Rating: 
Summary: Arakis ain't the middle east
Review: I rented this because I am such an avid fan of Dune, the book, and David Lynch's vision. I was not only disapointed, but rather angry at the attempt to simplify the Fremen's culture by suggesting that they were in fact nothing more than Arabs on Earth's african continent. They appeared to practice the muslim religion, wore Arab garb.... no still suits! Just traditional Arab dress. The acting was want, with the exception of the costuming the entire effort was a miss. They had a lot more time to address the scope of the book, but missed this opportunity and dumbed down a terrific story. Maybe they were playing to a more adolescent audience. Whatever I did'nt like it.
Rating: 
Summary: Good, but lacking
Review: ok, first. I'm a Dune fan, I own the books, and i have read them at least 5 times each. I own the Linch movie. Liked it. I own this miniseries, also liked it.This installment is more true to the book than the movie. But the settings, the overall experence falls short. The costumes are creative, but some are a bit clownish, like the sardaukar ones. Are they soldiers or players in a renaicence fair? One thing I lked very much of the Linch movie was the costumes, in that regard they did their job. Their soldiers looked like...well, soldiers. One thing I did not liked specially in the miniseries was the disregard for water. Why oh why did they put the fremen walking in the open, with windows to the open desert? playing, and talking and living in a place that its supposedly, the closest thing to hell on earth. Overall I liked the movie better. The acting was better. The scenary was better. The special efects were better. I mean, they can make a full motion picture now, all in a computer. I expected better f/x. If i was made to choose, i would buy the movie. Now.. there is the new Children of Dune miniseries coming, and i will buy it. So I suppose I'm not discarding this one either.
Rating: 
Summary: look to lynch
Review: I found this interpretation of Frank Herbert's Dune novel insulting. If you haven't read the book, I recommend watching David Lynch's version of the movie. Lynch's version envisions the personalities involved with a vigor that the TV series lacks entirely. The TV series has Paul, the hero, as a whining non-participating member of the plot, almost like his arm is being twisted to embark on this universe-changing story. The acting was flat almost all around. I was sorry to see William Hurt in this as I find him to be a good actor, but nothing he could have done would have saved this haphazard attempt to recreate Frank Herbert's brilliance. Again I recommend Lynch's interpretation. It's a bit bizarre in places but reflects well upon the book. Of course if you haven't done so, read the book and you'll know.
Rating: 
Summary: A great tv movie, a great adaption
Review: The Special Edition of the Dune mini-series has a number of scene cut out of the American TV because of nudity (not very much, but with the causality of a European television) and because of time constraints (American television has more commercials).
The content of the show is much closer to the original novel with a more traditional direction than the cult classic 1984 movie. The design concepts are very well conceived and conjure images of feudal Europe dealing with the Middle East. Most fans of the novels should be satisfied with the amount of subplot lines that are full fleshed out in the movie. The whole plot is much better fleshed out than the original movie and this is likely to be the best adaptation possible, no need for anyone else to try again. The best expansion of a character is princess Irulan, play extremely well by Julie Cox. Unfortunately you sympathize with Irulan more than Paul's concubine, Chaney, in the end because their relationship lacked some needed development. Paul is play well, though there are a few rocky moments, by the Scottish actor, Alec Newman, who changes from a petulant teenager to a Messiah in the course of the movie. William Hurt, though touted before the title, is stolid and stayed for his part and only makes cameos in the second two installments. This is not one of Hurt's better performances. The rest of the international cast operates well, with many genuine accents that can be hard to understand at points. The desert scenes have the flat painted back drops that signals that they are obviously on a soundstage, but are used effectively to create the appearance of the desert on a television budget. The number of extras, the well-filmed street scenes, and the quality of the cinematography make this TV movie look and feel like a film. Worth seeing and worth buying
Rating:
Summary: Shakespeare+Star Wars+Religion+Tremors = Dune
Review: I have to thank another reviewer for the Shakespeare meets Tremors idea, but as I was watching Paul ride the sandworm, it made me think of Tremors. What if Kevin Bacon could have been cast as Paul Atreides? Never mind... The 2000 miniseries will forever be compared to David Lynch's 1984 version, as well as the book. I think we need to realize that comparing a film to a book will bring nothing but disappointment. Here's my main comparison: The 1984 version tried to cram too much into a three hour movie, and the resulting edit became practically incomprehensible for those who had not read the book. The Sci-Fi Channel miniseries version has more time to develop the story, so to me there was much more satisfaction. The story is about royal houses jockeying for power and control of the desert planet, Arrakis, and the production of Spice, the single most valuable commodity in the universe. When House Atreides takes over from House Harkonnen, Duke Atreides is soon assassinated and his royal concubine and son are left in the desert. Young Paul Atreides, skilled in mystical fighting/magic methods, embarks on a hero's journey and meets the people of the desert. He eventually assumes a messianic role to lead the Fremen in revolution against the Harkonnens.
