Did you have to jump scare us at 4:06 ? Jesus christsss

lol I think it’s really just the visual effects and the fact that it came out in 1984, obviously people knew that’s the best they had but doesn’t mean they were ok with it

The Sci-fi Channel did a version that I really like too. It was my favorite until this one!

Bob dylan has been wildin

Too bad you couldn't compare the scifi miniseries too.

I guess the second attempt at dune doesn't even exist.

While in film terms it is technically a sequel, I see both movies as one "film". Dune is not a neat and clean trilogy structure like LOTR. Given the length of the book and it's complexity, the material demanded a longer run time, other wise we would've had another mess like David Lynch's "Dune".

But Part One is a much better film

I personally dont liek this artistic use of colors.. and who cares about meaning behind it .. jeez

the stomp when he asks the Emperor to kiss his ring still gives me chills

People can analyze, philosophize, contemplate, but one thing is certain in my mind - Villeneuve's film will never gain cult following like Lynch's, and the mainstream audience will one day dissipate, and only few, if any, when recall DV's version, will feel the same way people feel when remember DL's version. If true, if I am right, this says a lot about two auteurs and two films.

I got an ad at 8:53, but there was a pause before the ad started, so it sounded like Lynch was just saying stop making movies lmao

"THE PAIN!"🤣🤣🤣

I preferred part 1 but both were great 🤷‍♂️

The book gives a much better reason for him to give up on avoiding the Jihad, by the way.

Haven't watched the video yet, but I don't. I really liked 2 but I liked 1 more

I feel so bad for David Lynch. It could have been something great in the optics of the 80s.

Denis failed in the first Dune to convince me we were dealing with super-beings. He made up a lot of ground in the second one. Not having any of the inner monologue made it feel like it wasn't Dune at all, as that is a BIG part of the story. Overall, I like both movies but Lynch's feels more like the book in a lot of ways. Mamoa was just bad casting.

Thats the best part about adaptions, you get to see how different authors see the story of the book

Both of these versions are shit. The Miniseries was much better.

While the David Lynch's Dune might be a failure in general... but visually the design and the aspect of it inspired the new Dune very much. Not only that, the theme bgm is also inspired by old Dune. The older Dune set a stage for new Dune in many ways i would say.

Part 2 is significantly worse than the first.

Lynch Dune is a masterpiece. Aesthetically stunning. Far more interesting than the new creation.

great video!

I wonder why nobody remembers the 2000 miniseries

I liked the filming style of this movie, but the story and pacing is subpar compared to other Nolan movies. My favourite Nolan movie, Interstellar, remains at its throne.

I wish i liked either part.

I LOVE THIS VIDEO!

Nah I prefer Part 1.

We are mesmerized by dialogue repetition , how far have we fallen..?

I loved Dune 1984. It is unfair to compare a movie made in 1984 to one made in 2024.

meh, the new ones have some pretty significant deviations from the books. villeneuve is pretty arrogant to think he's good enough to change the story like that.

Too bad all of these kind of movies is ethical trash and moral bankrupcy. Without exception, all of these.

Despite the bad ( very bad) CGI , I like the Lynch version better .

Jodorowsky's Dune is the best movie.

I'm pretty sure the second 'Paul Atreides' is actually named Orson Hodges. Just saying!

1984 version was better , I liked his other films but this Dune was BORING, in the book they had RED hair , the constant scowl of chani, the forced DEI, the lack of guild and too much fremen..1984 was superior

1st is OBJECTIVELY better imo. 1st had more varied environments, so it was visually more impressive. Geidi prime, caladan, etc. 2nd was mostly just arrakis. 1st also had more new story, whereas in 2nd, everyone knew exactly what would happen. Paul would slowly become the fremen leader and then take over arrakis. 1st was also much more fast paced. Every scene was new and more story. 2nd was slow plotwise because they had to do character development, which while i understand was still slow. Also, everything good about dune's setting, like the ornithocopter design, or the suit design for example, all were new in 1st. Not the fault of the 2nd movie, but obviously saying 2nd was better is stupid tho.

9:21 hughie 😂

If only Jodorowsky was allowed to finish his.. A project that was to feature David Carradine, Orson Welles, Alain Delon and Salvador Dali as the emperor, special effects by future creator of Alien Dan O'Bannon, music by Pink Floyd, Tangerine Dream and Magma, freaking Moebius for storyboards and art concepts..So sad we'll never get to see it

Yeah, but New Dune had the Harkonen attack scene that featured technology that completely undermines all subsequent conflicts. Total jumping the shark moment that somehow gets a pass.

I liked part one better. Dislike, dont recommend channel 🤭

If Lynch's version didnt have the boxy and jarring force fields, I would really enjoy it still. But it is a moment I have to look away in the film cause it is so dated.

It’s really weird talking about the LOTR and Dune movies and decisions that were made when most of those decisions were made in the books and simply not deviated from in the movies.

The old film is a product of its time. It's a sci-fi opera with performances both subtle and over the top, grand sets and beautiful practical effects that are sadly dated by our modern standards. It isn't meant to feel "real", it's meant to feel surreal. It has depth and memorability but suffers from the camp and ham of the 1980s. The modern film on the other hand is technically beautiful but feels empty and soulless. The CGI makes for great vehicles, battles and monsters but lacks the depth and grit of practical effects. The sets feel cavernous and empty and the acting, while done straight and serious, lacks passion and humanity.

Going to go against the grain here, both movies where excellent in my opinion and have watched each many times. Dune was my first novel as a teen and i also loved the video games. New Dune hit hard but had two parts to build the world and tell the story. I think both are amazing films.

Ohh...that debate again. Lynch told us: "I didn't want a desert kung-fu film". He has made a perfect movie with the help of Real Actors and Actresses. As for the new adaptation - Villeneuve made exactly that: kung-fu in the desert, a damned woke-ist mash which stands firmly on the Book by minimalist and pure (Ikea-style???) intentions...still it has no actors and actresses. And do not forget: Tony Masters designed Dune(1984)!

David Lynch is the worst hack of all time

New Dune is just a safe, boring scifi world with nothing truly new or strange or interesting. Just another bland scifi movie. It's alright to watch, rather boring at times, and just doesn't have the feel of the books. It doesn't help that the new movies cut out or changed some things to make the Atreides seem like just good people, instead of aristocrats playing the game of politics and control over their own people, and the other houses.

the one thing both films have in common is how boring they are. it’s an unadaptable book. just read it instead. there’s a lot of backstory that is best explained in novel form. Despite taking several hours to tell the tale, the new Dune is still barely scraping the surface and leaves the audience unsure of who is who. and what we should care about. too many characters for a movie. someone just needs to learn how to say “no” to adaptations and start making stories for film that work for film - instead of ruining works of literature and misrepresenting it to the masses.