New film version of Dune to be made :)

It is worth noting that in these new films the "jihad" term was changed to "crusade" ^_^

(as observed first by Angst!)
So already they're doing a retcon. "Jihad" and "Crusade" can both mean "holy war" but "crusade" doesn't always mean that. Context is critical in pinning down whether they mean the same basic thing, but even if they do, the nuances are different. If you take medieval era Crusades as an example, no doubt some of the participants really were into it for sincerely-held religious reasons. But many others weren't; they had numerous reasons for going on crusade, and many were simply out of self-interest - to make their fortunes, to achieve glory (and be noticed by the king and be granted rank, money, privileges, and power), or to avoid prison or execution for some crime they'd committed.

It's similar in Dune. Many Fremen participated in the Jihad because they sincerely believed that Muad'Dib was holy and it was necessary to bring this to other worlds. But there are others who just wanted to get off Arrakis and see other worlds. One of them, in Dune Messiah, states that he left because he wanted to see an ocean. It was something beyond the imagination of the Fremen at that time, that there could be so much water that you couldn't see across it, or that it could be so cold that it would freeze. Still others wanted to be rich, and they settled on the worlds they traveled to.

Kyriakos said:
Commodore said:
Why? I kinda liked how mixed religious terminology in Dune showed how all of our separate religions all just kinda blended together over time. Plus "Butlerian Crusade" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "Butlerian Jihad" does.
Obviously a decision based on politics. I am not sure if in the books the jihad is in the end seen as negative (some characters who took part in it seem to think so). @Valka D'Ur would help with that :)
I can't find Commodore's post there, so if I'm missing any context for it, please help me out.

The section of the Dune Encyclopedia that deals with Fremen religion is huge, and would take numerous posts to even summarize. For anyone who is seriously interested in this, I recommend tracking down a copy of the Encyclopedia (they're not cheap, though).

*puts on lecturer's hat*

Basically, the Fremen are also known as one branch of the Zensunni Wanderers, who follow a belief system that developed from a combination of Zen Buddhism and Sunni Islam. Considering that the events of Dune itself take place approximately 20,000 years from now, it's entirely believable that religions would blend and integrate various facets of others. Add to this the fact that after the Butlerian Jihad, it was realized that the best way to ensure that thinking machines not come back was to make them anathema... which necessitated rewriting the religious tenets people were taught to believe.

Thus the Orange Catholic Bible was hammered out at a retreat somewhere in Hawaii (information related in the Appendix of Dune). This document incorporated elements of all the major religions at that time, in order to make it accessible and relatable to the people of the Imperium. After that, millennia of generations of people were taught the tenet: "Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind."

^ Yeah :) It's quite the opposite...
Djihad has that awful Muslim connotation, this evil terroristic 9/11 feel, that could bring unease to the mainstream American public.
Crusade, on the other hand, has the class and glamour of heroism and knights of old. It's a much more fitting term to describe the Event that lays at the foundation of our little heroes world order and adventures.

Which is more (apart from this good guys-bad guys split - and, you know, Muslim people tend to be pretty critical of the crusades), the terms are far from synonyms.
The Djihad can be an armed conflict but it can also be a personnal quest for sprirituality and self-improvement, which the universe of Dune is all about. The "Butlerian Jihad" also has an ecumenical ring to it, that is coherent with the whole thing and the later religions and the general philosophy of Dune.

I think the Saudis would love it if Holliwood acknowledged their religion as something other than the work of the devil (not to say Saudis have a monopoly on Islam). But it's a fact that the figure of the Russian has been replaced by the Arab as the bad guy of choice in many a Holliwood movie.
9/11 took place in 2001. The first miniseries was shown in 2000, but the second was shown in 2003. There were plenty of references to "jihad" and Leto's "Golden Path", which was to yet again remake the religion of the Imperium, which once again necessitated going out and forcing it on the people.

I don't think it's the Dune fans who can't handle the word "jihad."

A school here (in Canada mind you, not the U.S.) is under fire for using the mascot name "The Crusaders". I don't know if they're changing it, but I was under the impression that this word was not really that well accepted here in North America due to all that.. well, history. I've heard politicians using this word without thinking and then backtracking.
The general connotation of "crusade" with "holy war" means that politicians (in Canada) using the word are suspected of violating, or intending to violate, the Charter of Rights clause that says government must not discriminate on the basis of religion.

