Jodorowsky's Dune (2013)

One of my all time favorites.

best movie i've ever seen.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

"Visionary" is the most misused term in film circles of late, thrown around by idiots who wouldn't know a D.W. Griffith film from a Warhol. Such is the fate of Alexandro (proper spelling) Jodorowsky, a darling of cultists.Unlike the particularly lame set of experts rounded up here (fan boys as film critics and untalented film directors Richard Stanley and Nicolas Winding Refn), I was a film buff in the '60s and '70s and properly placed Alexandro's work ("El Topo", "Fando & Lis", "The Holy Mountain") in the context of his betters: Glauber Rocha from Brazil and the fabulous European surrealist Arrabal.Frank Pavich who directed this documentary fails to mention even in passing that "Fando and Lis" was adapted by AJ from a play by Arrabal. "Viva la Muerte!" by Arrabal was just as influential a midnight movie at the outset of the '70s as AJ's "El Topo", and all the art-house directors of that era owed plenty to the innovations of Rocha in a series of films from which "Antonio das Mortes" stood out, and would still be a reference point if folks did their homework. In covering AJ's work this documentary is incomplete and misleading. The most famous anecdote regarding "The Holy Mountain" concerns star Dennis Hopper going crazy during filming and leaving the set, forcing AJ to replace him. Nowhere is that level of historical research encountered here.Instead we have AJ pontificating, gesticulating, and basically acting the part of "the mad genius" for Pavich's camera. This routine, favored by Werner Herzog in recent decades gets old in a hurry and made watching "J's 'Dune" a real chore. I interviewed Terry Gilliam in 1981 in Manhattan on his promo junket for the release of "The Time Bandits" and he behaved in person one-on-one quite similar to the way Jodo acts here. Both men are so full of enthusiasm and passion concerning making movies that they literally seem about to blow a gasket at any moment. Both Jodorowsky and Gilliam have become famous over the years for the outlandishness (and scale) of their projects, and their becoming folk heroes by going Don Quixote-like up against the windmills/giants of the Film Establishment, i.e., the guys who hold the purse-strings.Much is made here of Hollywood's inability to see the power of AJ's meticulously (and permanently) enshrined shooting script that is bound in hardback the size of an unexpurgated Webster's dictionary. Both he and Gilliam seem to have a mental block against recognizing the difference between making a large-scale, say mature David Lean- scale, movie and writing the Great American Novel or crafting the ultimate Broadway Play. Self-appointed "visionaries" need not apply - only fools like Bob Guccione and his "most expensive porn film of all time" Caligula can do that. Artists like these should sensibly follow in the footsteps of avant-garde filmmakers, Maya Deren, Ed Emshwiller, Stan Brakhage and Stan Vanderbeek: create independent, no-budget, uncompromising underground cinema. Leave the $200,000,000 projects to hacks like Michael Bay.It was Dino De Laurentiis (along with Joseph E. Levine and Alexander Salkind) who initiated the era of big-budgets we currently live with: back when Dune by AJ was being worked on and shopped the entire film industry was functioning under very tight budgetary restrictions following the near-collapse of the studios in 1969: no film in the '70s was being green-lighted with a budget as high as $15,000,000, which Dune would entail.For the record, it was 1976 when Levine's "A Bridge Too Far", Dino's "King Kong" and Salkind's "Superman" were independently produced at much higher budgets, opening the floodgates. And not coincidentally it was Dino, through his daughter, who ended up producing the David Lynch flop of "Dune".So the doc's argument about AJ's war with stupid studio execs is completely off- base and ignorantly presented -their hands were tied at that time.Worse than that, the movie's implication about the power and influence of AJ's Dune, even without it being made, is 180 degrees off the mark. Sure, we see trotted out a who's who of ultra-creative talent that was working on preparing the movie: Giger, Moebius, O'Bannon, even hangers-on like Welles and Dali. Ridley Scott is rightly shown to be the chief recipient of the fruits of their labors -going from the promising art-house director of "The Duellists" to fame and fortune (via hiring AJ's technicians) with increasingly bigger- canvas epics like "Alien", "Blade Runner" and ultimately "Gladiator" and many others all of which not coincidentally resemble the '60s epics that sank Hollywood's fortunes and led to that moratorium on big-budget projects in the first place.The legacy of this unfinished film is not launching top technical and creative talent in a host of blockbusters but rather the industry's ongoing fascination with flashy, mindless crap, currently emblazoned by the application of 3-D (a tarnished medium from the early '50s) to so many pictures as well as fake IMAX (not using the IMAX photographic system) to market the junk.What Pavich presents as AJ's strengths are in fact his fatal flaws. Rounding up the top talent - it seems like he has the Midas touch in finding the best in each field, does not disguise the obvious fact that had he actually been able to make "Dune", AJ would be calling all the shots, like a Robert Rodriguez (writer/director/cameraman/editor). Evidence of this creeps into the doc with the segment dealing with Doug Trumbull, who is sloughed off as arrogant or not a team player when AJ rejects his participation out of hand, when in fact it is obvious that AJ is the arrogant s.o.b., not Doug.AJ would have a firmer and more legitimate place in film history had he remained independent and tackled smaller-scale films that expressed exactly what he wanted to say, a la the models of Jim Jarmusch or Woody Allen.

