Rating: 
Summary: Centers on the Fremen
Review: While not perfect I'd have to rate this far and away above the Lynch movie. Besides hackign the plot to death in totally unecessary ways, the Lynch movie lsot the real story-- the story of the Fremen.This is emphaticly **not**the case in Harrison's movie which centers around them and their struggle against opression. As a sci fi allegory combining both the mythology of the middle east and the history of the Brittish empire's emperial presence, this movie succeeds as the book does. Thsi is not to say its a perfect film. Tehre are some scenes in the middle of the film where they clearly made due with inferior and obvious abckdrops to save a few bucks in production. Also, someone should point the scene designer at the dictioanry definition of an ornithopter, as none of the vehicles in this movie were in fact ornithopters at all. Still, gvien that Dune was oen of the formative books of my youth this movie left me happy, whereas Lynch's movie left me depressed.
Rating: 
Summary: Sort of OK
Review: I am watching a German dubbed version here in Europe. This was made for TV, so I expect the effects to be a little hokey and they are. How the costumes look, I do not care too much about that, but the plain black robes of the Reverend Mothers in Lynch's movie are way better. Surely a Bene Gesserit "witch" should wear black. It seems only kind of right. But if all people object to is costumes, I think that shows the story itself to be pretty faithful to the book. I do not even object to bringing Irulan more front and center. After all she marries Paul for political reasons, I don't mind her sleeping with Feyd for essentially the same reasons. The stillsuits? No I have no problems there either. All you have to remember is it is made for TV. When you do that, I think it comes across as a pretty good effort. Shame there is no Margot Fenring though. The biggest objection I have is in the treatment of the desert ( as other reviewers have stated ). Paul and his mother walk endlessly across the desert and that brings no worm. When they fall down a dune face, which would have been an irregular noise ( like falling and slipping sand ), a worm comes. Go figure. And of course the scene in the desert before Paul and Chani have sex - was that a picnic as others have said? Certainly looked like it. No, the principal objection I have is to the mollifying of the desert."God created Arrakis to train the faithful". Here it looks like he did it for way less harsher reasons. May be to get a tan.
Rating:
Summary: Refreshing storytelling
Review: The chief complaints I have read about this sci-fi channel adaptation of Frank Herbert's classic novel, seem to spring from comparing it with David Lynch's cult classic film, rather than with the book itself. Lynch's film, a classic in its own right, suffered from the studios insistence that it be no longer than two hours. Dune is an epic and needed to be treated as such. The miniseries format is uniquely suited to delivering complex, lenghty stories and, in that sense, this film holds up very well indeed. I am a fan of long movies, that take time to tell a story and this four and a half hour adaptation seems just about right to me. It is engrossing and exciting, at once epic and personal. I was skeptical at first but, in the end, I was caught up and swept away by the story and the production. For fans of good science fiction and good storytelling, this shouldn't be a disappointment. That is not to say that there aren't problems. Casting was sometimes questionable. William Hurt seems barely conscious through his stint in the film. And young Paul Atreides was played, at first, with such sleepy arrogance that I wanted to punch him about a hundred times in the head. It soon becomes clear that this is a directorial choice, however, and the character eventually redeemed himself in my eyes. The special effects range from merely acceptable to pathetic (Star Trek Next Generation was creating effects as good as this ten years ago.) And, perhaps worst of all, the entire production was filmed on soundstages, failing to capture even a hint of the epic wasteland that is Arrakis. Still and all, this is an entertaining film, an eccellent story, well adapted. Reviewed without consideration of Lynch's film, it is really quite good for the home video medium.
Rating: 
Summary: A Weak Version...
Review: After having seen the original movie with Kyle Maclachlan, I have to say I was sorely disappointed with this remake. Given a longer screening time, I would have thought the characters and storyline could have been fleshed out a lot more. It may have also been due to the weak and unconvincing acting, together with the fake-looking backdrops and amateurish special effects, that made me think I'd wasted my money on this DVD.
Rating: 
Summary: Pretty good interpretation of a cult sci-fi blockbuster
Review: I saw both the David Lynch film version for theater release and then the "director's cut." While the director's cut was an improvement, the original Dune film left a lot to be desired. Now we have John Harrison's 288-minute TV miniseries with more time, a more leisurely pace with which to deal with Frank Herbert's magnificent novel Dune. Did Harrison succeed? Well, not quite. Let's start with the cast. William Hurt fails utterly as the charismatic Leto, who was supposed to be such an inspiring leader as to make his fighting men as good or better than the Emperor's crack troops, the Sardaukar. He is mild and lovable, but about as inspiring as milk and water. Boo. We get a slightly wimpy Jessica who is able to rise to the occasion once in a while, and a young pup of a Paul who never really hardens into the holy terror Muad'Dib. The emperor's daughter, Princess Irulan, is turned into a viable character here, with excellent acting and credible changes to the novel to make her a vital player. Irulan is well acted, so are Chani, Alia, Liet, Rabban and other minor characters. Alas, the leads like Leto, the Baron, Feyd-Rautha, Paul and Jessica are not quite up to snuff. What about the costumes, script, dialog, battles? The costumes are based on the Art Nouveau magnificence of Mucha and work well to convey the imperial feudal aspect. The worms are fabulous. Perfect in every way. The worm-riding scenes are as right as can be. The dialog is a mish-mash of lines from the book and good condensation. There are absolutely perfect moments, generally near the end of the series, and others that make no sense unless you are steeped in Dune the novel and even then leave you flat. The best scene was probably the transformation of Jessica to Reverend Mother. That was done so well. Unfortunately, the rest doesn't come up to that level. So close...sigh. The battle scenes were long and in some cases, downright stupid. At the end, the Fremen wield just their crysknives against the rapid fire weapons of the Sardaukar. Come on! Who brings knives to a gun fight! Should you see it? Sure! If you love sci-fi, it's worth a look. Is it all one would hope for? No, the acting is spotty. But it is the most faithful version yet of this unwieldy blockbuster of a science fiction masterpiece.
