I get teary whenever I see the title appear across Frank's face in the intro. There's such a perfect mix of tragedy and joy throughout the whole movie.
Denis Dune is ok….. and kind of unremarkable and bland This guys argument is he saw an AI RU-vid Jodorowsky video an is scared they’re going to release it?………………. Jodorowskys dune will NEVER be released it doesn’t exist, there was an entire documentary about this… Nobody is saying they want an AI Jodorowsky movie but I guess… Jodorowskys dune if it would have been made would have been the peak of surrealism and sci-fi that transcends filmmaking. Die hard dune book fans hate Jodorowsky cause he’s essentially Stanley Kubrick destroying the shining book to fit his subliminals God imagine being so basic you think Timothy chalamaldingdong and Zendeya are better than DALI and ORSON MF WELLS 🙃
Every actor was terrific in Succession regardless of the size of their role (I have no intention of insulting anyone and hope no one else will either), with all having both comedic and dramatic chops, but for me, Matthew Macfadyen was the absolute star. I have been a fan of his for awhile and I think his performance as Tom was possibly his best onscreen performance to date. He is simply magnetic on screen, essentially playing multiple characters when you consider how consistently different he behaves depending on who he is around. He is the sole reason I will go to see Deadpool & Wolverine even if he only ends up having a small role in it. Something I have not seen people point out is how much older Macfadyen is than all of the other “young” cast members (the actors playing Shiv, Kendall, Roman, Greg, Jess, and Willa). He is 4-17 years older than them. I.e. he is a whopping 13 years older than the actors playing Shiv and Greg. Most actors get better and better as they get more experienced if they keep challenging themselves like he has, and I believe his age and experience works to his advantage in this role. Some things can only come with age.
I think there's something to be said as well about sexism influencing box office numbers when it comes to women-led action films, specifically. Think about how poorly the Marvels performed, even when taking into account the general Marvel burnout. Even if there aren't as many vocal losers out there writing rants about Mad Max being woke or some crap, that 2010s antifeminist culture has definitely had an impact on film viewership in strange and pervasive ways. Even people who aren't intentionally avoiding films because of their own sexism may have that same reaction you were describing of seeing a large amount of negative sentiment surrounding a film and talk themselves out of seeing something that they were on the fence about.
makes sense that Kuritzkes has a theater background! i had no idea that the osaka/williams match was an inspiration for the movie-i had forgotten most of the details of that match too, but that was such a wild ride, and i feel like the movie really taps into that sense that winning is not always a victory
He actually mentioned two tennis matches as major influences the other being Federer’s wife being so anxious in a match despite them already being set for life (brand deals, fame, etc) despite the outcome for the game. It’s a cool meld of both ideas.
I agree with everything here. But one thing I’d add is that studios have a real FOMO problem that if people don’t go see a movie in theaters in opening weekend then they’ll throw it on streaming nearly asap, like it’s looking for another hit.
Yeah I never really understand the need to rush "pre-order on digital" I guess it's guaranteed money in a couple weeks but it makes the theatre seems less important. This didn't make the video because I'd have to research it a lot more, but "allegedly" early VOD doesn't effect later theatre runs despite that being opposite from what we'd think. (Again no clue if this is actually correct)
Absolutely agree that scandal/controversy/flop culture is killing cinema. All it takes is a few dozen posts and articles to completely kill momentum or hype for a project. The best thing about it is it also kills AstroTurf efforts for bad projects. There's too much to choose and not enough time to do as much research, so you pick an opinion and ride with it. It's just easier.
I think the scene between Tom and Matsson in Sweden wasn't actually a strike... though it may seem so at first glance, when you rewatch it, you realize that Tom's answer wasn't some bullshit suck up answer, of him trying to act all fake insightful by trying to bring up some The Economist article about France like Greg did. His answer was actually insightful. It was a commentary on the American "post imperial" mindset. It showed that Tom understood the American public as head of ATN, and that someone with such an American perspective, which Matsson was lacking, would be useful to keep around if Matsson was going to be buying Waystar. You can see on Matsson's expression that he was actually somewhat impressed by Tom's response, while he did not care for Greg's fake wittiness at all. It's those brilliant scenes with their little nuances that make the show so good and worth rewatching.
Tom along with many others are losers in the end. Servant (not partner) CEO of a company that isn't family-related whereas he was a dept head of a family business with much greater stability.
Today’s world, we have to look at the national entities that have a unique tendency to do good, and replicate that formula. No matter how (in the spirit of dune) much it sacrifices cultures that are most prone to violence. Because while no country is unique in committing atrocities, there are countries that are unique in acts of goodness. For example, would you rather be a prisoner of war in Russia or the US? Or China or the Netherlands? And this is coming from an East Asian.
Jodorowsky was a prima donna who didn't understand the meaning of restraint. The best studio films are a crossbreed of art and commerce. He failed the commerce part; and the artistic choices look whacky rather than believable.
