The Cultural Gutter

dumpster diving of the brain

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." -- Oscar Wilde

You Can’t Make a Masterpiece Without Madness

Keith Allison
Posted June 12, 2014

duneThere are a number of books and films I’ve classified as “having seen,” because I have. But, upon reflection about these titles, I realize I remember nothing about them, usually because I experienced them decades ago and as a young lad. Neuromancer by William Gibson was a big one. It hit me a few years ago that, although I count the book as one of the most influential in my life, from one of my favorite authors, I didn’t actually remember anything about it other than some space Rastas who didn’t care for the internet. This revelation struck me again in regards to Frank Herbert’s Dune, a book (and series) I read probably around the time David Lynch’s cinematic adaptation (which I adore) was released.

While sitting in the audience recently for a screening of the documentary Jodorowsky’s Dune, I was inspired to resume my abortive journey through the Dune universe, which I had initially launched only to derail myself because I decided I was going to read everything in the Dune universe, in narrative chronological order, and that meant starting with the “Butlerian Jihad” trilogy by Kevin Anderson and Frank Herbert’s son, Brian. Anyone who has read those books might understand why my little scheme went awry.

Jodorowsky’s Dune tells the story of eccentric (to say the least) filmmaker Alejandro Jodorowsky’s doomed quest to adapt Frank Herbert’s sprawling epic — regarded by many as the greatest science novel ever written — into a film during the early 1970s. Jodorowsky was best known for his films El Topo and Holy Mountain, which were bizarre blends of psychedelic insanity, profane philosophy, and epic scale. They are generally regarded as the first of the “midnight movies,” and although exceedingly weird and challenging, they are both masterpieces that found a surprisingly large audience amongst the counter-culture youths, freaks, and weirdos who were starved for more eclectic cinematic fare. Among these fans was Michel Seydoux, the scion of a wealthy French family who dreamed of becoming a movie producer. He sought out Jodorowsky and told the filmmaker he wanted them to make a movie together, and Jodorowsky could do whatever he wanted. “I want to make Dune!” he exclaimed enthusiastically, because there is nothing that Jodorowsky doesn’t do enthusiastically.

Jodorowsky had never read Dune, mind you.


And so begins the story told in director Frank Pavich’s Jodorowsky’s Dune of a film that involved everyone from Orson Welles (Baron Harkonnen) to Mick Jagger (Feyd Rautha) to Salvador Dali (Emperor Shaddam IV), with design work by French comic book artist Moebius (one of the founders of Metal Hurlant magazine), special effects man Dan O’Bannon (whose only credit was effects work on John Carpenter’s low budget Dark Star), science fiction book cover painter Chris Foss, and a creepy young illustrator named H.R. Giger. Together they drew, quite literally, almost every shot of the movie in a massive storyboard that became a bound book for them. Jodorowsky’s vision of the film was vast, an epic on a scale science fiction film had never attempted. A psychedelic mind warp that Jodorowsky himself said he wanted to be like taking LSD without taking LSD. He wanted his film to be nothing short of a cultural uprising, a trumpet for the legions of youth who had risen up against the establishment in the 1960s. He wanted Dune — in story, in philosophy, in daringness, in design — to be a revolution.

Pavich’s documentary tells the story of how this movie never actually got made.


Jodorowsky’s Dune has been frequently compared to Lost in La Mancha, a documentary about filmmaker Terry Gilliam’s calamitous attempt to make an adaptation of Don Quixote. While the two documentaries tell a similar story (and involve Orson Welles!), the effect of each could not be more different. Lost in La Mancha, for me, is infused with bitterness, with regret, with frustration. Jodorowsky’s Dune, by contrast, soars. Where Lost in La Mancha makes me mad, Jodorowsky’s Dune makes me want to cheer for the lunatic director and his eccentric band of “spiritual warriors.” In theory, it is the story of a failure, of millions of dollars and countless hours of effort wasted. It doesn’t feel like the story of a failure, however. The overall impact the documentary had on me wasn’t one of the disappointment of a failed project or the short-sightedness of timid studios; it was one of elation, of re-inspiring my love of and faith in the potential of film, the beauty of storytelling, and the wonder of those who are truly visionary, truly driven to create, and genuinely, gloriously weird.

Jodorowsky himself, through his many interviews for the documentary, emerges as a man of indomitable spirit, and the look at how much his unmade Dune influenced the films that came after it lends a triumphant tone to this story of a story never told. Some of Jodorowsky’s stories seem almost too fantastic to be true — the way in which he wooed Orson Welles to play the Baron Harkonnen, for example, or the contract he drew up with Salvador Dali whilst contemplating the painting behind the counter at the King Cole Bar in New York’s St. Regis Hotel, being particularly good — until you are clued in a little more about the circles in which everyone ran. By the time a sea of people at a posh party parts to reveal Mick Jagger to Jodorowsky for the “I want you/I’m yours” casting of the singer as Feyd, you won’t even question — or care — whether it’s truth or embellishment. The story is just too good.


No less grandiose and impossible is his vision for the film, which was equal parts breathtaking, mind-blowing, and utterly absurd. Certainly there are questions that haunt the production — what if the film had been made? It doubtless would have enraged fans of the book (if you thought Lynch’s film wreaked havoc with the story…). Would it have been glorious, or would it have been an absolute disaster? Could it have been both? What would the landscape of cinema look like if Jodorowsky’s Dune had been science fiction’s first blockbuster epic instead of Star Wars? How much of Jodorowsky’s vision made it into David Lynch’s Dune, the film that was made after Jodorowsky’s version collapsed and the rights to the book were sold to Dino De Laurentiis?

