David Lynch's DUNE--new DVD (merged thread) (1 Viewer)

[Damin J Toell]

I don't think it's ambicable to be told that "anyone with any knowledge of film history" will disagree with me, as it clearly means that I have no knowledge of film history (otherwise, I'd be able to tell myself how wrong I am). Really, please don't bother telling me anymore what you believe someone else's intentions were. If the poster in question meant something other than the blatantly obvious insults, he can post that on his own. Otherwise, enough has been said.

DJ

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Agreed.

that's why I specified compromises due to studio impositions.

 

[Jefferson Morris]

A slight, tangential clarification. Brazil actually was released theatrically as Gilliam intended it (minus a few minutes), although it took a hell of a fight to get it out that way. The studio-cut "Love Conquers All" version of Brazil, complete with happy ending, was only ever shown on television (and of course included on Criterion's LD/DVD).

--Jefferson Morris

 

[TheLongshot]

Did he actually say that? Does he still feels that way?

I could see him prefering the theatrical cut from the standpoint that it was the only version he was involved with, but that doesn't mean that it was 'the best that could be done'. Certainly George Lucas never thinks he has done his best work, and has to tinker.

Jason

 

[Damin J Toell]

Lots of artists constantly revist their works throughout their lives. Lots also don't.

DJ

 

[MarcusUdeh]

David Lynch is not revisiting this movie just because (Lucas, Spielberg and Coppola). He’s getting his final say (God let’s this be true!). That’s something that did not occur in 1984.

 

[John CW]

I'm pretty sure Lynch has always maintained that it was his cut of Dune that got released in 1984. If he's doing it again he probably has figured out a way of making it better, but that would be REALLY surprising as I read a quote from him that he's very unhappy with the way the film turned out (something that couldn't just be fixed with a quick re-edit).

 

[MarcusUdeh]

"In retrospect I can see that I started getting into trouble on Dune early on, and it wasn't just the final editing that did it, although I think the film could be way, way of better. I still worry that I don't know if it could ever be a great film, or even a real good film. I don't know. I forget so much about it." - David Lynch

"I started selling out on Dune. Looking back, it's no one's fault but my own. I probably shouldn't have done that picture, but I saw tons and tons of possibilities for things I loved, and this was the structure to do them in. there was so much room to create a world. But I got strong indications from Raffaella and Dino De Laurentiis of what kind of film they expected, and I knew I didn't have final cut. And little by little – and this is the danger, because it doesn't happen in chunks, it happens in the tiniest little shavings, little sandings – little by little every decision was always made with them in mind and their sort of film. Things I felt I could get away with within their framework. So it was destined to be a failure, to me." – David Lynch

 

[John CW]

If you read what he's actually saying, he's actually unhappy with the entire film. He's equally unhappy with ALL of it. The editing won't fix it, so I'd be really surprised if he ever decided to revisit it. Sadly.

 

[Sean Richardson]

But doesn't that mean that no release of 'Dune' would *ever* be the director's cut? I mean, since he can't go back in time to fix all the things in the production, there will never be a director's cut by that definition. If Lynch didn't have final cut on 'Dune', it could be argued that the theatrical release isn't the director's cut [although I am unaware of Lynch being thrown out of the editing room at any point, and he seems to think that the theatrical cut, which he stands behind to an extent, was the best *he* could do with the material as-shot], but I'd agree with Damin that it's still closer to being a director's cut than the longer versions.

That said, 90% of the time, "director's cut" is just a marketing term anyway.

 

[Jay Pennington]

Director's cut. Whatever happened during production is irrelevant. Whether the director had final say in the editing room is the only criteria whether a cut is his or not. By definition!

 

[Grant H]

Knew I'd draw some hits attacking a Goldsmith score, even if it never made it to a theater screen. I usually like his work, but the Legend score seemed to me a shining example of the score telling the audience how to feel instead of enhancing what was on-screen. The severe back-and-forth moods kind of made me queasy. Unicorns--happy music to Bad guys--scary music, repeat ad nauseum. Sometimes it's more powerful to let the music play with you a bit, so you're somewhat surprised by what unfolds on screen. Let it lull you into a false sense of security.

I didn't notice the theatrical cut of Legend to be any more violent or less sincere than the DC. If anything, I thought the T.D. score dripped with sincerity. I would think the Goldsmith score would be considered the darker, edgier version if anything.

