as long as you remember that the original theatrical release was, in fact, directed by the legendary "Allen Smithee".
Lynch was so frustrated by studio interference that he had his name removed from the credits.
As one who truly loves the world of 'Dune', I was disappointed with the movie because, as has been mentioned, the complexity of the story and the plots within plots are almost impossible to translate into a mere two-hour film.
Lynch's version was (as the kids say) a hot mess but was very unsatisfying and likely very confusing to anyone unfamiliar with the source material.

Posted by: Spender at October 27, 2009 12:36 PM

I'm also a fan of the original, so I'd have David Lynch remake his own remake. Isn't that the thing to do these days?

Posted by: Cindy at October 27, 2009 12:42 PM

Katherine Heigl as the sand worm

I just cracked up in class. Love you.

Posted by: esme at October 27, 2009 12:44 PM

I love the David Lynch movie, and I love the books more. If you don't try to reconcile them, they are each amazing on their own terms. I never bothered to watch the newer version.

Posted by: Brenton at October 27, 2009 1:03 PM

Sorry to say it, but Dune is like The Lord of the Rings in its layered complexity and its slavish, detail-oriented fandom; nobody's ever gonna be fully happy with attempts to film it. Just enjoy the bits they get right.

Posted by: Salieri2 at October 27, 2009 12:11 PM


I'm having major anxiety about turning A Game of Thrones into a miniseries due to the exact reasons. Although, if it HAS to be attempted, I'm sure glad that it's a miniseries and HBO. Movies don't seem to work for these adaptations.

Posted by: Agent Scully at October 27, 2009 1:42 PM

I just watched the '84 version for the first time this weekend. While it's awesome in its own insane way, I don't think I could make it through another adaptation.

Posted by: kelsy at October 27, 2009 1:43 PM

Do you deliberately get up in the morning with the intent to rag on classics?
Admitting this may bring me nothing but heartache (not to mention derision), but I kinda have a big crush on BSlim.

Posted by: brite at October 27, 2009 1:55 PM

I will sign off on the re-make only if they work in that bad-ass theme music from Lynch's picture. I always want to slay some enemies, when I hear it.

Posted by: gunnertec at October 27, 2009 1:56 PM

I liked all of the original Dune series, but I'll concede they get progressively weaker.

I've told my girlfriend to stop after the first one.

Posted by: Orser at October 27, 2009 1:56 PM

I once got very high and watched Dune. My friend cracked me up by saying throughout the movie "I'm Sting and you're not!!" in an overblown accent every time his poutiness showed up on screen.
I can't watch the movie without thinking of it.

Posted by: myysharona (formerly Sharon) at October 27, 2009 2:01 PM

Lynch's DUNE is about as classic as Brian Herbert's novels are a legitimate addition to the canon. The Sci-Fi Channel miniseries wasn't awesome, but it was far superior to the '84 version. And Children of Dune was taking steps in the right direction (with several steps in the wrong, to be fair).

DUNE was and is one of the single most defining experiences of my life and while I may have wanted to see it on screen when I first read it in 7th grade, I am unsure now that it should be translated.

Neodiogenes, I don't mean to be rude, but I have no idea what DUNE you were reading if you think its themes are dated. Environmental concern? Distrust of corruptive religious and governmental power? Fanaticism and the appropriation thereof? The danger of hero worship and of trusting any one man to fix our problems? Systemic oligarchic exploitation? Resource control? The manipulation of history? I appreciate the thought in your post, but its themes are anything but dated.

Everyone, DUNE done well could (could, not would) be a great 12 hour miniseries. But I'm not so sure it should be. I've read that book more times than I've read anything else in my life. I'm happy just to read it again. I don't have it memorized, but I don't doubt that I know it better than a lot of Americans know the Pledge of Allegiance.

David Lynch.
Brian Herbert.
Kevin J. Anderson.

Why do we need someone else's name on Frank Herberts world?

Posted by: coryo at October 27, 2009 2:27 PM

I read the first Dune book and loved it. I consumed that book like a starving person; it was amazing. I promptly went out and purchased the second book. I got home and started reading and nearly died of boredom. I stopped reading half way through the book, because it had none of the life that was found in the first novel. I haven't bothered with reading any of the other books in the series.

That said, any remake that does not include Sting in the cast is an automatic fail.

Posted by: androstarr at October 27, 2009 2:38 PM

I haven't seen the '84 version of Dune since the first time I saw it when I was about ten. I remember being amazed by the visuals, but I doubt they would hold up to a second viewing. I read the novel several times as a teenager, and maybe once in my early twenties, and loved it dearly. I rented the Sci-Fi Channel mini-series on DVD, but I don't think I got through the whole thing.

I'm not sure Dune is meant for the big or small screen. There are some stories that just can't be told faithfully through that medium. I prefer to stick to the visuals provided by my imagination, instead of letting my vision of Paul be polluted by Edward Cullen. It's already got enough influence from that-freaky-dude-with-lightsaber-blue-eyes-and-a-lumpy-leather-catsuit that I vaguely remember from the first movie.

