NP, who won't win a Nobel, but Krugman, who did, on DUNE. ( I might suggest David "Lynched" the first Dune w his attempted envisioning not that he didn't get nor think audiences wouldn't. We know it was drastically cut, so..)

[Mark Kohut]

aRead online
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/gSmDqSeBcQbX3RUMh8r78Q~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P4QnAWh0dHBzOi8vbWVzc2FnaW5nLWN1c3RvbS1uZXdzbGV0dGVycy5ueXRpbWVzLmNvbS90ZW1wbGF0ZS9vYWt2Mj9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZD0xMTYmZW1jPWVkaXRfcGtfMjAyMTEwMjYmaW5zdGFuY2VfaWQ9NDM3OTcmbmw9cGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuJnByb2R1Y3RDb2RlPVBLJnJlZ2lfaWQ9NjU1MjcyMTgmc2VnbWVudF9pZD03MjY2NyZ0ZT0xJnVyaT1ueXQlM0ElMkYlMkZuZXdzbGV0dGVyJTJGYzIzNTlhYzgtZDE2MC01MDQ2LWE5NGMtYjQ0YjUwNGVkOTVlJnVzZXJfaWQ9NmI3NjE2ZTZiMDMwOGI0ODgyOTQ2MzljYTI5ZDdmZDRXA255dEIKYXY5LXhh6aLl8FIUbWFyay5rb2h1dEBnbWFpbC5jb21YBAAAAAA~>

Subscriber-Only Newsletter
[image: New York Times logo]
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/PffdeD5UC7dde4Aew4S5bw~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P0TCaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vY29sdW1uL3BhdWwta3J1Z21hbj9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZD0xMTYmZW1jPWVkaXRfcGtfMjAyMTEwMjYmaW5zdGFuY2VfaWQ9NDM3OTcmbmw9cGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuJnJlZ2lfaWQ9NjU1MjcyMTgmc2VnbWVudF9pZD03MjY2NyZ0ZT0xJnVzZXJfaWQ9NmI3NjE2ZTZiMDMwOGI0ODgyOTQ2MzljYTI5ZDdmZDRXA255dEIKYXY5LXhh6aLl8FIUbWFyay5rb2h1dEBnbWFpbC5jb21YBAAAAAA~>
[image: Paul Krugman]
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/PffdeD5UC7dde4Aew4S5bw~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P0TCaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vY29sdW1uL3BhdWwta3J1Z21hbj9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZD0xMTYmZW1jPWVkaXRfcGtfMjAyMTEwMjYmaW5zdGFuY2VfaWQ9NDM3OTcmbmw9cGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuJnJlZ2lfaWQ9NjU1MjcyMTgmc2VnbWVudF9pZD03MjY2NyZ0ZT0xJnVzZXJfaWQ9NmI3NjE2ZTZiMDMwOGI0ODgyOTQ2MzljYTI5ZDdmZDRXA255dEIKYXY5LXhh6aLl8FIUbWFyay5rb2h1dEBnbWFpbC5jb21YBAAAAAA~>

October 26, 2021
Warner Bros.
[image: Author Headshot]
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/4rzGVu49NcZBVmzXhmhHJA~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P0S-aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vYnkvcGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuP2NhbXBhaWduX2lkPTExNiZlbWM9ZWRpdF9wa18yMDIxMTAyNiZpbnN0YW5jZV9pZD00Mzc5NyZubD1wYXVsLWtydWdtYW4mcmVnaV9pZD02NTUyNzIxOCZzZWdtZW50X2lkPTcyNjY3JnRlPTEmdXNlcl9pZD02Yjc2MTZlNmIwMzA4YjQ4ODI5NDYzOWNhMjlkN2ZkNFcDbnl0QgphdjkteGHpouXwUhRtYXJrLmtvaHV0QGdtYWlsLmNvbVgEAAAAAA~~>