I guess there really isn't a better word to use, and this one is the safer of the two

I suspect they also don't want to try to portray the Fremen as Muslims too much. There's obvious parallels there, and in the movie they are the good guys.. sort of.. in many cases though - not really. I think they want to avoid those negative connotations popping up. If it's a crusade then it's tougher to argue that these Fremen are supposed to be muslims, maybe.
Then the producers/writers are idiots. The Fremen religion is basically what you get if you throw Buddism and Sunni Islam into a blender, add various parts of a few other religions, allow several thousand years for it to settle down, and there you have it. An offshoot variety of Islam on a planet orbiting Canopus, millennia in the future, by a people who have been forced from planet to planet over those millennia, forever denied what they're seeking (hence the label "Zensunni Wanderers").

It should be possible for a thinking person to divorce this fictional variety of Sunni Islam from the real-history version.

Thanks, Warpus. I understand now why you meant the term Djihad might upset Muslim people...
You're referring to the infamous SJW community, aren't you ?
I can see the term Crusade being a lot more offensive - or better : non-PC - than the Djihad (synonims : effort, struggle towards a saint goal), however, in a large part because of the White supremacist communities that afflict your... continent. They put a shade on the image of the pretty white knight.
These cultural issues are sensitive in North-America, aren't they ? It seems very childish or even artificial to us Europeans to argue over PC vocable given how violent society itself can be, is. Almost as if arguing over what a receivable vocable is would... deter... from adressing the overencompassing violence.
It's amazing what will make some people flip out and get offended. I once got into a multiple-day argument over at TrekBBS due to one line in my sig: "Let's give it Riker. He'll eat anything!".

Anyone remember the old Life cereal TV commercial about Mikey? That's what inspired my sig, in combination with Riker's habit of eating all sorts of revolting stuff. Yet in spite of the fact that I've had this line in my sig for 13 years, it took over half that time for someone to notice and insist hysterically that I was body-shaming Jonathan Frakes, and how dare I do that?

They want to be able to show this movie in those peace loving countries like Saudi Arabia, probably.

Besides, the novelization is never accurate when a movie is made. In Stephen King's IT there is an orgy involving 12 year old children. Or maybe I should call it a gangbang? Whatever it is, there was NO mention of it in the movie version, for obvious reasons. It didn't make any sense in the novel either, it was just sort of awkwardly included there, so in that case I can understand not including it in the movie. Imagine if you're watching a horror movie and then 12 year olds start banging. Man, King is a messed up guy. But he can sure write. Surprised no editors went "Uhhhhhhhh we can't include that part, what the hell man", but I guess the 80s were a different time.
There is a fundamental fact about Children of Dune that was weird enough in the novel, but audiences absolutely would not have accepted it on TV. The twins were played by young adult actors. But they were only supposed to be 9 years old. As Pre-Born, they were born with fully-functioning adult consciousness, so even though they were physically children, they were thinking at the level of someone in the vicinity of 30 years old (too lazy at the moment to look up how old Chani was when she gave birth to the twins).

There's a reference in the novel in which the Bene Gesserit, in an attempt to salvage the Atreides genes, want to breed the twins together - something the Fremen absolutely would not stand for, as incest is punished by death, and the dead persons' water is poured out on the desert, rather than added to the tribe's water. If the twins are only 9, that's something the audience wouldn't stand for, either.

Ditto the part of the novel about marriage. Ghanima's official husband is Leto II. But her actual husband, who was chosen for political purposes and because his genes measured up, is Farad'n Corrino (Irulan's nephew). There's a bit of dialogue near the end of the novel when Ghanima is talking to Farad'n about them having children, and he says, "You're a little young yet." She tells him, "Never say that to me again." Ghanima Atreides has an adult mind in a child's body, but the audience would only see a 9-year-old girl marrying a man more than twice her age.

I don't mind this change, unless they change more. It's just a word. If it means the movie can be shown in more countries and be more $$ successful, then fine, whatever, let's do this, it seems like it would increase the odds of the story being finished in the sequel. If the movie doesn't do well, we won't get it, and I probably won't even notice. You can easily change the words in your head as you're watching

I don't get how "Crusade" is fine though. That has the same sort of connotations as "Jihad". But maybe not in muslim countries *shrug*, I won't presume to understand that pov without somebody chiming in with more information/context
When is this movie supposed to be coming out - this year or next? If it's next year, any references to "jihad" are going to set off some people because next year will be the 20th anniversary of 9/11.
 