Posted by: Alexandra at October 27, 2009 5:12 PM

Admitting this may bring me nothing but heartache (not to mention derision), but I kinda have a big crush on BSlim.

Posted by: brite at October 27, 2009 1:55 PM

--------------------------------------------

I'm wearing flip-flops, and I'm slathered in Vaseline petroleum jelly LET'S DO THIS!....bitch!

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 27, 2009 7:44 PM

I only read the first book (a masterpiece), but I've been told that if you can make your way through books 2 & 3 - albeit a very tough slog - that you'll reap great rewards for your effort in books 4 through 6 (or however many there are).

Posted by: DarthCorleone at October 27, 2009 8:05 PM

I'm wearing flip-flops, and I'm slathered in Vaseline petroleum jelly

So when you're walking around the house ( abattoir of love? padded cell?)does it sound like:
slap squish slap squish slap squish slap squish?

Posted by: brite at October 27, 2009 8:55 PM

Posted by: coryo at October 27, 2009 2:27 PM

Perfect post.

Posted by: ed newman at October 27, 2009 9:52 PM

I saw David Lynch speak at my university about 4 years ago. One kid got up on the microphone and told him that Dune was his favorite movie of all time. Lynch responded: "I actually consider Dune to be my greatest personal failure." Hah!

That's actually his only movie I've never seen, at least partly due to that comment.

Posted by: Alli at October 27, 2009 10:31 PM

Thanks, ed.

Posted by: coryo at October 27, 2009 10:36 PM

Blomkamp, dude, not Blompkamp. You can do it.

Posted by: Saartjie at October 28, 2009 6:02 AM

I only read the first book (a masterpiece), but I've been told that if you can make your way through books 2 & 3 - albeit a very tough slog - that you'll reap great rewards for your effort in books 4 through 6 (or however many there are).
Posted by: DarthCorleone at October 27, 2009 8:05 PM

Mostly agree. I love the entire series, but #2 (Dune Messiah) is probably my least favourite.

And re: the dated themes, I'm with coryo. It's a masterpiece of philosophical thought wrapped in sci-fi trappings, and the themes are as relevant now as ever.

Posted by: Brenton at October 28, 2009 6:07 PM

The remake isn't necessary, but I think all would agree that we'd love to see it hit the big screen. Having Berg attached to it scared the sh*t out of me, as he's too mainstream, maybe even too bland for this project. We need someone with grit, incredible vision and a slanted look at society to take on this piece of work.

Short List: Neill Blompkamp, Terry Gilliam, Guillermo del Toro and Christopher Nolan.

I believe Nolan would do this subject matter justice - he has the mindset to craft the numerous levels that are required of this story.

So let us all pray that Nolan finds this script and has his brother bring it to a place where it becomes "real" instead of in development. Seriously, what is Nolan doing after Batman 3? It's gotta be a Dune Trilogy.

You heard it here first!

Posted by: Falltoofar at November 8, 2009 12:05 AM

Reread the post by coryo, and offer a spice beer to ed newman. Herbert's DUNE saga (1-6) is a masterpiece, everything else is a waste of time. The 1984 movie was an abomination for many reasons, the weapon of choice is unspeakable, and the ending...well i'm still throwing up, and I originally saw it when it premiered in the theaters. All I can say about the SciFi miniseries is that Paul was a high maintenance whiner. I can forgive a lot of mistakes, but if the central character is botched, the rest falls apart. Although they certainly tried harder, and improved a bit with the Children follow up, it was still a waste of time. If you are going to devote that many hours to Dune, read it, any of it, as long as it isn't the awful stuff sadly perpetrated by Brain and SF's resident franchise parasite, Kevin Anderson.

Posted by: Fuse Tender at November 9, 2009 5:13 PM

[i]Ragging on Lynch is fine as long as you remember that the original theatrical release was, in fact, directed by the legendary "Allen Smithee"[/i].

Wrong. That's the extended cut.

Posted by: Darth Nadir at November 12, 2009 7:57 PM

For those of you who stopped reading the Dune series due to Dune Messiah(2nd book)being mind numbingly boring at times. Do yourself a favor and pick up children of dune /god emperor of dune, and you will not be disapointed. I had the same problem myself but was convinced by a friend to give the 3rd book a chance. I couldnt put it down, and when i reached god emperor(4th book)/heretics of dune(5th book) my mind was seriously blown. The continueing exploration of Frank's underlying themes and philosophies as well as the the character of Leto II are just too much to miss out on. Leto's journals as the god emperor are just as incredibly fascinating to read as they are to interpret. As well as giving you the feeling that Frank himself is pouring his heart and soul into them. Leto's fears feel like Franks fears for humanity and you can only hope to understand them in time.

As for the movies I'll look foward to any interpretation by anyone and always look at them with an open mind. Just as i think Frank himself would, may he R.I.P.

The universe of Dune and how it can be interpreted is nearly as endless as the golden path. No one adaptation will ever satisfy everyone, nor should it.

Posted by: RoSs at November 21, 2009 2:09 AM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment: