Rating: 
Summary: Caveat spectatior. (Yes I know it's not proper Latin...)
Review: I'm sorry to say, I've read (like Kyle MacLachlan) Dune every summer from the age of 16 on, and I simply like David Lynch's vision a lot more than the SciFi channel's. I'll be the first to admit that it wasn't exactly like the book (and though it was closer, SciFi's wasn't either), but there are certain glaring problems with this edition. For one, with all of the money that went into special effects, you'd think SciFi could pay to get a bigger set. The matte painting's edge can clearly be seen at the back of the 10X10 meter set. As if the technical problems (which extend far beyond the size of the sound stage) weren't enough, the acting is truly sub par. Is one looks to the David Lynch version, not only do we see a movie filmed mostly in the deserts of Mexico, we see it starring a wonderful array of actors, all of whom were at their prime. As well, tacking on Frank Herbert's name to the SciFi version of the film doesn't make it his work. If one reads interviews from the early 80's, you'll see that Herbert was working along side Lynch, and approved of the script. Why oh why did SciFi then go and spend oodles of money to ruin a perfectly good legacy? Ah yes, the "newer = better" theory. What a disappointment. Ah well. The movie's made, and so is its almost blasphemous follow up. Watch at your own risk.
Rating: 
Summary: Dune- well done
Review: The Sci-Fi version of Dune was a better portrayal than Lynch's verison in 1984. Lynch's film was better that he put the dialogue of what they are thinking. But Lynch made the movie a little gross. (Baron Harkonnen's face, pulling heart-plugs, the baby inside the womb) The new version of Dune had a good portayal of some characters such as Gurni Halleck, Lady Jessica, Baron Harkonnen, Stilgar. Although Alec Newman was not as good as a Paul Maud Dib as Kyle MacLachlan was in Lynch's version. Alec Newman was like a spoiled person before he became Maud Dib. He also didn't attempt to prevent a jihad as he did in the book. I thought the blue eyes was done well. The special effects was from horrible to awesome. (Bad special effects of the mouse creature, awesome special effects of the battles in Arakeen) The Sci-Fi version was overall better because it had the more important parts of the book than in the 1984 version. It was a job well done, although Children of Dune was better.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing, but still DUNE
Review: Just to let you know, I can honestly say that Dune is my all-time favorite book, so this is a review from a purist. That said, I definitely appreciate the fact that someone attempted to adapt the book to the screen again, and overall, I enjoyed this movie. However, several things really irritated me. First, if you are going to go to the effort to make a miniseries many hours long (presumably to stay true to the novel), WHY in God's name would you still change things? Irulan in my opinion is the best example here, as she has been given WAY too much importance in this movie. She's supposed to be an observer (she writes many of the pre-chapter quotes in the novel), not an active player in what's going on. There are other examples which I won't mention here, but trust me, this movie's plot differs from the book much more than it should. Second, one thing that is amazing about Herbert's DUNE is that the female characters are powerful, influential (NOT Irulan, though), and independent, yet still maintain their femininity. The characters in this movie, especially Jessica and Mohiam, seem way too fragile (physically especially - these are supposed to be Bene Gesserit masters - they should at least have athletic builds) -- they talk big, but don't have anything close to the aura of strength that their counterparts in the novel have. Third, I really like Herbert's way of making the importance of hand-to-hand fighting believable in a technologically advanced world -- the invention of personal shields neutralizes the effectiveness of most firearms (only the slow blade will penetrate the shield), but the fighting in this movie is laughable. These soldiers are supposed to be adept fighters. I realize this probably falls into the special effects category and may have been limited by funding or something, but they should have hired some choreographers and trained their Sardaukar and "Fremen warriors" a little better, especially in an age of movies like "Crouching Tiger" and The Matrix. When watching a Dune movie, a somewhat couch-potato-ish civilian like myself shouldn't feel like I might actually be able to take on an elite imperial trooper, but I felt that way several times in this movie. Unfortunately, the only thing that was enjoyable about this movie was that it mostly followed the plot of an excellent novel. This is a major positive, of course--the story is great, and mostly preserved in the movie. That's the only reason I gave it as high a rating as I did. However, if you're expecting a faithful adaptation of the characters and "feel" of the novel, this movie fails miserably. I hope someone eventually will try again to make a decent Dune movie, but I expect I'll have to wait a long time.
