Rating: 
Summary: Lynch film flawed, Harrison series ALL flaw
Review: To make a faithful version of Herbert's novel would take more like 20 hours than six. The viable options are to do a movie that captures the essence of the book (which Lynch partly succeeded in doing, as Frank Herbert himself said a number of times, as did Harlan Ellison)--or do a really faithful adaptation, which takes time. It also takes somebody who isn't trying to turn the opportunity to adapt the novel into a chance to make a TV movie franchise for himself, which Harrison was clearly trying to do. Most of his interviews have been sly excuses for self promotion at Lynch' expense. There are no excuses for the kinds of changes Harrison makes. Most of the stuff people complain about in the Lynch film is just visual flourish. The weirding modules, rain on Arrakis, etc. Harrison goes in and changes the characters themselves, and basically makes up a new Irulan, when there are existing characters in the novel who could show us the Imperial court more effectively. Clearly, Harrison was trying to put his own stamp on the story, to take it over. In essence, Harrison is acting as if he's a better director than David Lynch and a better writer than Frank Herbert. He is neither. Those who give Harrison slack because he didn't have as much money as Lynch should give Lynch slack because he didn't have as much time--he made a much longer movie than the one we saw which was cut to ribbons by the producer, and then restored in a version he didn't approve). Harrison, OTOH made the film he wanted to make, and this boring turgid piece of sludge is the rather sad result. And Lynch had to good grace to not boast about the movie afterwards. At the SciFi website, there is a poll on which version is better. The Lynch film got 63% of the votes. At the website of the cable network that presented the miniseries. Case closed.
Rating:
Summary: Don't be deceived by the "Yuehs" out there! Lynch is better!
Review: This movie in no way compares to the original Film. While it is one thing to tell verbatim the story in several hours(And quite dryly I might add), it is the true artist that can tell such a sweeping scope in just a two hour movie and still keep the ambience that the book had. Everytime I watch the original movie, I still get a shiver down my spine when Aliah says,"he IS the kwisatch haderratz!" At the end of this new weak mini-series, I just yawned, rolled over, and farted.
Rating: 
Summary: In the Shado Of the Original
Review: The biggest hurdle i had with this was the fact that i've seen the original. I had to watch this as if this is the first Dune movie ever to appear. The actors were a little weak,where the demand that they be strong was called for,they seemed to lack the intensity necessary to create the affect that i think Frank Herbert was trying to portray. The film had a polished air about it, the sickness in the Harkonnen clan was never felt as it was in the original, giving them a far too clean immage,which i think was a major downfall, taking the plot in an all to familiar direction. Special effects were great, and it was nice to see another rendition of a sci-fi classic, and those who are not familiar with the original, but are great science fiction lovers will cherrish this as another work of great immagination. I did personally like this and am looking foreward to owning this version, as i am also a great sci fi film lover...i just found myself asking too many of those nagging "What Happened to That" questions........Mick
Rating: 
Summary: Better than the David Lynch version, but...
Review: I give this video four stars only because I happen to be an insatiable Dune fan. It's better than the David Lynch version released in theatres, but it's not quite there yet as far as matching the fantastic visions created by Frank Herbert. The story-telling was MUCH better (and much more coherent) than the movie, but the outlandish, over-the-top costumes were distracting, and unnecessary. Another complaint, I guess, would be that (again) the Harkonnens are depicted as simple buffoons. I must have read a different book than the directors of both movies. Overall, though, the visual effects are good and the dialogue moves the story along well and keeps you engaged in this complex, baroque tale of futuristic political intrigue.
Rating: 
Summary: - Dune - A magnificent masterpiece...