In the end, these questions are no more important than the whodunit of a well-written whodunit. I walked out of the theater in a mood I’d not felt in a long time. Later that night, I dug out my battered old paperback copy of Frank Herbert’s Dune and finished it before the weekend was over, plowing through its moody, melancholy sequel, Dune Messiah, in a similarly short time. The next day, I was filled with an urge to go out and…do something. Take photos. Shoot some super 8 film. Write better articles than I had been. Go to a part of the city to which I’d never been. Jodorowsky’s Dune had filled me with an urge to create, an elation with no real focus but that lifted the spirit and spoke to me in the voice of a crazed film director. For being the story of a massively ambitious film project that totally fell apart in the eleventh hour, Jodorowsky’s Dune sure did make me feel…happy.

Keith Allison is riding atop a shai-hulud


2 Responses to “You Can’t Make a Masterpiece Without Madness”

  1. Chris Szego
    June 12th, 2014 @ 9:49 pm

    You’re the second person in a week to share such positive feelings about that movie. Must watch it.

    As for the the ‘new’ DUNE novels: at my store, we call them all “Noun Of Dune”.

  2. Gilgamesh
    June 15th, 2014 @ 4:15 am

    What an inspiring review! I’d never heard of this documentary, now I’d like to see it.

    “…the wonder of those who are truly visionary, truly driven to create, and genuinely, gloriously weird.” There is, regrettably, not nearly enough of this sort of thing available these days.

    Regarding the starship illustration, are those candy wrapper engines supposed to be hydrogen collectors?

Leave a Reply

  • Support The Gutter

  • The Book!

  • Of Note Elsewhere

    At Bleeding Cool, Cap Blackard writes about the contested homeworld of Howard the Duck. “If you’ve seen the much maligned Howard the Duck film or read any Howard the Duck stories published since 1979, you’re probably familiar with the concept of Duckworld. You know, an alternate Earth where everyone is ducks and everything is duck-themed: Ducktor Strange, Bloomingducks, etc, etc. Sounds like a recipe for a finite barrel of bad jokes, right? It is, and it’s also not Howard’s real point of origin. During his landmark initial run, Howard’s creator Steve Gerber had the down-and-out duck hailing from a world of talking animals, but all that changed when Gerber was kicked off the book and Disney flashed a lawsuit. Now, after decades of backstory fumbling, Mark Waid has reinstated Howard’s point of origin in a one-shot issue of S.H.I.E.L.D.” (Thanks, Mark!)


    At The Village Voice, Jackson Connor writes about the making of The Warriors. Amid the refurbished boardwalk and laughter of children, it’s easy to forget that Coney Island was once a place where tourists did not venture. For much of the latter half of the twentieth century, street gangs dominated this neighborhood. They ran rampant through the area’s neglected housing projects, tearing along Surf and Neptune avenues toward West 8th Street. Those gangs, or gangs like them, and that incarnation of Coney Island would form the backbone of author Sol Yurick’s 1965 debut novel, The Warriors, about the young members of a street gang. More than a decade after the novel’s publication it would be optioned and, eventually, turned into a major motion picture of the same name.” (via @pulpcurry)


    Edith Garrud taught Suffragettes jiu-jitsu and formed Emmeline Pankhurst’s Bodyguard. “The first connection between the suffragettes and jiu-jitsu was made at a WSPU meeting. Garrud and her husband William, who ran a martial arts school in London’s Golden Square together, had been booked to attend. But William was ill, so she went alone. ‘Edith normally did the demonstrating, while William did the speaking,’ says Tony Wolf, writer of Suffrajitsu, a trilogy of graphic novels about this aspect of the suffragette movement. ‘But the story goes that the WSPU’s leader, Emmeline Pankhurst, encouraged Edith to do the talking for once, which she did.'”


    At Playboy, Jake Rossen writes about the story behind the filming and the restoration of Manos: The Hands of Fate. “For a long time no one wanted to see it unless it was accompanied by MST3K’s taunts. Then, in 2011, a collector of film prints uncovered the original negative of Manos and embarked on an inexplicable project to restore the film with all the white-glove attention archivists give to Hollywood classics. His efforts would incur the wrath of a mysterious man with a fake New Zealand accent named Rupert, as well as Joe Warren, Hal Warren’s embittered son, who intends to preserve the Manos legacy at all costs.” (Thanks, Ed!)


    At Die, Danger, Die, Die, Kill!, Todd reviews the two part Ghanian director Ninja’s film, 2016. “2016 is a movie that I am obligated to review by virtue of my having long ago joined the internet chorus of people trumpeting on about its insane trailer—and this despite the fact that all of you with any interest in seeing it have most likely tracked it down already. In that case, you already know that it is essentially a no-budget remake of Independence Day set in the suburbs of Ghana. And if that sounds like a massive over-reach to you, you obviously know very little about Ghanaian action cinema, and even less about the films of maverick multi-hyphenate Ninja.”

    Read about part one, here, and part two, here.


    Look, it’s the trailer for “The Abominable Snowman” a new episode of classic Thunderbirds. Huffington Post UK has more: “It’s exactly half a century since we heard the ominous tones of voice actor Peter Dyneley bringing us the Thunderbirds intro ‘5 -4 – 3 – 2 -1 Thunderbirds are go’, and to celebrate, the team are producing three brand new original episodes, based on audio-only recordings made in 1966, which means fans will get to enjoy the original voices, with some 21st century gadgetry thrown in on screen.” (Thanks, Todd!)


  • Spilling into Twitter

  • Obsessive?

    Then you might be interested in knowing you can subscribe to our RSS feed, find us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter or Tumblr.


  • Weekly Notifications

  • What We’re Talking About

  • Thanks To

    No Media Kings hosts this site, and Wordpress autoconstructs it.

  • %d bloggers like this: