Welp I fell down a google/reddit wormhole and it sounds like scale is incredibly inconsistent across the series; at one point in an early book a rat is seen driving a horse-drawn carriage. At points mice live in trees, though I could arguably hollow out and live inside a redwood. Jacques ironed out scale a bit more…

From the scant interviews and statements I’ve seen, they just weren’t having fun making movies; the blame seems more at the feet of the studio system making it harder to finance and distribute the projects they want to make. They do a lot separately from one another (plays, books, the above film), and just wanted to…

tbh the Coens have had enough of a track record of movies which land to muted response (Lebowski, Hudsucker, Caesar; Serious Man and Intolerable Cruelty depending on your perspective) only to grow in stature with distance; I’m absolutely willing to give this a chance.

I wouldn’t make that assumption, and I’d lay this problem 100% at the feet of the editorial staff (or lack thereof).

...as Adam J points out, maybe 8+ years ago, before Gawker bought this shit. Since then it’s been breathless reposts of Marvel news and Don’t Worry Darling gossip.

AVClub last week: there’s too many adaptations! Hollywood is so mercenary for picking over IP constantly!

iirc there simply weren’t any humans; the animals were all relative to one another in size and the buildings (like the Abbey) were proportionate to their inhabitants.

It’s also weird how often they refer to Paul as “Atreides.”

Also, it doesn’t seem like a critique of the character’s place in the film so much as a critique of not getting to see enough of a famous person onscreen. Most of the critiques in this review evince a feeling the critic failed to just sit and take in the movie itself.

…do they?

This whole review, sentence fragments and all, reads like hastily scrawled first impressions. 

Yeah...I’m pretty sure they made it immensely clear this was only half the story; the review goes on:

oh boy I’ve been watching this show’s entire run over the last couple months and I feel actually equipped to say why this is such a big deal on, as you point out, a show where people do a lotta cheating.

Bret Easton Ellis is a hack; he’s been rewriting the same book recently, and don’t get me started on his podcast/twitter.

It’ll never cease to blow my mind that, for a specific set (particularly those who were kids when the prequels came out and watched the cartoons which sanded the rough edges of the canon), the prequels basically are Star Wars.

iirc (I reread it in 2020), Feyd basically doesn’t appear until the back half; he may be in the room for some Baron scenes, but he doesn’t really do anything. Makes sense from a budget perspective not to cast a name in the role until you have a green light on part 2.

I’m gonna be a crank and ask why every bounty hunter has to be Mandalorian these days? The scene in Empire as well as the Bantam Tales of the Bounty Hunters book always gave me such a ragtag, catch-as-catch-can feel to them; it’d be fun if the game let you do a bit more to customize your appearance and style of bounty…

maybe they’ll make a movie about my weird college friends who were obsessed with contra dancing.

The funny thing about “problems” like this is, as I’ve gotten deeper into my programming career, that they exist constantly and consistently; half the time your IT department is fixing a bug they’re just dealing with issues stemming from time zones and time format conversion.

The pinball ban is interesting in that it wasn’t the game itself that was troubling, it was the idea that people could gamble on it. Kinda makes me think of Footloose itself, where it isn’t that the town/pastor has a problem with the act of dancing so much as being out late at dances increased the risk of drunk…