By Paul Krugman
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/4rzGVu49NcZBVmzXhmhHJA~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P0S-aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vYnkvcGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuP2NhbXBhaWduX2lkPTExNiZlbWM9ZWRpdF9wa18yMDIxMTAyNiZpbnN0YW5jZV9pZD00Mzc5NyZubD1wYXVsLWtydWdtYW4mcmVnaV9pZD02NTUyNzIxOCZzZWdtZW50X2lkPTcyNjY3JnRlPTEmdXNlcl9pZD02Yjc2MTZlNmIwMzA4YjQ4ODI5NDYzOWNhMjlkN2ZkNFcDbnl0QgphdjkteGHpouXwUhRtYXJrLmtvaHV0QGdtYWlsLmNvbVgEAAAAAA~~>

Opinion Columnist

The blogger John Rogers once noted
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/1qCATFMFjX1_LLNrdft7hw~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P0T7aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZHJlYWRzLmNvbS9xdW90ZXMvMzY2NjM1LXRoZXJlLWFyZS10d28tbm92ZWxzLXRoYXQtY2FuLWNoYW5nZS1hLWJvb2tpc2gtZm91cnRlZW4teWVhcj9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZD0xMTYmZW1jPWVkaXRfcGtfMjAyMTEwMjYmaW5zdGFuY2VfaWQ9NDM3OTcmbmw9cGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuJnJlZ2lfaWQ9NjU1MjcyMTgmc2VnbWVudF9pZD03MjY2NyZ0ZT0xJnVzZXJfaWQ9NmI3NjE2ZTZiMDMwOGI0ODgyOTQ2MzljYTI5ZDdmZDRXA255dEIKYXY5LXhh6aLl8FIUbWFyay5rb2h1dEBnbWFpbC5jb21YBAAAAAA~>
 that there are two novels that can shape the lives of bookish
14-year-olds: “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Lord of the Rings.” One of these
novels, he asserted, is a childish fantasy that can leave you emotionally
stunted; the other involves orcs.

Well, I was a bookish 14-year-old, but my touchstones were two different
novels: Isaac Asimov’s “Foundation” and Frank Herbert’s “Dune.”

Many social scientists, it turns out, are science fiction readers. For
example, quite a few experts on international relations who I know are
fanatics about the TV version of “The Expanse
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/kzJL3O7-OvgTAaR0w8o7PQ~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P4QuAWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9wb3N0ZXZlcnl0aGluZy93cC8yMDE3LzAzLzIzL3RoZS1iZXN0LXNob3ctYWJvdXQtaW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbC1yZWxhdGlvbnMtb24tdGVsZXZpc2lvbi1yaWdodC1ub3ctaXMtb24td2FpdC1mb3ItaXQtc3lmeS8_Y2FtcGFpZ25faWQ9MTE2JmVtYz1lZGl0X3BrXzIwMjExMDI2Jmluc3RhbmNlX2lkPTQzNzk3Jm5sPXBhdWwta3J1Z21hbiZyZWdpX2lkPTY1NTI3MjE4JnNlZ21lbnRfaWQ9NzI2NjcmdGU9MSZ1c2VyX2lkPTZiNzYxNmU2YjAzMDhiNDg4Mjk0NjM5Y2EyOWQ3ZmQ0VwNueXRCCmF2OS14Yemi5fBSFG1hcmsua29odXRAZ21haWwuY29tWAQAAAAA>.”
I think it’s because good science fiction involves building imaginary
worlds that are different from the world we know, but in interesting ways
that relate to the attempt to understand why society is the way it is.

Anyway, that’s my excuse for devoting today’s newsletter not to the latest
scary developments in politics and economics but to a much happier event:
the U.S. release of a wonderful, satisfying film version of “Dune” — the
first movie I’ve seen in a theater since the pandemic began.

Before I get there, however, a word about the new “Foundation” TV series,
which is being released one episode a week on Apple TV.

The “Foundation” trilogy had a huge impact on my teenage self. For those
who’ve never read it, it’s about social scientists who use their knowledge
to save galactic civilization. I wanted to be Hari Seldon, the brilliant
mathematician who leads the effort; this economics thing was as close as I
could get.

