Rating: 
Summary: Loved it!!
Review: I hated the original Dune movies, and I did not even read the book yet! However, I have read the books and am a fan of Dune. thismovies was true to the book, as it could be. I loved it!!!
Rating:
Summary: A good interpretation of the book
Review: A good movie, which showed us a better view of the dune universe than the original. Good acting and the special effects were amazing.
Rating: 
Summary: Absolutely terrible
Review: Granted, I am a fan of David Lynch in general and really did like his Dune despite its shortcomings -and there were many.Nevertheless, I had high hopes for this series, especially in terms of being true to the novel, which were dashed. Glaring inaccuracies in novel-to-film adaptations make me nuts, and this has plenty of major problems, even to the point where actions taken by one character in the novel were taken by a completely different character in the film, such as the issue with the water at the dinner given by Duke Leto - in the film attributed to Jessica. The scene with the hunter-seeker was messed up, as well, and I wasn't happy with the scene with the gom jabbar. Most unforgivable was the introduction of the emperor's daughter as a major character and influence - in the novel, she doesn't even appear until the end of the book! At one point I thought I must be going nuts so I broke out the book and watched the movie with the book in hand to see if my memory was just completely wrong. It wasn't...but the movie was. The movie might be enjoyable if you never read the book or read it long enough ago that the details have faded, or if you're not hung up on the fact that "Frank Herbert's Dune" should reasonably be expected to resemble the actual Frank Herbert's actual "Dune".
Rating:
Summary: Very disappointing
Review: Where can I begin? I've always loved David Lynch's version of this classic novel. I watched this version because I heard it was more complete and true to the book. I haven't read the book so I was hoping to get a wider perspective on the parts Lynch had to cut out. Being a four and a half hour movie, it should have been twice as much movie as the original, but most of what was left out of Lynch's version was boring stuff. There were a few interesting revelations about the spice and the water of life. This movie also shed more light on the political situation. But there certainly wasn't four and a half hours worth of movie here. The actors were very flat in their portrayal's of the characters. The only notable exceptions were Liet and Princess Irulan. And Paul's character got better as the story went along. His total lack of expression with the black box was quite apalling, however. Also, the voice was scarier and more convincing in David Lynch's version. Here it's kinda wimpy and spineless. The costumes were cheesy to say the least. Especially the Bene Gesserit. The stillsuits may have been truer to the book, but they didn't look functional at all. The Fremin should have kept them on too, because most of the time they weren't wearing them. But they were still in the desert. The worst part of this movie was the backgrounds. In virtually every scene there was a flat background. Especially in the desert, where the background was eight feet behind the actors, and the horizon was way too high. The backgrounds didn't even match the forground in most cases. As for special effects, this was made in the year 2000 where we supposedly have technology. I've seen better effects in movies from the sixties. The dream sequences were pretty weak in this version too.
Rating: 
Summary: FINALLY!!
Review: They did it right this time, and used the right amount of time to tell the whole story. Now people can watch a REAL film adaptation of Frank Herbert's novel, the David Lynch version needs to be burned.
Rating:
Summary: Speechless....nearly.
Review: Never have I seen such absolute garbage. This so called movie disgraces the Dune books and is an extremely inferior version compared to David Lynch's masterpiece. I spit on this abomination of a "Mini-Series". AAARRRRGH!
Rating:
Summary: What Happened?
Review: First off I know that the 1984 version of the movie obviously couldn't do the book justice, but this DVD makes Paul Atriedes look like a whiny two year old. When I read Dune, Herbert made it clear that Paul was like an adult at an early age due to lack of kids his age around the palace on Caladan. So why is Paul kicking his feet up on tables on treating everyone like they're trash? This movie threw way to much crap in that needn't be there, where as the 1984 version left too much out. Still, Kyle Maclachlan makes a far better Paul Atreides, and although the 84' version leaves a bit out, get it instead. Really helps with pronunciation also.
Rating: 
Summary: I believe they gave their best but...
Review: ...this DVD proves it's really impossible to put all the complexity of Dune on screen. Just watching it you will never know how powerful Jessica is. Where is Tuffir Hawat? -- that guy isn't he. Many important details were cut out, such as the secret Bene Gesserit message Lady Fenring left for Jessica. And so on. The special effects are poor; take a look at the Maud'dib rat of the desert -- they took it from the Muppets Show! Please don't give up reading the book because of the bad impression the DVD might give you.
Rating: 
Summary: A Valiant Effort
Review: Let me start off by saying that I am a fan of the 1984 David Lynch version. I understand the problems that people have with that concerning plot changes, but I still think it, as a unique work, quite good. The point being that I saw this version after the 1984 version and must compare the two. It is fairly obvious that the makers of this film took great care to make a film very close to the original book. It is in this that I say the movie did a good job. However, some aspects of this film are lacking. Particularly the sets and costumes. The costumes are so gaudy it's almost impossible to get past them. Now I realize that they are supposed to be a little over the top according to the book (which I have read), but this is just getting out of hand. Same way with the sets. Though the more low-key set designs are quite nice, the majority of them are so complex and out-landish that it nearly fries your retinas. Put the sets and the costumes together and it literally looks like a technicolor yawn. The special effects were for the most part well done, particularly the ships. However, sometimes the landscape textures look a little flat, not enough bump to them. Also, it was INCREDIBLY obvious that the outdoor desert shots and the shots in the siche were done in a studio with greenscreen and poorly rendered backdrops. The overall effect was one of watching a live play. In truth, they should have been shot on location, but I guess all the money for that was spent on giving people blue eyes. But if you can get past the stage feel of it, then you should be okay. What really killed this movie for me was the actors and acting. Really, they were horrible. Now William Hurt isn't a bad actor, but his comatose style is only good in certain situations, and this is not one of them. Alec Newman, who played Paul Maud'Dib, looked way too old to play the young Duke, but later in the movie he grew into the role. Ian McNeice did a stand up job as Baron Harkonnen, and Barbora Kodetova made a very alluring Chani (on an even par with Sean Young as the orignal), but all the rest of the cast just couldn't get their lines across well. They are a poor substitute for the star-studded cast of the 1984 version. But given all of the that, once Paul joins with the Fremen, things pick up, and aside from the poor desert shots, the film becomes enjoyable. I don't think it is as good as the 1984 version, but those plot purists will definately go for this one over David Lynch's masterfully shot 2 hour story. This one could have been better, and it could have been worse. All in all, it isn't a bad way to kill 4 hours.
Rating:
Summary: A Sci-fi must have
Review: I saw the 1984 version of Dune and enjoyed it very much, despite that it was not very true to the book. I didn't know what to expect from the DVD, because I had not seen it when it aired on the Sci-Fi channel. I was impressed. The attention to detail, the special effects, the direction and story telling were all excellent. Its the best 240 minutes of viewing you'll spend your money on for TV-to-DVD entertainment.
| 