Positives:
I liked the multi-party political intrigue with the various factions. The costumes were fantastic, with a European Renaissance feel, with some feudal Japanese thrown in for warriors. As another reviewer stated, Alec Newman's Paul initially sounds as whiny as Mark Hamill's Luke Skywalker in Star Wars IV, but Newman grows with the role and his character is one of the few dynamic characters in the series.
Criticisms:
The special effects were little better than a suped up Star Trek TNG episode. The navigators in the 1984 version were more mystical, and their role more important. Also, the Baron was much more disgusting. There were some weird passages of time too, like Jessica's daughter going from infant to about six years old in a short period. The same with Paul and Chani's son. Finally, in the final battle, a mob armed with knives attacks guards with automatic guns. That's stretching things a bit... Still, this was an interesting tale and about as close to the book as one is likely to see.
Rating: 
Summary: Absolutely stunning
Review: This extended version is magnificent. The added scenes aid the story (for the most part), or bring it closer to teh spirit of the novel. The only problem with it, some of the scenes are clearly low-budget blue-screen, and the complexities of teh different training schools are demarcated by silly hats (instead of , say, red-stained lips for the Mentats, or the Suk doctor mark, they wear silly hats.) The costumes are otherwise magnificently Renaissance (as opposed to the more Gothic feel of Lynch's Dune). Worth seeing. Worth owning.
Rating:
Summary: Well-meaning but inept
Review: To its credit, this treatment's five-hour running time affords the kind of attention to narrative detail and to *pacing* that Lynch's version lacks. And the cast is pretty good--the main actors give, by and large, their all. The fellow playing Paul is especially good in the final third of the show, during his transformation into the messiah/savior. Sadly, there appears to have been no budget whatsoever--the special effects are beyond bad, the art direction questionable, the editing, directing (and much of the acting) rote and often sloppy. Even the *dialogue* editing is poor, with bits that were recorded at different times having different timbres than other speech from the same scene. I was floored when I learned after watching that the cinematographer was none other than Vittorio Storaro, the mastermind who lensed *Apocalypse Now*. How could such a genius have boarded this wreck of a production? If one does the work of mentally separating the cinematography proper from the special effects, it's clear that there's some talent there. But when nearly every shot is an eyesore, what's the point? The money used for Storaro and William Hurt would have been much better spent on additional graphics engineers. It's one thing for Arrakis's deserts to look imperfect. Deserts are big and vast and incredibly hard to fake, like oceans. But even the scenes filmed in *caves* look like they were shot on a soundstage! And it's not like the actors behave as though they're in a fierce desert. Half the time the characters are out there, they're unbuckling their face masks as they approach, blatantly for the camera's benefit. The director mentions the show's "operatic" qualities in the bonus features, as if the staginess were a strategy he embraced rather than an obstacle he lacked the money or the skills to overcome. The sand worms look great in and of themselves, but forget about believability in any shot showing both worms and people. "It's the story, not the effects," say some. But when you can't tell the story because you don't have the effects, it's a problem. How do the Fremen dismount once they're atop and somehow steering the worms? How close to home can they ride them? For that matter, where do the Fremen keep their 'Thopters? And why does the desert mouse, so small but so important, have to look like a discarded prop from "Sesame Street"? It's inexcusable. I can *imagine* Arrakis when I read the book. When I watch the movie, I'm looking to *see* it. Period. You could maybe get away with staging a movie for a Jane Austen drama in which most of the story takes place in a mansion. But not with something of the epic scope of *Dune*, where the landscapes and skyscapes are so central to the story. The preciousness of water to the characters is practically the only thing in this production that's consistently believable, and movies far too often overlook this kind of verisimilitudinous detail. Yes, I'm glad I saw this DVD, and I'll be watching Harrison's next production, too. But still I must ask: Peter Jackson, where are you?! It's not too late to do this story right....
