September 8 2024
3:00 AMNewsletterSubscribeSign inMy AccountSign out
Dune 1984 vs 2021: Which one is better?
By Israa Radaydeh, Jordan News
last updated:
Sep 26,2021
The 1984 film, Dune, based on Frank Herbert’s science fiction novel (Photo: IMDB)
+
-
AMMAN — The history of
cinema features essentially two types of remakes: Those who, years after the
original, limit themselves to exploiting the new opportunities offered by
technology but essentially only repurpose what has been done and said before;
and those that instead give new life to the plot by exploring previously
neglected elements.اضافة اعلان
Denis Villeneuve’s
approach to the almost 700 pages of Frank Herbert’s book is proof of the
latter. How he tackled Herbert’s 1965 Dune, a science-fiction classic, is both philologically
more accurate and cinematically more compelling.
The 1984 film, Dune, based on Frank Herbert’s science fiction novel (Photo: IMDB)
Villeneuve renounces
illusory synthesis, which would be inevitably destined to create holes in the
screenplay given the complexity of the plot, and instead proposes a first
installment of considerable duration but equally remarkable effectiveness.
The project for a
remake of Dune started in 2008 but only in 2016, when Legendary Pictures
acquired the rights and hired Denis Villeneuve, did it finally take off.
In short, we are looking
at a new, ambitious attempt to transpose the science fiction epic born from Frank
Herbert’s imagination onto the screen.
Villeneuve, now a
habituée of the sci-fi genre (boasting Arrival and Blade Runner 2049 on his CV),
and the stellar cast are the two main ingredients in the 60s classic’s return
to cinema, already transposed onto screen once before in 1984 by David Lynch
(who in his time received conflicting public reviews).
Taking on a project
like Dune to the big screen is not easy: The 700 pages written by Frank
Herbert, which over the years have become a timeless classic of science
fiction, are certainly a task that no director would relish to take on unless
they already have an extensive resume and are capable of tackling a challenge
of this caliber.
This is not make no
mention of diehard fans of Lynch’s iteration of the firm, which proved a
powerful rereading of the myth of Dune in a way unique to the genre, and left a
definitive mark on the history of cinema.
The two works are very
different, despite both being inspired by the same book.
Herbert’s Dune, initiator
of the narrative saga, is a work that has totally changed science fiction as we
know it, inspiring, among others, George Lucas’ Star Wars . The sci-fi odyssey
finds its genesis on the planet Arrakis, rich in the coveted spice melange,
disputed between various houses across the universe. The novel explores a
variety of themes, from politics and religion to physiology and ecology. It is
a project with extremely complex and nuanced content, which has always posed problematic
to bring to the big screen.
The first who tried to
adapt Dune to cinema was in the 1970s by Alejandro Jodorowsky, a famous Chilean
surrealist artist and director who had planned on paper an extremely ambitious
film that was never made.
Subsequently,
Jodorowsky's legacy was picked up by Lynch, who transposed the initial novel in
its entirety, appealing to his sensibility and taking several liberties.
Unfortunately, all this has cost him dearly, resulting in a fiasco at the box
office and a storm of criticism.
The 1984 film, Dune, based on Frank Herbert’s science fiction novel (Photo: IMDB)
Villeneuve, a Canadian
filmmaker also wanted to cinematically bring, his version of Dune, which was
released on September 16 in Italian cinemas and premiered in Venice. Let's find
out what main differences exist between Lynch's work and that of Villeneuve and
if indeed the realization of the latter is superior.
Lynch gives a lot of
space to the characters, exploring in his feature film almost all the figures
that are present in the original novel. This attention to characterization
(which does not always respect the canon of the book). This approach limits
some narrative passages, and makes them confusing.
Particularly the dream
sequences, a Lynch trademark, were never more disjointed and disconnected.
Villeneuve, unlike his peer,
tries to find a balance between setting, narration, and characters, putting
everything in a coherent system. This does, unfortunately, result in some
characters being vague, narrative changes and twists being clear, and the
scenography seeming to be almost a separate element of the script.
Dune 2021 Trailer
Dune Trailer 1984
Toto
and Brian Eno’s music compared to the monumental classicism of Hans Zimmer
The soundtrack of the
1984 Dune, composed by Brian Eno and Toto, unfortunately does not do justice to
the layered and full-bodied first novel of the Dune cycle. The soundtracks,
although well made, clash with the setting and the story, looking more like an
accompaniment to a rock opera than to a philosophical sci-fi epic.
For the latest
iteration, Hans Zimmer was chosen instead; one of the most famous and talented
composers on the Hollywood scene. Zimmer totally changes register. A lot of attention
is paid to the background choirs, which lend gravitas and the right drama to
the film, while the general tones of the orchestra instill a monumental
classicism that shouts from all its pores the imposing ideological and
political clash that is taking place on Arrakis.
The
contrast between Lynch's chromatic delirium and Villeneuve's aseptic but
imposing philosophy
Lynch's film is very
colorful and rich in truly suggestive chromatic shades, giving life to a peculiar
and brilliant aesthetic, which stands in contrast with the gloom and atmosphere
that Herbert's novel evokes. On the other hand, this meshes well with the dream
sequences of the film, which become even more alienating and disturbing — at
times hallucinatory.
Villeneuve’s Dune is
colossal in all its representations, both in the artificial constructions and
in the constructs of nature. Furthermore, the entire artistic and technical
sector has a tinge of sterility which, in addition to giving dark and strongly
oppressive chromatic solutions, integrates perfectly with the reference
universe: A cruel world oppressed by war and clashes between clan’s rivals.
The
original novel is manipulated by the two directors in opposite ways
The 1984 Dune
reproduces on the big screen the entire first novel of the literary saga, with
many alternative solutions perfectly consistent with the director's style, but
totally foreign to the world of Arrakis.
Although the whole
story has been relayed in full, much of the book's mystery is lost, stifled by
some very radical changes, especially in the characterization of the
protagonist Paul Atreides (portrayed by Kyle MachLachlan).
On the contrary, the
2021 adaptation transposes only half of Herbert's work more faithfully, evoking
the most intimate spirit of the book. Not only does it accomplish this through the
general atmosphere, but also by drawing on detail upon detail, aimed at
building a meticulous and timely introduction to the reference saga.
Obviously there are
differences, but the purest and most traditional soul of the original material
has been reproduced with rigor and attention.
Frenzy
and quiet
Finally, the rhythm of
both films differ. Lynch’s work excessively speeds up the resolution of events
to such an extent that, in the second part of the film, the whole narrative is
devoid of a clear direction. It almost seems that content consistency has been
sacrificed in order to bring the entire first book to the screen.
Villeneuve, on the
contrary, has a staid rhythm, such that the story develops gradually. This
aspect makes the feature film very demanding in terms of payoff, but it offers
viewers a dizzying overall care. Unfortunately, the narrative is affected by
this choice; at times too cryptic and vague, because it must be understood as a
preparation for the sequel and the saga itself.
There is no doubt that
the last Dune is superior to that of Lynch both in terms of narrative and artistic
content, even if his adaptation must be read in a specific perspective — not
one focused on fidelity, but on Lynch’s reinterpretation.
Where Villeneuve's Dune
triumphs as an individual film, it suffers from ambitious design that leaves
the audience with many unanswered questions; a problem Lynch solved by
concentrating all of Dune’s content into one film.
In conclusion, the two
titles are so different that it is particularly complicated to compare them and
reach a final judgment.