Star Wars vs Star Trek - the ultimate nerd battle

[Sheilbh]

I could see that happening.  I think Dune also needs to be viewed through the time it was made - 60s sci fi was becoming rather interesting, but was still the era of, well, Star Trek.  The world presented by Dune was so detailed and alien from our own, which was quite unusual at the time.

I had the same experience with reading Watchmen to be honest.  I think once you've been exposed to the hype/reputation and remove the context then for me it just didn't stack up.

[Barrister]

I'm really not a comic book guy, but I read the Watchmen comic after seeing the movie, and thought it was really good.

[katmai]

You all know there is another attempt at Dune in pre-production right?

[Barrister]

You all know there is another attempt at Dune in pre-production right?

Give me a STO review dammit!

[katmai]

You all know there is another attempt at Dune in pre-production right?

Give me a STO review dammit!

I'm working on it!

[grumbler]

You could probably say the same thing about Lynch and Dune.

I don't know.  I think Lynch's Dune is a wonderful failure precisely because of his creative vision which is distinct from the book (I prefer the film to the book). 

I think we are agreeing while appearing to disagree.  Lynch's movie was, indeed, a marvelous failure, but could have been so much better if it didn't have to carry the baggage of the book (which I infinitely prefer to the movie) with it.  There was just so much to the book that Lynch didn't "get" and yet so much to the movie that Herbert would never have dared to think of, that a divorce seems natural and right.

[Barrister]

You could probably say the same thing about Lynch and Dune.

I don't know.  I think Lynch's Dune is a wonderful failure precisely because of his creative vision which is distinct from the book (I prefer the film to the book). 

I think we are agreeing while appearing to disagree.  Lynch's movie was, indeed, a marvelous failure, but could have been so much better if it didn't have to carry the baggage of the book (which I infinitely prefer to the movie) with it.  There was just so much to the book that Lynch didn't "get" and yet so much to the movie that Herbert would never have dared to think of, that a divorce seems natural and right.

While I think I agree that Lynch wanted to go in a slightly different direction than the book, and maybe even a divorce would have been appropriate, I really don't think it's fair to say that Lynch didn't "get" the book.

[grumbler]

I could see that happening.  I think Dune also needs to be viewed through the time it was made - 60s sci fi was becoming rather interesting, but was still the era of, well, Star Trek.  The world presented by Dune was so detailed and alien from our own, which was quite unusual at the time.

I think that is the power of the book - it was just so divorced from the SF of the pre-"New Vision" era.

I happen to think that it was actually quite good in its own right, but acknowledge that I am prejudiced from having lived through that time period.  It might not seem so great in retrospect.

I could say the same thing about Lord of the Rings, which I read in the Ace editions.

[grumbler]

While I think I agree that Lynch wanted to go in a slightly different direction than the book, and maybe even a divorce would have been appropriate, I really don't think it's fair to say that Lynch didn't "get" the book.

We can agree to disagree, but I think that the movie supports my position far more than yours.

As Yi points out, the "scream guns" show that Lynch thought the Fremen answer was technology, when it was in fact the opposite of technology.

[Barrister]

While I think I agree that Lynch wanted to go in a slightly different direction than the book, and maybe even a divorce would have been appropriate, I really don't think it's fair to say that Lynch didn't "get" the book.

We can agree to disagree, but I think that the movie supports my position far more than yours.

As Yi points out, the "scream guns" show that Lynch thought the Fremen answer was technology, when it was in fact the opposite of technology.

I thought the scream guns (which I certainly agree didn't particularily work as a plot device) was more an attempt to make the Atriedes/Fremen victory more understandable to the movie audience.  Not that Lynch "didn't get" the book.

[DontSayBanana]

I thought Trekker was what Trekkies call themselves.

Trekkers are Trekkies who are embarrassed about it.  They basically claim to be "lite Trekkies;" in reality, they're the ones who'll still go to cons, just not in costume.

And really, STXI... Zachary Quinto can't act, Spock shouldn't be getting with Uhura, poor George Kirk seems to have been forgotten... other than that, the largest beef we Trekkies have with the movie is the way they shat all over the canon design ethos set down by Probert, Okuda, Drexler, and Eaves.  Since TNG, we've known what to expect from visual designs of the show.  You could watch a second or two and think "that's Star Trek."  This new stuff is blobby, it's an unknown quantity, and most Trekkies don't handle massive changes in the series real well.

[Barrister]

Your favourite source in the universe, Wikipedia, quotes Lynch (even better - without citation!):

Director David Lynch's decision to use modules was taken because he found the idea of the Weirding Way unworkable on film, stating he did not want to see "Kung-fu on sand dunes".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weirding_Module

I quote this not to say Lynch was correct, but that it was a deliberate choice made for the screen, and not that he didn't "get it".

[grumbler]

I thought the scream guns (which I certainly agree didn't particularily work as a plot device) was more an attempt to make the Atriedes/Fremen victory more understandable to the movie audience.  Not that Lynch "didn't get" the book.

So you won't agree to disagree, but rather you will argue that Lynch understood but ignored his understanding of the book? 

Okay.  I will sipulate that Lynch may have "gotten' the book but ignored his understanding of so that he could be more successful in a pretence that he didn't get it.

[grumbler]

Your favourite source in the universe, Wikipedia, quotes Lynch (even better - without citation!):

Director David Lynch's decision to use modules was taken because he found the idea of the Weirding Way unworkable on film, stating he did not want to see "Kung-fu on sand dunes".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weirding_Module

I quote this not to say Lynch was correct, but that it was a deliberate choice made for the screen, and not that he didn't "get it".

But, according to http://languish.org/forums/index.php?topic=3368.msg172565#msg172565, the reason he did it is because "he didn't get it."

We both have anonymous internet sources to back our contentions. I would contend that to "agree to disagree" is better than citing more such sources.

[Barrister]

I thought the scream guns (which I certainly agree didn't particularily work as a plot device) was more an attempt to make the Atriedes/Fremen victory more understandable to the movie audience.  Not that Lynch "didn't get" the book.

So you won't agree to disagree, but rather you will argue that Lynch understood but ignored his understanding of the book? 

Yes.