“Foundation” might seem unfilmable. It mostly involve people talking, and
its narrative inverts the hero-saves-the-universe theme that burns many
acres of CGI every year. The story spans centuries; in each episode
everything appears to be on the brink, and it seems as if only desperate
efforts by the protagonists can save the day. But after each crisis,
Seldon’s prerecorded hologram appears to explain to everyone what just
happened and why the successful resolution was inevitable given the laws of
history.

So how does the Apple TV series turn this into a visually compelling tale?
It doesn’t. What it does instead is remake “Star Wars” under another name.
There are indispensable heroes, mystical powers, even a Death Star
<https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/Iu_H7jCgV-isAX8Ygt3MTA~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRjWrI5P0TjaHR0cHM6Ly9naXptb2RvLmNvbS9mb3VuZGF0aW9uLWp1c3QtYmVjYW1lLXN0YXItd2Fycy1hbmQtaXQtc3Vja3MtMTg0NzkxODM2OD9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZD0xMTYmZW1jPWVkaXRfcGtfMjAyMTEwMjYmaW5zdGFuY2VfaWQ9NDM3OTcmbmw9cGF1bC1rcnVnbWFuJnJlZ2lfaWQ9NjU1MjcyMTgmc2VnbWVudF9pZD03MjY2NyZ0ZT0xJnVzZXJfaWQ9NmI3NjE2ZTZiMDMwOGI0ODgyOTQ2MzljYTI5ZDdmZDRXA255dEIKYXY5LXhh6aLl8FIUbWFyay5rb2h1dEBnbWFpbC5jb21YBAAAAAA~>.
These aren’t necessarily bad things to include in a TV series, but they’re
completely antithetical to the spirit of Asimov’s writing. Pretending that
this series has anything to do with the “Foundation” novels is fraudulent
marketing, and I’ve stopped watching.

Now on to “Dune.” The book is everything “Foundation” isn’t: There’s a
glittering, hierarchical society wracked by intrigue and warfare, a young
hero of noble birth who may be a prophesied Messiah, a sinister but
alluring sisterhood of witches, fierce desert warriors and, of course,
giant worms.

And yes, it’s fun. When I was a teenager, my friends and I would engage in
mock combat in which the killing blow had to be delivered slowly to
penetrate your opponent’s shield — which will make sense if you read the
book or watch the movie.

What makes “Dune” more than an ordinary space opera are two things: its
subtlety and the richness of its world-building.

Thus, the Bene Gesserit derive their power not from magic but from deep
self-control, awareness and understanding of human psychology. The journey
of Paul Atreides is heroic but morally ambiguous; he knows that if he
succeeds, war and vast slaughter will follow.

And the world Herbert created is given depth by layers of cultural
references. He borrowed from Islamic and Ayurvedic traditions, from
European feudalism and more — “Dune” represents cultural appropriation on
a, well, interstellar scale. It’s also deeply steeped in fairly serious
ecological thinking.

So why was the 1984 film a disaster? Because the director — yes, David
Lynch — either didn’t grasp the subtlety and richness or decided that
audiences couldn’t handle it. That is, he did to “Dune” what Apple TV has
done to “Foundation.” For example, in the book there’s the “weirding way of
battle,” which is about using psychology and deception to overcome foes; in
Lynch’s film this was replaced with some kind of gadget.

The great thing about Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune: Part I” is that he respects
the audience enough to retain the book’s spirit. He trimmed the narrative
to reduce it to filmable size — and even so, his two and a half hours cover
only the first half of the book — but he didn’t dumb it down. Instead, he
relies on spectacle and spine-tingling action to hold our attention despite
the density of the story. In so doing he made a film worthy of the source
material.

I wouldn’t say that this “Dune” matches the vision I had when reading the
book. It’s better. The visuals surpass my imagination — those ornithopters!
The actors give the characters more depth than the book’s author previously
had in my mind.

Will this labor of love sell to a mass audience (and allow Villeneuve to
finish his story)? The early box office looks good, and this does seem like
the kind of film people will see twice — I did — so sales may hold up
longer than usual. But I guess we’ll find out.

In any case, all of us former bookish 14-year-olds finally have the “Dune”
movie we always wanted to see. Sometimes, things actually do go right.