The Social Network movie has Mark Zuckerberg saying a line that goes " _If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you'd have invented Facebook._ " Lynch's Dune is a thousand times better than Jodorowsky's Dune because it actually GOT MADE, despite how much of a commercial flop it may have been Color me a late player since I had just gotten into the books these past few years or so, and I never got the same desperation Dune fans had that Star Wars fans felt in between the various movie entries, but going through all of the hype about Jodorowsky--seeing the concept art, and even watching the documentary about the unproduced movie--I keep coming back to the realization that Jodo's Dune is one of the greatest vaporware projects in fandom history At some point, there *has* to be a reason this surrealist auteur never got to make his vision of Dune, no matter how many years he won't stop complaining about it. It's an imaginary movie full of premises and promises that most people doubt could deliver on what it claims to do. At the very best, it would be a strange sci-fi arthouse film that would be so far apart from the Dune books that it might as well have come from an alternate universe. At the very worst, it would be a messy hodge podge of things that would make the Frank Herbert novels look as simple and straightforward as a Winnie the Pooh book. I guess in time, AI generation could eventually deliver on Jodorowsky's vision. But at that point, would it still be his Arrakis, his Dune, if it was all made by a thinking machine and had no involvement from the man himself? Anyways, thanks for expressing a conclusion that a lot of us have come towards. Dune is special because of its analysis and criticisms of charismatic leaders, religion, politics, and of humanity itself. I don't see how a thousand Harkonnen soldiers shitting on screen could adequately capture the books' themes.
Very much disagree, anyone who says stuff like this is either really ignorant or just doesn't like Jodorowsky's style (which is fine) but they then say his style is objectively bad which is just wrong. The Holy Mountain is an artistic triumph and something Deni Villeneuve couldn't even dream of making. If you hate The Holy Mountain that's on you but don't parade around your ignorance like its an educated opinion. Jodorowsky's Dune would've failed don't get me wrong, but it would be cause it was too much for general audiences, not cause it would've been bad. Also, Deni didn't adapt an unadaptable book, he cheated and removed everything that would make it unadaptable, the true Dune still hasn't been adapted yet. 03:02 no, it wouldn't get released, it would be an ultra simplified version of it. Jodorowsky's movies are good because everything is done intentionally to give a meaning or theme, if it wasn't made by him you would lose all the intention and it would be just random weird stuff happening with no point (which is what a lot of people think Jodorowsky movies are anyway which is sad). A movie isn't its concept or its concept art, its what all of that means when connected together, and you would lose that if it wasn't made by Jodorowsky but instead some teenager feeding their dune art into an ai without understanding the intention behind those creative decisions. The fact you view media like this shows me why you don't like Jodorowsky. AI art has no intention, we will never see Jodowsky's dune cause he'll be dead. The only way its possible is if we create a machine that can read peoples minds to understand his intention behind everything, and even then, most good stories become something completely different from what the creator originally intended when they start production. Its genuinely heart-breaking to see people think the only thing different between human art and ai art is the time and effort that goes into making it. So sad. Art is about self expression, the ai has nothing specific to express so its just really impressive elephant paintings with no specific meaning. Watch The Holy Mountain and realise that everything there is just an new language, its just a new way of expressing yourself in a way that words simply can't. Jodorowsky isn't just a filmmaker but a proper full on genius. His movies are about extremely specific and deep emotions that if you connect to will effect you deeper then basically any other films (other than maybe Charlie Kaufman films). The new dune is cold and distant and isn't expressive, Jodorowsky's would've been expressive, i am sad we never got Jodorowsky's. It wouldn't have been dune but at least it wouldn't be pretending to be dune like these new movies which are basically Dune lite. Whatever just please don't view art in that way where an ai can just create it now and we have it, no, we will never have it, we will have bad interpretations of it by pretentious teenagers.
Brother, I think you're reaching a bit too much. Please drink some water--this is just a RU-vid video, not an attack on the Holy Jodorowsky, as it would appear to you
I disagree that Denis failed to adapt the source material, part of adaptation is adapting the source material to the intended medium and certain elements of a novel do not translate to the medium of film. This Denis understood and made changes that helped enhance the intended medium whilst keeping the key plot points and story intact. Jodorowsky is a imo an artist, his art is challenging and created in the medium of film. That being said Jodorowsky's Dune was nothing like the source material and strayed further from it than either Lynch's Dune or Vlllienuve's Dune. That being said i would love to see it realized and preferably as some form of animated movie.
@@johnernest5843 I do admit i like Jodorowsky but not anymore than other passionate artists like Charlie Kaufman or Naoki Urasawa. I just disagree with this persons analysis of Jodorowsky. Because of Dune lots of people are getting introduced to this guy as "the guy who failed to make dune" and then they see this guy saying all this crazy shit and think "yeah this guys a nutter, glad he didn't make dune". If you discovered Jodorowsky through his films you gain a massive appreciation for him that grows when you start listening to him speak. He's not a filmmaker, hes a philosopher who happens to also make films and comics. It's just a shame to see people so misunderstood.
@@AGamingEntityi disagree with that, in lynch's movie and the novel i found it hard to relate to paul and i think denis did a good job at making him relatable. My main issues with the movie is that it is a movie and really Dune should be a high budget series.
First of all, I wouldn't call a literal Bible sized concept and script book just "a couple of concepts", it is literally the whole movie written down in extreme detail. If one were to film it by that book it would be a full run-of-the-mill Jodorowski film. Idk where AI comes into this, it's not like we can't film it ourselves if he technically could in the 70s. If we just don't insert anything of our own into it it will be faithful (listen to Peter Jackson's interview about the Trilogy, that's the right approach). Lastly, dude, movies like Hellraiser exist and you're skeptical of a speedo on Paul? Not to talk about the other movies FROM Jodorowski.. It's the 70s aka a shit ton of LSD and hippie stuff, wdym "no"? I for one would love to see just the absolute glam and over the top stylishness of everyone and make it as trippy as you can, I don't want another basic ass adventure story. As great as the new Dune movies are, they're just not special in any kind of way. I don't see them becoming classics like the David Lynch one, they're too modern Hollywood, too clean and corporate (the Shaj Hulud are literally just a visual spectacle, nothing more). If someone were to make a film faithful to Jodorowski's script or the bible I think we'd at least have a great acid trip of a movie if nothing else
