Page 1 of 1

Thoughts on the "television" cut

Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 12:07 pm
by silenttwn
I really love the Dune movie. I was really eager to sit down and finally see the elongated version and after seeing it I can see why David Lynch would have problems with it.

The biggest problem is the editing... there's a lot of audio problems, and for some reason there are moments in the movie where they overlap two different songs. It really pisses me off, because I love the soundtrack.

The best thing about it is all the new Fremen stuff... it really adds to the movie. If you've seen the theatrical cut, you know that when Paul joins the Fremen it just speeds through the plot and it really is disjointed as is. I really wish some of the cut material was in the theatrical cut, if only to fix the pacing.

Anyone else have thoughts on this cut?

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 6:14 pm
by Annie
Well, I'd say, yes, it does add a lot of Fremen history. But we could get that from the books. I didn't need the Alan Smithee version to understand the David Lynch movie. All you have to do is read. Am I sounding like a broken record?

Re: Thoughts on the "television" cut

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 9:53 am
by jekessler
silenttwn wrote:The biggest problem is the editing... there's a lot of audio problems, and for some reason there are moments in the movie where they overlap two different songs. It really pisses me off, because I love the soundtrack.

There is a long history of this sort of thing when it comes to these epic films. I remember the vastly extended cuts of Superman and Superman II, when they appeared on tv.

Often these tv projects are inflated in size because of contracts with the producers that get them more money for each minute they cram back in.

Generally the directors and original editors will have nothing to do with this, so its all bare bones editing. they take pre-finished material in some case a nd just cut and splice, which is why the editing can be atrocious.

Of course, even if it doesn't play well as a whole, the added bits are intriguing as a window into what was actually shot, and perhaps some of the stages of development the film went through.

And what I woldn't give to see the original, non-Sandworm version of the water of life scene. Just so we could have a proper fan edit, if nothing else. :-)

Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 6:15 pm
by Shipslice99
I wish Universal would pony up the money to allow Lynch to recut the film to his liking. Even if the original cut that he screened for cast and crew in Mexico is gone forever (and I'm not entirely convinced it is), they could still go back to the original negative and create something approximating Lynch's preferred cut.

Universal really blew it with some major genre films in the '80s. They botched the releases of Dune, Legend and Brazil, all three of which now have multiple cuts floating around out there...and yet only the latter two have approved (and superior) director's cuts. I'd love to see Dune join the club.

Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 12:17 am
by Annie
I'm really glad to see people this interested in DUNE. But it's done for good. David has said he'll never touch it again. Anybody here read the script? They've got it on an MSN group called the Landsraad. Not totally the same as the movie; but it had to be written before the movie was shot.

I love it anyway. Even if it isn't totally true to the books. How could it be? At the time it was made, there were only 6 books, and they still only gave him a little over 2 hours. My brain will always picture Paul as Kyle, no matter how many times I read the books.

Oh, and I don't like the "television" cut or the Children of Dune or any of the Sci-Fi channel's attempts to redo it. Just for the record.

Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 10:14 pm
by moviemaker
Annie, I completely agree...Paul IS Kyle end of story!

But what I find interesting is how David has really disowned this movie yet it has his thumbprint (and four fingers) all over it. In fact I would say apart from Eraserhead, it feels like it could be one of his most spiritual movies so far as it deals with issues of mind, consciousness, etc.

Yes it is a flawed movie, but as flawed as it is, it's still better than so many movies out there. When David says he didn't have director's cut I still feel the movie would not be that different if he had. The special efx, models, acting, music, etc. etc. would have remained the same--a product of the times circa 1984. Let's face it, it's a hard book to translate to film, for anyone. I for one love the soundtrack!

So I really think he should be proud of what it is. I mean in a wierd way, because of the gigantic, bloatedness (pun intended) of Dune, we got Blue Velvet (my fave DL film), the small independent personal story that was the complete antithesis of Dune but still had Kyle!

Dune takes my back to my early childhood and for that it will always hold a special place for me.


Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 12:17 am
by Annie
Welcome to the board, moviemaker! You are my new best friend. I obviously love DUNE and Blue Velvet is my favorite DL movie, too, as you can tell from my avatar.

I don't know where I read this, but David did acknowledge that by making DUNE, he was then able to ask for final cut on Blue Velvet, so he gives it that much credit. I think it was just a bad experience for him, which really is too bad.

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:55 pm
by D0ppelgangerDale
I, too, prefer Lynch's version of Dune. The extended version is boring in comparison. I especially hate its amateurish, overblown introduction.