JODOROWSKY'S DUNE as laid out in this documentary could've rivaled 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for sheer Nerve. 2001 crept along at a snail's pace, to be sure, but it eventually attempted to give us a glimpse of what lay at The End of the Universe. Good or bad, right or wrong, it crept along doggedly until it presented its Conclusion (such as it was). DUNE would've DWARFED 2001 just in terms of Story: the book touched on so many themes that to do the idea(s) justice would've required a SERIES of movies (of considerable length). David Lynch did a commendable job, all things considered, but his version of DUNE lacked the mind-bending FEEL that the Spiritual transmutation of Paul should've engendered; THAT would've taken a filmmaking savvy that the eccentric Lynch just didn't possess. (Maybe only Werner Herzog could've given us a closer approximation to what Frank Herbert had wrought.) The Harkonnens remain some of the vilest villains in the history of Science Fiction (especially in view of worldwide events over the past four decades), and it would be great to see them done justice.

With having found auteur film maker Alejandro Jodorowsky's The Dance of Reality to be a dazzling surreal title,I was pleased to spot on a thread on IMDb's Film Festival thread that a doc about a project Jodorowsky failed to get made was chosen for viewing,which led to me getting ready to step on Jodorowsky's Dune.The outline of the doc:After his movie The Holy Mountain is an unexpected hit,film maker Alejandro Jodorowsky is asked by the producer about what he would like to do for his next project.Hearing about the book,Jodorowsky decides that he would like to do an adaptation of the Sci-Fi novel Dune.Once the producer gets the rights, Jodorowsky begins writing a screenplay for a 14 hour long (!) adaptation.As he Jodorowsky starts hiring people for the film,the project starts to face cash troubles.View on the film:Displaying a number of the superb storyboards and drawings that Jodorowsky had done for the project,director Frank Pavich offers a bittersweet taste to what could have been by bringing the storyboards alive with a delicate use of CGI.Along with the CGI preview,Pavich dips the film into Jodorowsky's surrealist ink,thanks to images of the stars and pre-production meetings, (from Mick Jagger to producer Dan O'Bannon being high when he first met Jodorowsky!)giving the movie a dreamy fantasy atmosphere.Despite the project not reaching the screen, Alejandro Jodorowsky displays a burning passion for the project which shines across the screen,as Jodorowsky reveals what came out of the ashes of Dune.

Jodorowsky's Dune allows viewers to peer into the mind of an artist fully committed to seeing his vision become reality. This film is not just for sci-fi fans, it's for anyone who is fascinated and inspired by the creation of art. It's hard not to be amazed by Jodorowsky's passion and excitement as he walks the audience through every stage of attempting to create his masterpiece.It's easy to view Jodorowsky as an over-idealistic man with a screw loose, thanks both to his mannerisms and his zealous approach to art. But that's what makes the story so interesting. He almost turns down Pink Floyd because the band didn't stop eating their hamburgers while discussing the musical score of Dune. He introduces himself to Dan O'Bannon by immediately presenting him with some of his "special marijuana". He offered Salvador Dali $100,000 per minute to act in the film (granted, it was stated that Dali was set to be in the film 5 minutes at most). You feel Jodorowsky's pain when he discusses receiving the news that all major studios were uninterested in the picture, and that the film's production had to stop right when things seemed to be heating up. You want to laugh with him when he expresses his euphoria at realizing the David Lynch adaptation of Dune was a disaster. You respect and revere him when he talks about the abundance films he had an impression on and the artists he helped inspire. And you admire him when he suggests that Dune has lived on through those films, that his hard work, effort, and vision have not, in fact, gone to waste.The film is not for any one segment of the population. It's for those who love human expression, commitment, and diligence, and for those who are truly in awe of individuals who are driven by the love of their artistic craft.