Review: I just recently watched this on the Sci-Fi Channel, and was amazed. Some of the special effects are amazing, although not as good as movies like The Matrix. The story is about as good as it gets. I'm currently reading the book, I'm around page 75, and so far everything is VERY close to the book. I saw it at first as a Dune ignorant person, and it by itself is great. But when paired with the book, it's almost as close as the Lord of the Rings movie will be. I didn't notice much of the music, because I was paying too much attention to the story. The acting is above-average, the costumes are great (I love the sandworm riding Maud'Dib!). I thought the stillsuits looked pretty cool, but then again I have no other movie to compare them with exept for the old movie. I'm going to watch it in a few days, regardless of all the warnings (especially of the "weirding modules"). I thought some of the coolest things were the sandworms, and the bat-like Guildlings (a.k.a. Guild Navigators.) If the scale were 1 to 100, I would give it a 100%! The other stats would be: Visuals: 90/100, Sound: 95/100, Characters: 100/100, Plot: 100/100.
Rating:
Summary: An updated and expanded version of the 1984 Classic.
Review: This version of Frank Herbert's Dune was shown on the Sci-Fi channel from Dec. 3 thru Dec. 5, 2000. It was also shown in 1.85:1 aspect-ratio for Widescreen fans, of which I am one myself. I'm not going into a long drawn-out description of the plot and actors. Because the only reason you are probably here is that you already know the story and want information about this new remake. This version followed the 1984 version fairly closely but expanded on the story a bit more. I have not read the original book, so I am not sure how accuarate it follows the book. While following the plot of the original almost verbatum, they would embelish what would be going on in between the scenes from the original. Being filmed in this generation of film technology, this mini-series featured all new special effects as today's audience would expect. However, the reason I gave it 4 stars is that some of the live-action sets looked like small soundstage sets with fake green screen backgrounds. But of course being a "made-for-TV" production, I can overlook that. The sand worms were improved since the 1984 version. Same basic look, but more intricate detail in the mouth area. The costumes were pretty good, however I liked the '84 costumes better with the exception of the Fremen. The large indoor sets were very well done. The casting in this series was not bad, but it wasn't spectacular. The only main-line actor was William Hurt. However the guy they got to play the Baron was very good counterpart to the '84 actor. But in all and all, a pretty good remake of a classic novel and movie. I recommend it if you're looking for a new twist in the Dune world. And weighing in at 5 hours, it makes for a good afternoon of viewing.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting additions to the book
Review: This movie combined a lot of material taken directly from the book with some very interesting additions and alterations. Without giving anything away, some of the background plots are fleshed out, and there is at least one major change at the end which will make the next mini-series interesting too. If you enjoy science fiction, this movie will show you how it should be done. Lavish sets, bizarre and beautiful costumes, interesting plot, well-acted. Very well worth seeing.
Rating:
Summary: Finally, a movie that does the book justice
Review: Unlike the previous version of Dune, this one does not rely on its sepcial effects. While it does have some great effects, it also has great acting to back it up. Also unlike the previous movie, it actually tells almost the entire story from the book. Just about everything in the movie is exactly like it is in the book. If you enjoyed reading Dune, this is the perfect movie for you. If you have not read it yet, after this movie, you will want to.
Rating:
Summary: Dune: The Real Book Adaption
Review: This mini-series does justice to the novel in this one. I'd say between the movie and the series; the later is better. The new version explained that the two fighting houses were mining spice. Spice is what makes the universe whole. Like heating fuel is to us. It runs the starships and gives the society an industry it depends on. In the film there was too much territory covered in too short a period. The characters were too rapidly introduced. The new version gives us a glimpse of what inspired the Star Wars myths. I know this novel was written at time when science fiction was seen as low brow literature. Herbert has proven them wrong. I'd like to see all the books adapted for telivison. If a little drama and additional writing is needed; so be it. Long live Dune.
Rating:
Summary: True to the book... What a marvel
Review: The first time I saw this movie was it's debut on TV (Christmas 2000). First impressions were that it closely resembles Starwars episode I, cinematography wise. I had read the book and seen David Lynch's version of it (which I enjoyed very much), and had my doubts that John Harrison would be able to do a better job. He was able to do a better job all right and also was very accurate to the novel. This movie entices your senses with rich dialog and detail, which builds up to a climax that you'd have to see for yourself. Just like the book it keeps you wanting more. No wonder Frank Herbert continued writing 5 other best sellers continuing the saga of DUNE. It's a must see movie and rates as one for the top 2 epic movies ever. The other being Starwars.
| 
