Rating: Summary: LYNCH'S WORST FILM!! Review: Dreadful....one of the worst,most ill-conceived sci-fi movies ever made,not to mention boring!!
Rating: Summary: Kull Wahad! Film vs. minseries debate rages on Review: Unfortunately, DUNE (and I'm talking about the original theatrical version, not the unauthorized "Alan Smithee" tv long version with awful narration and bad edits.) wasn't the masterpiece that David Lynch and the fans were hoping for, though I think, after watching the film many, many times, buying it on VHS Widescreen, and suffering through much of the scandalously bad, embarrassing Sci-Fi Channel miniseries version last year, the film holds up better than previously thought. Sure, it's a Cliff's Notes version of the novel, and a lot of characters, dialogue are edited out, and Lynch adds new elements and scenes that don't even appear in Frank Herbert's novel. Still I think the film blows away most fantasy films coming out these days for sheer originality, closeness to the spirit of the original story, and the work the crew did on the sets, costumes, and sound design are still awe- inspiring. But even if you still detest this version of Dune, PLEASE don't mistake the godawful Sci-Fi Channel version miniseries with the book or the "real" Dune: in fact, if you compare the miniseries with the novel Dune, it has even LESS in common with the book than Lynch's version. The idiots at Sci-Fi Channel singlehandedly destroyed Dune. I'm starting to think this desecration was done on purpose for some unknown reason. Many of the characters from the novel are there, but they are so twisted into camp, comedy versions that it doesn't matter. The costumes in the Sci-Fi Channel are absolutely godawful, they have nothing to do with what Herbert's vision of the future was like. I mean, the Spacing Guild in Lynch's film LOOK like the Spacing Guild--in the miniseries they look like bad versions of the Knights Who Say Ne! from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. In the final analysis perhaps Lynch's Dune should have been done at three-hour plus length, whether released theatrically or on television, but minus the hideous narration, but with extra scenes and dialogue intact. Lynch made decisions like including the non-novel "weirding module" weapons scenes and he's got to live with those decisions, right or wrong, even though they deviate from Herbert's original storyline. Still, nothing could be worse than the SF Channel's grossly inept and insulting version of Dune. I'm glad Herbert wasn't alive to witness THAT travesty! Even HE approved Lynch's version of Dune with all the changes and accentuations that Lynch added. He knew at least that Lynch was shooting for authenticity. But the SF Channel miniseries the "final" version of Dune? Not on your life, not by a longshot. I believe a solid, serious adaptation of Dune is possible, but it will take a studio brave and ambitious enough to mount it responsibly and not flinch from its epic length and scope. Yes folks, you CAN write a script that will follow a novel like Dune more closely AND film it in such a way as to not lose the fans along the way. I promise you it can be done. I believe that with this short version of Dune, Universal did the fans a disservice by insisting on a short version--they let the fans down, they let David Lynch down, and they let Frank Herbert down. That the film is still as enjoyable as it is is tribute to the great talents involved.
Rating: Summary: Horrible. Review: Big-budget sci-fi epic about the rise of a messiah on a desert planet is the exact opposite of its miniseries remake: Dull, cheesy, badly acted (with the exceptions of Patrick Stewart and Sting), and simply unpleasant to look at. It's also an incomprehensible mess with a lot of insulting interior monologue ("Arrakis...Dune...desert planet" is a phrase repeated no less than three times in the first ten minutes, as if though we couldn't get it the first time!). Certainly, this will hold much appeal to hardcore David Lynch fans but everybody else will probably be smarter and stay away. Special note to the final battle scene, which features not a single loss on the Fremen side!
Rating: Summary: DUNE Review: Well, The original *UNCUT* movie is worth 5 stars. I was very dissapointed to find a few important scense cut from this DVD. Surly they could easly included them. On a positive side, the wide screen format was super.
Rating: Summary: Glorious, Pseudo-religious Bombast! Review: I am a fan of the original books written by Frank Herbert.A 2 hour movie could never hope to capture the detail present in those novels. David Lynch does not attempt it. His Dune looks like a slice of religious instructional propaganda from the year 10 000 A.D. You can't watch this as a version of the book, it almost isn't. It's a peek into the Dune universe and enjoyable in its resulting inscrutability. If you can learn to enjoy movies for something other than straight narrative and character development, then you might enjoy this. leave that stuff to other movies. I still think it sets the pace for visual interpretations of science fiction novels. When I read Dune, I think of the David Lynch movie. The mini-series looked like a campy stage production.