Blending Buddhism and Islam is a hella big no no in the Koran. I know it's sci fi but still.

Maybe some heretics made it off Old Earth and the rest died idk.

I don't think they go into a huge amount about how Zensunni came to be.

Still 34000 years can explain a lot.

 
Thanks, I take it as a compliment.
If I referenced Marvel and superheroes : look at the cast. People say it is all-star.
We've got actors from Spider Man, Mission Impossible, Aquaman, Justice League, Gardians of the Galaxy, Avengers, Ant Man, The Dark Knight, Avengers (again, the whole series), Star Wars, Javier Bardem, Assassin's Creed (Charlotte Rampling is alright), Star Wars... So, alright, the casting is all-stars but it's more like the 2-out-of-5 stars sort of stars.

Let's take a hint from this and acknowledge the sheer gluttony, the obscenity of a system that will now deprive Dune of its substance and make it a formulaic super-heroic adventure.
Which leads me to :


I think the best quality of Denis Villeneuve (I've watched most of his movies), is that he can handle a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars. He can handle the scope, the scale, and never shoot his budget through the roof. He understands it is in his best interest to be a cooperative partner to the studios and producers,
Unlike frantic and minor directors like Orson Welles, Francis Ford Coppola or Terry Gilliam, who had hostile relationships to the studios,
Which is why Denis (let's call him Denis from now on, I feel like we're acquainted enough and pass judgement) will not, has not produced a The Trial, an Apocalypse Now or a Munchausen.

Who wants to hand 200 millions of dollars over to a madman like Terry Gilliam ? Nobody does.


I will leave it to somebody else to explain how Lynch and Jodorowsky did not have the best relationships with producers either.

You've got some good taste. Few people ever bring up Münchhausen when discussing Gilliam, yet it is easily one of his best films. Time Bandits, The Fisher King and Münchhausen are actual masterpieces of cinema, but don't really get the validation that Brazil or Fear and Loathing do. Personally I have similiar views on Denis. He is a great craftsman, he knows his way around the business, and he makes very good movies. But he is, imho, lacking that inexplicable spark that elevates some pieces of art over others.

I feel the exact same way about Nicolas Windign Refn, especially drive. What a gorgeous film, well edited, too, amazing use of colours, but it still seems a bit.. hollow. Maybe this is my personal cynicism of the world, but there is certainly something predictable, capitalistic, product-designey about those two aforementioned directors, and a certain lack of boldness, insanity and passion.
 
Last edited:
Then the producers/writers are idiots. The Fremen religion is basically what you get if you throw Buddism and Sunni Islam into a blender, add various parts of a few other religions, allow several thousand years for it to settle down, and there you have it. An offshoot variety of Islam on a planet orbiting Canopus, millennia in the future, by a people who have been forced from planet to planet over those millennia, forever denied what they're seeking (hence the label "Zensunni Wanderers").

It's not the producers who are the idiots, it's audiences and politicians. Not even audiences really, more like all the idiots all over the planet that would react to such a word and be easily fired up about it without taking any time whatsoever to understand any of these nuances.

These days you can't even display a drawing of Mohammed without getting some jihadis on your butt trying to slaughter you and your family. You can't show ghosts or your movie will be banned in China. If you're a standup comedian and make a joke somebody doesn't like you can get "cancelled" by morons on twitter.

Unfortunately this is the world we live in, and if you're trying to make a movie to appeal to global audiences and need it to pull in enough money to warrant a sequel.. then you gotta cut some corners. In this case I'm happy that this is the only corner they cut (it seems). It's just the change of 1 word, so it's relatively minor. If it means that this movie isn't banned in muslim countries or whatever the hell would happen, then I don't mind. If they changed a big part of the plot.. then I'd be getting fired up.. but just one word, I can live with that, especially since both words pretty much mean the same thing.

It should be possible for a thinking person to divorce this fictional variety of Sunni Islam from the real-history version.