Rating:
Summary: The Spice must flow
Review: Much has already been said about Dune. A complex tale of politics, ecology, and religion wrapped up in a science ficiton setting, Frank Herbert's vision has been the recepient of two film adaptations. 1984's adaptation is a well known disaster. [Director] David Lynch admitted it's the only film he ever regretted making. The Science Fiction Channels version has the advantage of the mini-series medium which allows for a far more coherent narrative. Yet, the film fails many conceptual challenges presented by the book. The great desert of Arrakis is perhaps the most important "character" in the book. But it's been reduced to a sound stage here. The utter vastness and deathly majesty of the planet is gone. This weakness is highlighted by the truly shoddy digital FX in the film. While the overall story is far more important than the production values, understanding what is taking place in this story depends on seeing things we don't actually get to see because of budget contraints. This hurts the films overall credibility. The acting is generally a hit and miss: Ian Mcneice as the Baron Harkonnen is straight out of a comic book, William Hurt is sleepwalking, Alec Newman as Paul Atreides is worthy of a bratty, vindictive "messiah". The costume designers were clearly attempting a Renaissance look, but whether or not it comes across as stylish or silly depends on your tastes. The Directors Cut of the DVD adds 30 minutes of additional footage. Most of the editted material should have stayed on the cutting room floor: it seems little attempt was made to clean up the new scenes before they were put back in; most of the new shots are grainy. Also, in the original cut, there was no sound in space. A truly refreshing experience to see this dose of reality in a science fiction film. But alas, in the director's cut, sound is put back into space. In the end, it's becoming obvious that Frank Herbert's masterpiece should remain on paper.
Rating:
Summary: Sadly not an equal comparison to the book
Review: I think that this book deserves a better movie than this. Recently on a road trip I rented this movie for the car ride. I am glad that I rented it and not bought it because I would probably never watch it again. Although they may be good actors, they still fall short of my expectations. They may do well in other movies but in this particular movie the rolls demand sincerity, seriousness, and emotion. I do not think that all the actors and actresses conformed to my standards. One main example would be with Alec Newman. Although he gives an outstanding performance (note the three stars not one) with his beautiful body and thoughtful speech, he could have given a better performance by talking slower and actually pretending to care. This would help it be more like the book because the book portrays Paul as being cautious and unsure of himself and his decisions and unlike the movie's sure, defiant, and self-centered Paul. Overall this was an okay movie and I hope that you enjoy it more than I did.
Rating:
Summary: Dune...TV Miniseries is THE BEST!!!
Review: Ok I saw the television miniseries first. I bought the dvd set because I missed the airing of it on SciFi. I loved it! I was so impressed by the costumes, sets, and the use of color. Everybody seems to be attacking the acting but I don't agree. William Hurt did what he could with a small but important role. I agree it could have been handled a little better but whats done is done.
I then rented the Lynch version and sat in pain during the whole thing. I had to stop and watch it over a couple days it hurt so bad. The style was all wrong to me. I hated almost everything about it. I was disappointed because I think David Lynch is a great director. I advise watching the miniseries first then the "film" version.
|
