I've got Dune. What am I in for?
the real magic was the psychology we learned along the way
>>25271124One good book
>>25271124Boring slogfest, lame dialogue keyed to the boring self insert protagonist, clumsy boring action sequences, boring Trump derangment syndrome.
>>25271124The prose is no good, the world building is ok, and the main character is written so accurately to his circumstances it can get a bit annoying.
>>25271124A good book, an okay sequel, an unreadable shitstain, and a mildly okay fourth entry
>>25271411>self insert protagonistby that you must mean Duncan Idaho, the Gary Stu that defeats Sex-Witch magic by being better at sex than her.
>>25271124Is this bait or did you really buy a whole series before reading the first book??
>>25273039I heard it was based and picked these up from thrift stores for a dollar a piece. How do the movies compare to the series? I've only seen Lynch's work years ago on a tape I used to own.
>>25273070I will never bother watching part 2 of the new dune. Truly awful. The original movie was atleast true to the spirit of strangeness, though i cannot remember how true it was to the books. I remember it being "close enough"
>>25271134Yeah, Messiah. >>25273070The new movies are fine. They streamline things and modify certain elements that are very '60s schlock or just outright bizarre (mainly the characters of Alia and Fenrig). The original Dune was serialized by chapter and Herbert never really tightened up some of the plot points when it was collected, which means certain elements feel unresolved or anticlimactic. This was made worse by Messiah's having been lopped off the original first book when it's the clear ending. The new movies round off those problems while also taking away some of the rough charm. Lynch's Dune is more interesting and committed to Herbert's universe as an exotic space. It takes just as many liberties as the new ones but there's a lot more joy in the sets, effects, and costuming .