It should be, but you forget that the vast majority of humans on this planet do not think like that. Many do not even think at all. To remind yourself of this just pop on twitter for 2 minutes and take a peek around.


Hmm I don't like how the video just casually mentions "and sandworms were introduced to Dune".. By whom??? From where? Why?

I can just google this, but it seems like a big oversight to not explain these details.
 
Last edited:
It should be, but you forget that the vast majority of humans on this planet do not think like that. Many do not even think at all. To remind yourself of this just pop on twitter for 2 minutes and take a peek around.

I think it's somewhat dangerous to think that people who you disagree with politically "do not think at all". Yes, hardcore SJWs can be aggravating and may seem "insane" to you, but these people think just as much as Flat Earthers or neonazis do, they just accept different frameworks, ideologies, truths and gospels.

One of the hardest things to accept in this world, I have found, is that there are people out there who genuinely hold ridiculous, harmful or disgusting beliefs, not because they're individually stupid, but because these beliefs do have some appeal, otherwise they would not exist.

Ironically, I think it is precisely this which fuels a lot of ignorance that you are talking about. As an example:

Someone who watches a lot of alt-right clowns on YouTube ridicule SJWs and call their beliefs irrational is in turn much more open to accepting irrational, illogical or malicious beliefs from those alt-right talking heads. The same goes for the political left, too.
 
Last edited:
@yung.carl.jung

Why are you focusing so much on these so-called "SJW's"? I never even used that term. If this hits close to home or something, it shouldn't, this post was not supposed to be about you personally.

I stand by my point. A lot of people just don't think. They look at what uniform they are wearing, look up in their little manual how they are supposed to react to something, and then they act accordingly. Rational thought and discourse plays no part in these proceedings. Twitter is full of all sorts of examples of people like that, from flat earthers, to baptists, to morons trying to get the next movie banned, or whoever.

In the very same post you reference "right-wing clowns". Surely this is exactly the same kind of "ignorance" you accuse me of.
 
@yung.carl.jung

Why are you focusing so much on these so-called "SJW's"? I never even used that term. If this hits close to home or something, it shouldn't, this post was not supposed to be about you personally.

nah, don't worry, I never even considered that you'd be talking about me :)

I just personally really don't think that there are people that don't think. If instead you're saying that people conform a lot, then I would 100% agree.

and nah, thinking Ben Shapiro or Tucker Carlson is a clown (they genuinely are entertainers, anyway) is not the same as thinking that all right winger are stupid, irrational and don't think (for themselves or at all).
 
When you start to think how your work of art would not offend a certain category of people, then, suddenly, it isn't a work of art anymore.

I'm not really familiar with the fact. I know David Byrne recently apologized because he made a bogus interview of him interviewing himself and amongst his many selves interviewing himself he was impersonating a black man. And he recently apologized for that bogus interview, dated 1984 (!), as if a black David Byrne could not interview David Byrne or for some obscure reason that escapes me, a reason of status, or, truly, this is as shameful as it comes.


ps : If you don't know who David Byrne, is, well, suffice is to say his act, The Talking Heads, are the most prominent band to ever have come from New-York and the most inclusive ever.


So, let's say you do produce stuff. Who are you catering to ? Is this the question to ask ? I don't think catering to anybody is the question.
 
Last edited:
When you start to think how your work of art would not offend a certain category of people, then, suddenly, it isn't a work of art anymore.

I'm not really familiar with the fact. I know David Byrne recently apologized because he made a bogus interview of him interviewing himself and amongst his many selves interviewing himself he was impersonating a black man. And he recently apologized for that bogus interview, dated 1984 (!), as if a black David Byrne could not interview David Byrne or for some obscure reason that escapes me, a reason of status, or, truly, this is as shameful as it comes.


ps : If you don't know who David Byrne, is, well, suffice is to say his act, The Talking Heads, are the most prominent band to ever have come from New-York and the most inclusive ever.


So, let's say you do produce stuff. Who are you catering to ? Is this the question to ask ? I don't think catering to anybody is the question.

That is an awesome interview :lol:
 
Honestly I think all this stuff will sort of play itself out over time as the world adjusts to the digital media reality.
 
Honestly I think all this stuff will sort of play itself out over time as the world adjusts to the digital media reality.