Rating: Summary: WILL NOT BUY IT! Review: Why? Because it's the version that's missing almost fifty minutes of footage! I saw the three hour-plus version on Sci-Fi Channel, and for the very first time on the original Disney Channel which showed more adult films late at night! What I saw of the 137 Minute version takes a good amount of the story out! Trust me, wait for the three hour version! You'll see that it's worth it! Grade: F
Rating: Summary: Will they ever release the "Director's Cut"? Review: I thought this version was OK, but would prefer if they'd release the full uncut version on DVD (3+ hours). That's the one they sometimes show on the sci-fi channel...The prologue is a lot more informative, and there are a lot more explanations about what is supposed to be going on. I think just like "Blade Runner" is better w/the Director's Cut, "Dune" would be vastly improved.
Rating: Summary: Grotesque Review: Dune is a very long book so that it is hard to fit the elements into a film. The going rate is that a film can tell a short story. Dune is in reality the re-telling of the story of Mohamed. A person has some insights and finds some desert warriors to follow him. They have been trained to live through hardship and are able to defeat the corrupt forces of the Byzantine and Persian Empires although hopelessly outnumbered. They set up the Caliphate which dominates the world for hundeds of years. Dune is set on a desert planet and the hero of the story is the son of a merchant. His family have been given the planet which can generate enormous wealth as it produces something rare. The evil Harkonan family however want the planet back and they invade. Our hero is driven into the desert but stages a Geurilla war with the help of desert tribesman and not only regains his family plantet but the world. The problem with the film is that it is like a very potted summary of a long novel. In the novel the events define the characters and why they are good and bad. Because there is not time to do this in the film, the baddies are shown to be physically grotesque and addicted to eating live cows to establish that they are on the wrong side. The heroes are such because they look more attractive and dess more tastefully. The villians also live in a tasteless abode and have appalling manners. The heros also live in cooler pads and have more tasteful decorations. The book creates a sort of feudal society in which the main characters have endless sword fights. The basis of this is the invention of force field technology which makes projectile weapons inefective. In reality of course this is done so that Herbert can write a novel based on personal heroism rather than on characters who keep elaborate trading records. The film has a brief bizarre scene at the begining to illustrate this but then leaves the idea behind. One has the impression that a lot of editing has occured. What hits you about this film is the almost continually grotesque nature of the imagery and the very abreviated story. It is all pretty dreadful.
Rating: Summary: Deserves a better disc Review: This is a very visual movie so was truly lost on VHS. Now we have DVD, and the best available Dune is Australian (best picture but not the best 5.1 sound). All the regions 1, 2 and 4 suffer from non-anamorphic presentation. The UK disc has the best sound but a pretty grotty picture. The US disc is an uneasy mixture of the two. This will look beautiful when properly transferred, maybe someday.
Rating: Summary: a notorious flop - a "mishmash" adaption of herbert's story Review: In these days, most people talk about the difficulties of bringing J. R. R. Tolkien's epic tale, LORD OF THE RINGS, to the bring screen; We all know that doing the same with DUNE is numerous times more difficult. Even DUNE has its moments, most people will say, and that's true. There are glimpses of stunning visuals that occasionally makes this movie a worth-while experience, but in the end (and that's what counts) this is a complete "mishmash" adaptation of Frank Herbert's classical science fiction novel. There are several things that's wrong with DUNE, but, most importantly (I think), the film just hasn't been given enough time to tell its story. This should have been a three hour movie; 131 minutes just isn't sufficient time. In addition, Lynch has decided, for some reason, to use his prescious time introducing several things that were never in the original story, and they don't make much sense. Dino De Laurentiis wanted DUNE to be his STAR WARS, but instead he ended up with one of the great "turkeys" of the eighties. From what I've read, the only reason why David Lynch agreed to direct this film was so that he'd get full creative control on his next project, BLUE VELVET. Hmm... Perhaps that's reason enough why we shouldn't badger David Lynch too much about doing DUNE. I wouldn't recommend DUNE to anybody save for Lynch fans who wants to see or own this film strictly as a curiousity.
|