Who’s interested?

  • ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    For the same reason movie theaters will re-show anything. Because foolish people with money will pay to go see it. Like me.

    • mr_sifl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t know if I agree with foolish I never got to see it in the theater so I definitely will. I would pay to go see a lot of older movies in the theater.

      • ArtieShaw@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Who is the bigger fool? The fool or <insert that one Old Ben Kenobi quote>? I would definitely watch this in a theater. Same as I have watched the re-release of a bunch of Hitchcock and Miyazaki movies.

        1. Dune is fun and a special kind of weird.
        2. I had lots of friends with massive crushes on Kyle McLaughlin, so I’ve seen most of what he was in.
        3. The rest of my friends had weird crushes on David Lynch
        4. there was some crossover between 2 and 3

        And then we’re not considering the whole Patrick Stewart thing. I can’t even remember if he played Gurney or Duncan (how is this a name and how much crack have you smoked?) Idaho.

          • ArtieShaw@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            I think Duncan was supposed to be the attractive one… leading to his weird immortal future as a resurrecting ghola so he could keep impregnating people?

            The whole thing is bonkers. And I don’t mean that in a bad way.

            Personally, I think that the original Lynch Dune did a lot to set the tone for sets and costumes for the next 25 years. And it was better than it gets credit for. Jodorowsky… yeah I’ve seen the drawings.

            • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I have a love-hate relationship with David Lynch’s adaptation.

              I first saw it when I was about 13 on TV, dubbed in French with no English subtitles. So I barely understood a word of the dialogue. But the pure epicness shone through those challenges and I vowed to see the original English version.

              When I saw the original English version a couple of years later it was everything I hoped it would be, and then some. It was amazing.

              Then a few years after that I read Herbert’s novel, and that movie was forever tarnished. Reading the meticulous way he forged the plot really shone a light on the movie’s plot shortcomings that I had been ignoring.

              So now I see a deeply flawed movie, but also one that is still epic and beautiful and revolutionary to the industry. They really should have made it as a real miniseries from the beginning, so they could give it space to breathe. Trying to cram that incredibly dense novel into just two or three hours on the silver screen was doomed to fail.