Rating:
Summary: A waste of time on a saga that is epic and spectacular.
Review: When Dune was written by Frank Herbert in his time Science Fiction in movies and books were were usual.But when Frank Herbert wrote his epic visonary masterpeice Dune science ficton got a much needed facelift.Frank's vison was so ahead of it's time that it changed the way we look at science fiction forever an interglactic way of telling the ten commandments about a massiah that , would unite his people to uprise against an omiunent force that would threaten the galaxy and the universe. When David Lynch did his motion picture version of Dune it was huge spectacular , with huge grand sets and a gothic look and feel of the film that brought a style all to it's own , but because of the time refraints of hollwood and movies it had to be shortend wich ment key parts of the movie were cut out.Seventeen years later the Sci Fi channel took on yet another version of the respected science fiction masterpeice and DUNE was to become a miniseries. In the televison version of DUNE portrays the same conflict the same charachters.But theres far more to the story the story is not weak but the casting is weak the way the production is weak , because of worries that to much money would be spent and a cast of unknowns and knowns including a very wooden Willam Hurt as Duke Leto Atradies.And some unknown guy for Paul who personally I, have never even heard of until this series came out. Combine that with the fact that Dune is sposed to be made huge it's an epic powerful film.But the buget constraints show up in this version that obviously they wanted you to know it was made on a set because they sure didn't do a good job covering it up.Borderlines where you can see the line of the painted stills some very crapy , horrific lighting that more or less gives it away even if in the story you can't enjoy a resrained Dune like this a masterpeice because they were so worried about the buget they didn't even care to spend enough to make it satisfying enough , the planets have too peacful of feeling to them the Harkonans are sposed to be menaceing but here there peaceful.Feyd the son of Baron Harkonan looks like a feeble wimp where in the movie Sting made him work because he was crazy with the role. All in all Frank Herbert would probly like the look and scale and scope of the film DUNE, but he would like the way his story is treated in this version.If you want the size and epic , specticale of DUNE definately the movie is your best bet, but if you want storyline or book authenticity this version is definately your best bet.But this version dosen't even satisfy people who have read the book both are diffrent in many ways.
Rating:
Summary: It could've been better
Review: First of all, it's true this miniseries is more close to the book than the Movie, but in some points it's complete different,for example the deep participation of princess Irulan, but well, you can tolerate this. The only thing I didn't like at all was the Harkonnen house, the Baron was suppoused to be a disgusting being, here we have a choby man, that inspires compassion instead of repulsion. The movie version did a great job with the Harkonen house. By the other hand, the ship's scenes are great, specially with the Ornitopters. But not all the effects are cool, the scene when Paul sees the desert mouse (Muad'dib)is pathetic, the mouse is too unreal. But I have to recognize the Worms are great. So basically this movie is a good introduction to the Dune universe, gives you the desire to continue with the other books to know the whole story. I'd like to see other series based on the other books. The story of Leto II (son of Paul) is just fantastic, and people would have a chance to see Arrakis as a green planet at last. I've always wandered how should Leto II should look like as a giant worm with human face.
Rating:
Summary: Very very good
Review: I was pleasantly surprised by how much I dug this tv movie. From what I hear, they will be making the sequels as well. I thought it was excellent and its great to see SciFi Channel starting to live up to the potential I hoped for years ago when they just started out. Keep up the good work guys!
Rating:
Summary: It was alright
Review: Overall, I wish we could cut and paste the two different versions of Dune thusfar. Alec Newman was a horrible choice for Paul Atreides. I could suggest a dozen names for actors that would have been much better suited to play the Maud'Dib. He has too little character development as well. I was kind of excited to see that William Hurt was the Duke, but that turned out catastrophic too. At times he seems mechanically inclined and the way he says his lines make him seem constipated. Most of the costumes were very well done and the fighting was alright. Some of the sets were very realistic but overall, the deserts sets really stunk. Still, I thought this was better than the 1984 installment of Dune. I still can't get over Alec Newman though!
Rating:
Summary: It was alright
Review: Overall, I wish we could cut and paste the two different versions of Dune thusfar. Alec Newman was a horrible choice for Paul Atreides. I could suggest a dozen names that would have been much better. He has too little character development as well. William Hurt as the Duke was really bad as well. At times he seems mechanically inclined and the way he says his lines make him seem constipated. Most of the costumes were very well done and the fighting was alright. Some of the sets were very realistic but overall, the deserts set really stunk. Still, I thought this was better than the 1984 installment of Dune. I still can't get over Alec Newman though!
| 