I don't know that I'd call ESB the least sincere SW film either; more realistic, less fantastic possibly. If anything the others in the saga have a sort of "false sincerity" save the original, Star Wars, which I WOULD classify as sincere.

Oh, wait. This thread's about Dune. So no real news yet whether there is going to be a new Lynch Director's Cut? If as the one quote said he knew from the beginning he wouldn't have final cut, I don't know that you could call the theatrical cut a director's cut unless in fact as he suggests he filmed with the producers in mind to the extent there's nothing to create a version closer to his intent. If he "sold out" and filmed nothing to contribute to a vision differing from the producers' wishes, then maybe a DC is a pipe dream.

My guess is that somebody realized they had those 4:3 half-shots in the TV extended version and they're trying to figure out how to make a widescreen version of it without using the same shots twice. Maybe they're weighting the costs of patching things up themselves or pleading to Lynch to re-edit the film himself. If he's that pissed about the project he'll probably want too much money to have any involvement with it.

 

[GunterSK]

i bought the 3hr dune the other day, on dvd enjoyed it
i paid 5 dollars on sale at sanity, i am in australia so be region 4

 

[MarcusUdeh]

It would be ironic if Lynch re-cut DUNE in a form in which fans and Universal didn’t like. As though the movie played out as a more expensive FWWM!

 

[Steve Christou]

Goldsmith's magnificent score was in the original UK and European cinema prints, it was the only Legend music I knew until a few years ago when Legend popped up on tv with a different score. Only the US and Canada had the flutey Tangerine Dream music.

 

[Grant H]

I stand corrected. You'd think I'd know or remember that info since it's probably printed in the documentation inside the unclose-able DVD case released in Region 1.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Agreed...especially considering that those longer cuts were edited by people other than Lynch...

 

[Vincent_P]

Sean:

A director need not be "thrown out of the editing room" in order to be denied final cut. Most directors nowadays DO NOT have final cut, and yet they stay in the cutting rooms and supervise the editing of their films. Why would they do that when in the end, the studio gets final say? It's simple- because even though the final word on what the film will be is the studio's decision, if the DIRECTOR is supervising those wishes of the studio, then he or she at least feels that they have some say in the matter, and in the shaping of that material.

Yes, Lynch supervised the cutting and completion of the theatrical release of DUNE, but it's a well-known fact that this is the one film that he DID NOT have final cut on. He was cutting at the behest of the studio and DeLaurentiis. I think it's fair to say that if he had final cut, while the final film would still have been "compromised" by all the earlier compromises during scripting and shooting, etc., the final film would still be notably different than the current 137-minute theatrical release.

Lynch has stated that after DUNE, he insisted on having final cut on all future films. If he truly considered DUNE to be his "director's cut", why would he make this such an issue, and point to DUNE as the big turning point? Of the two cuts of DUNE in circulation (theatrical cut vs. extended TV print), obviously he prefers the one he was actually involved with- the theatrical cut. Technically, it's the "director's cut" in the sense that he supervised the work on it, but since he did not have final cut and made changes to it at the studio's insistance, in no way, shape, or form can the theatrical cut be said to properly present Lynch's "vision" of the film. If it did, why would he have made such a point about DUNE being the turning point with him and insisting on having final cut?

In the end, I think what we need to differentiate between here are the terms "Director's Cut" and "Final Cut". Many films are cut and finished under the supervision of the directors and thus could technically be called "Director's Cuts" in those cases, but those same films are ones that the studio had "Final Cut" on and thus, the directors may well have made many changes that they didn't want to make at the insistance of the studio. DUNE is clearly such a case, given Lynch's insistance after the fact that he forevermore be granted "Final Cut".

Vincent

 

[TravisR]

"Of the two cuts of DUNE in circulation (theatrical cut vs. extended TV print), obviously he prefers the one he was actually involved with- the theatrical cut."

I never understood why people would want to see the TV version released. I can totally understand why you'd want to see the scenes by themselves as an extra. However when the movie is listed as Allan Smithee-directed and Judas Booth-written, it lets you know where Lynch stands on that version of the movie and I can't believe people would care so little what the director thinks in the case.

Now a re-edit by Lynch is a whole new (and welcome) thing in my mind.

 

[Vincent_P]

Travis:

That's how I feel- the TV cut is a disaster, even if some of the added scenes on their own are quite nice. If Lynch would actually get involved in creating an "extended edit", that would be a beautiful thing

Vincent