Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dune, 50 years on

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 109 posts

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#21

Post by Nemcue »

rdtsc wrote: post #9
kepano wrote: post #3

Y'all have seen Jodorowsky's Dune, right? This documentary changed my life: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1935156/reference

I saw that movie, I thought it was very good. Just curious, what did you like about it that it changed your life. Did you mean the how it was shot (i.e. impressed by director's work), Jodorowsky as a person, his story how he worked on Dune with other people (the complexity, dedication, the obsession), or Dune itself? I found interesting how Dune influenced all these other blockbusters that came after, most importantl…

"It was also fascinating how Jodorowsky never actually read Dune."

It's so bizarre how people keep saying this, because you're far from being the first; like you all fell asleep during the exact same segment.

He _did_ read the book. He clearly says so in the documentary.

He hadn't read the book before he got the go-ahead from the producer.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#22

Post by BjoernKW »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #15

I thoroughly enjoyed Dune. It had an interesting story, set in an even more interesting world. However, it's also the kind of book that should never have had a sequel; other books in the series not only don't measure up, but actively undermine what made the original interesting. It's possible that other good stories could have been written in that universe, but they weren't. I highly recommend reading only the origin…

I agree. I found the sequels both not as compelling and harder to read than the original (the notable exception being Dune Messiah, which was still quite interesting and closer to the original): Plans within ploys within ruses within plans for pages on end, contemplations of a literal Godking in an even more distant future made the later storyline very difficult to follow at times.

However, while the first novel was the most digestible and most intriguing plot-wise, it is the sequels that explore the philosophical, political and social subjects of the original much more deeply. In a way the sequels are sometimes more like (huge) essays on various philosophical topics that merely use the original story as a backdrop.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#23

Post by JoshTriplett »

proofofconcept wrote: post #20
JoshTriplett wrote: post #15

I thoroughly enjoyed Dune. It had an interesting story, set in an even more interesting world. However, it's also the kind of book that should never have had a sequel; other books in the series not only don't measure up, but actively undermine what made the original interesting. It's possible that other good stories could have been written in that universe, but they weren't. I highly recommend reading only the origin…

Which (if any) of the Dune sequels are "good" is one of those Kirk vs. Pickard or Joel vs. Mike caliber sci-fi debates that gets unreasonably heated since people get very attached to their opinions on creative works that resonate with them on a personal level. (For the record, I don't really like the first two sequels but I really really love the 3rd-5th sequels; I realize it's a big ask of new readers to get that fa…

> For the record, I don't really like the first two sequels but I really really love the 3rd-5th sequels

I'll admit to not having gotten that far; two bad sequels was enough for me to give up.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#24

Post by veli_joza »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #15

I thoroughly enjoyed Dune. It had an interesting story, set in an even more interesting world. However, it's also the kind of book that should never have had a sequel; other books in the series not only don't measure up, but actively undermine what made the original interesting. It's possible that other good stories could have been written in that universe, but they weren't. I highly recommend reading only the origin…

The first book is black-and-white affair, the rise of an underdog hero. It takes few more sequels to paint a much bigger picture warning about dangers of religion fundamentalism and about placing burden of leadership on single person. In the end I also like the first book the best, but sequels are also worthwhile to read.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#25

Post by rdtsc »

Nemcue wrote: post #21
rdtsc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw that movie, I thought it was very good. Just curious, what did you like about it that it changed your life. Did you mean the how it was shot (i.e. impressed by director's work), Jodorowsky as a person, his story how he worked on Dune with other people (the complexity, dedication, the obsession), or Dune itself? I found interesting how Dune influenced all these other blockbusters that came after, most importantl…

"It was also fascinating how Jodorowsky never actually read Dune." It's so bizarre how people keep saying this, because you're far from being the first; like you all fell asleep during the exact same segment. He _did_ read the book. He clearly says so in the documentary. He hadn't read the book before he got the go-ahead from the producer.

Thanks for pointing that out. I misremembered. Edited my comment accordingly.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#26

Post by veli_joza »

ekianjo wrote: post #18
contingencies wrote: post #11

For the kids: though technically the RTS genre existed earlier in one or two games, it was essentially nearly singlehandedly popularized by Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty . The graphics and sound, probably inspired by the Amiga, were awesome in the era! So many elements of modern RTS were already present: multiple civilizations, each with specialist unit types. Level-oriented progression. Resource harvesting. Ter…

Erm. Let's not forget Dune the adventure game by Cryo as well, which was some kind of Adventure game mixed with real time strategy in the later parts of the game. Very well done.

There's also another fantastic game inspired by Dune, an older turn-based strategy game called Emperor of the Fading Suns. The game's religion system, power struggle between noble houses, along with mix of tribal themes and space technology creates a strong Dune-like ambience.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#27

Post by veli_joza »

Another TV adaptation worth mentioning is SyFy's miniseries "Frank Herbert's Dune" and "Frank Herbert's Children of Dune". They are much more faithful to books than Lynch's movie and better show the epic universe that Herbert imagined.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#28

Post by iwwr »

Dune is a fine work and stands on its own pretty well, but Kunzru gets fixated on the first one and misses out on the depth of the latter books. The first 3 (including Dune) explore the Muad'Dib's rise to power and his new imperial system, book 4 is his son's very long reign and books 5-6 explore the dissolution of that system over the centuries. The story arc spans thousands of years. The central theme as I'd see it is the domination of humans by 'oracles' -- creatures with access to resources that dominate by both predicting and shaping the future.

Paul Atreides is not merely a "white man who fulfils a persistent colonial fantasy", he didn't arrive in a vacuum. Fremen culture has been shaped by the oracles, their religion, traditions and prophecies were planted to suit the aims of the oracles. Paul recognized first that Dune is not merely a central position worth holding, but _the_ source of power in that universe, control over Dune means control over the universe. So it's very much a story of hydraulic despotism, of the natural resource curse. How do you break the curse? Herbert's answer is 'technology'. Technology created the problem but it's also ultimately the solution.

Re: Dune, 50 years on

#30

Post by iwwr »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #15

I thoroughly enjoyed Dune. It had an interesting story, set in an even more interesting world. However, it's also the kind of book that should never have had a sequel; other books in the series not only don't measure up, but actively undermine what made the original interesting. It's possible that other good stories could have been written in that universe, but they weren't. I highly recommend reading only the origin…

I would disagree. The sequels, especially 5-6 open up the wider universe and explore a variety of human cultures and social interaction. It's a fantasy-scify with deep and complex characters and complex interactions. Normally you'd start to see a scifi universe break apart after a few books, but Dune's could stand, it's 'realistic' in a sense.

If you mean the sequels, prequels, interquels made by Brian Herbert and Kevin J Anderson, then those are of a lower quality. They had the good fortune to inherit an IP and just ran with it. They may not be so bad as far as the genre goes (except for Sandworms), but they create a somewhat wider context. It's not for everyone, while I feel the originals of Frank Herbert may be, at least to people with a taste for sci-fi.

Post reply on HN