There is a great YouTube video breaking down how Dune's special effects were created to look as real as possible, as opposed to what you get in the average Marvel movie:
Thanks for the link! I didn't mean Dune looked intentionally fake, but I think there was some cohesiveness in the creative decisions behind the VFX, the cinematography, the set and costumes designs, the editing, etc. that intentionally creates an enhanced dramatic aesthetic, along the lines of what you might see in a Baz Luhrmann movie.
As per the original author's point, the shot included from Dune looks like something out of a fantasy world, whereas the shot from Lawrence of Arabia just looks like a dude walking around in the desert. But I think this difference was intentional and goes deeper than just CGI
Another series that I've enjoyed watching is the Corridor Crew. Their take on Dune (both versions) is https://youtu.be/OHPkdMGI6D4
Anyone who's interested in this topic should be watching Corridor Crew. They spend a lot of time analyzing why good CGI is good and bad CGI is bad, how great CGI can be invisible, and how, yes, practical effects are grounded in a way that can be difficult (but not impossible) to replicate with computer imaging.
Re: practical effects...
The video "Boston Dynamics Robots Can't be Faked - VFX Artists Explain Why" https://youtu.be/HQ1WEiMwV7Y is also really interesting to watch.
I definitely agree - Dune VFX was awesome
Not sure how much VFX Dunkirk had though - I have not looked into it - I know they did a ton of it practical with an imax camera on the actual planes. Impressive as well but maybe not the best comparison for VFX heavy vs SFX heavy
I think the VFX approach worked well for the movie, and movie critics seem to universally agree that the cinematography and effects were magnificent.
A better comparison would be a modern period epic like Dunkirk.