I can barely remember how it was before the internet. But it was very different regarding what you could say.
Having the ability to just go online and say whatever just didn't have an analogue in the pre-web era. Also, for obvious reasons one had far less access to all kinds of information.

That said, I think the web can desensitize. One can see being on the web and communicating there as somehow a replacement for social relations.
 
You've got some good taste. Few people ever bring up Münchhausen when discussing Gilliam, yet it is easily one of his best films. Time Bandits, The Fisher King and Münchhausen are actual masterpieces of cinema, but don't really get the validation that Brazil or Fear and Loathing do. Personally I have similiar views on Denis. He is a great craftsman, he knows his way around the business, and he makes very good movies. But he is, imho, lacking that inexplicable spark that elevates some pieces of art over others.

It's funny, that "lack of spark" is what makes Gilliam's films appealing to me. They don't try to overpower the viewer, they are human in scale, even though the arguments are not about real life. That extra tragedy or drama which they miss and fails to make them "great" would de-humanise the films!
 
Last edited:
It's not the producers who are the idiots, it's audiences and politicians. Not even audiences really, more like all the idiots all over the planet that would react to such a word and be easily fired up about it without taking any time whatsoever to understand any of these nuances.

These days you can't even display a drawing of Mohammed without getting some jihadis on your butt trying to slaughter you and your family. You can't show ghosts or your movie will be banned in China. If you're a standup comedian and make a joke somebody doesn't like you can get "cancelled" by morons on twitter.

Unfortunately this is the world we live in, and if you're trying to make a movie to appeal to global audiences and need it to pull in enough money to warrant a sequel.. then you gotta cut some corners. In this case I'm happy that this is the only corner they cut (it seems). It's just the change of 1 word, so it's relatively minor. If it means that this movie isn't banned in muslim countries or whatever the hell would happen, then I don't mind. If they changed a big part of the plot.. then I'd be getting fired up.. but just one word, I can live with that, especially since both words pretty much mean the same thing.



It should be, but you forget that the vast majority of humans on this planet do not think like that. Many do not even think at all. To remind yourself of this just pop on twitter for 2 minutes and take a peek around.



Hmm I don't like how the video just casually mentions "and sandworms were introduced to Dune".. By whom??? From where? Why?

I can just google this, but it seems like a big oversight to not explain these details.

I would have to double check but they meganuked Arrakis and glassed the surface in one of the books.

They made genetically modified worms and reintroduced them to Arrakis.

The worms went extinct once, and we're thought extinct once again.

Later on they seeded them on other world's.
 
Last edited:
I would have to double check but they meganuked Arrakis and glassed the surface in one of the books.

They made genetically modified works and reintroduced them to Arrakis.

The works went extinct once, and we're thought extinct once again.

Later on they seeded them on other world's.

Please have seat. Now why do you tie "worm" with "work"? /analyst
 
Last edited:
I would have to double check but they meganuked Arrakis and glassed the surface in one of the books.

They made genetically modified worms and reintroduced them to Arrakis.

The worms went extinct once, and we're thought extinct once again.

Later on they seeded them on other world's.

I was referring to the "Worms were introduced to Dune for the first time" part
 
No idea I haven't read all the Dune books only around 15 of them.
FYI KJA/Brian Herbert books don't count.
Not saying one can't enjoy them, I certainly enjoyed the Butlerian Jihad and House books*. They are perfectly serviceable scifi page-turners.

*Indeed, I read the Butlerian Jihad books before I read Dune. I found the BJ books in a box my uncle gave me of various sci fi and fantasy books and started reading those.
 
No idea I haven't read all the Dune books only around 15 of them.

Lol yeah I'm just saying the video listed that as a simple bullet point, so casually, but.. has it ever been explained in one of the books? huh? I don't remember that, but.. my memory can't be trusted either.

And how do books "count" or not? They're books, you either read them or you don't. That sounds like double reverse gatekeeping or something
 
FYI KJA/Brian Herbert books don't count.
Not saying one can't enjoy them, I certainly enjoyed the Butlerian Jihad and House books*. They are perfectly serviceable scifi page-turners.

*Indeed, I read the Butlerian Jihad books before I read Dune. I found the BJ books in a box my uncle gave me of various sci fi and fantasy books and started reading those.

Yeah I liked the BJ books.
 
Top Bottom