Rating:
Summary: A Superb Adaptation
Review: David Lynch's film of Dune, though incredibly expansive in its vision of Herbert's novel, is a failure in almost every other way. The narrative is rushed, the characters are flat, and Lynch's almost obsessive penchant for the grotesque is just about the only thing that will stay for any length of time with an uninitiated viewer. John Harrison's miniseries, on the other hand, is an improvement over Lynch's film on every level except that of special effects. The greatest strength of the miniseries is its characters. Jessica, Gurney, Feyd, Stilgar, the Emperor, Paul, and even Alia come to life on the screen as multilayered, human, realistic individuals. And one character is almost a revelation: Princess Irulan. In Harrison's teleplay Irulan becomes a kind of mirror for Paul. Like him, she grows into adulthood through a series of eye-opening experiences. Because a number of added scenes on the director's cut feature her, her importance is even clearer in this version than it was on the one featured on the Sci-Fi channel. And Julie Cox's performance of the princess is subtle, seductive, understated, just right. Lying back on a chair in one added scene, she seems both bored and coiled at the same time. Yes the "outdoor" sets look fake in this production, but I think they're supposed to. Perhaps this was a way of making a virtue out of budgetary necessity. The desert scenes are obvious artifice and are sometimes saturated with wild, even day-glo, colors, ostensibly emanating from the moons of Dune. I for one think this look is really cool. The acting style is also stagey. But it all works, at least for me. When Baron Harkonnen delivers rhyming couplets at the end of each of his major scenes, I'm reminded of a Shakespearean tragic hero, and he comes across as totally sincere. I've watched the whole four-and-a-half hour epic twice and liked it better the second time. I missed Children of Dune on TV in March but have already preordered the DVD. My hope is that the new director remained true to Harrison's vision and has used well the incredible talents gathered together for the first miniseries.
Rating:
Summary: Lots of content, little substance
Review: Having read the book, I rented both this version and the 1984 Lynch version to compare and contrast. I had seen the Lynch version back when it came out, but had only vague memories of it as I was rather young and had not read the boook then. After having watched both of them, I have to say that although the Sci Fi miniseries kept a lot more of the content of the novel, it was so off-base on the characterization of Paul Atreides that I wondered how I was going to get through 4 hours of this. Granted, the character gets somewhat better once he joins the Fremen, but it still doesn't touch the Kyle McClachlan portrayal in the Lynch film that to me really embodied the self-awareness and mysticism of this disciplined young man. The spoiled brat Paul at the beginning of the Sci Fi version was extremely irritating and I almost couldn't watch the rest of the dvd. Most of the characterizations were off, with the notable exceptions of Gurney Halleck, Chani, and the Baron. While I was pleased that so many scenes of the novel were kept in this film, there was also a lot either completely changed (pretty much everything on Caladan to start with) or made up--which shouldn't be necessary with such a novel. While I came away from the Lynch film saying "very different from the book" in terms of the way the film ended and the whole thing with the sound based "weirding modules" as well as some other details (Paul never had a son in Lynch's version), I felt that it still kept the spirit of the book. The characters were portrayed much more accurately. In the Sci Fi version, Yueh is almost a foot note from which we are supposed to understand the agony of his decision to betray the duke. Overall, I would watch the Lynch version again because the characterizations were done so well--I liked the inner monologues because they let you know what the character was thinking as in the book. Lynch's version also brought across the mysticism of the novel. The Sci-Fi's Muad Dib seems to embrace and foster the coming Jihad. Not the reluctant Paul Muad Dib of the novel who tries everything to prevent it. Granted, the jihad is not even mentioned in the Lynch version, but the Sci Fi version makes it completely change the character of Muad Dib. The special effects were not very impressive and I don't think TV is an excuse--Star Trek TNG had much better effects on a weekly show budget. One other thing, the Bene Gesserit Mohiam in the Lynch version seemed much more formidable and scary than the Mohiam in the Sci Fi. While I admire and appreciate the amount of content the Sci Fi version incorporated into their film, I was greatly disappointed by this version overall.
Rating:
Summary: Able to enthrall the viewer.
Review: Before watching this I had never read the book or seen the previous Dune movie. However, I was was very impressed with the film and immediately read the book, knowing that the book is always better than the movie and includes details that get left out because of budget and time constraints. However, I was really impressed that the film followed the book so closely. Scenes left out of the movie were not missed and the expansion of Irulan's role was done well. The special effects were well done with scenery that looked realistic. The worms are also faithful to the description of the book. Unfortunately there are many scenes where blue tint is missing or incompletely done in a character's eyes. From the perspective of someone new to the story, I was able to follow the storyline very easily. This is the mark of a well done film. I was able to go through the entire film without asking, "What do they mean by that?" Of course for the fanatical fan who analyzes every sentence of the book, no movie will ever satisfy.
Rating:
Summary: Better than the 1984 movie! Thank God
Review: This miniseries was more faithful to the book than the original movie in several respects (mainly because it's 3-4 hours longer). The characters are portrayed a little bit better in this version than the previous also, in the original movie Sting just didn't do it for me. One big drawback in this version is the blue screens. Whenever anyone is walking on a dune you can tell there's only about 3-5 feet of sand and the rest is just a screen. The blue eyes are always very fake looking. Both of these do seem to have been fixed in the Children of Dune miniseries though. Overall I enjoyed this movie a lot.
Rating: 
Summary: Good, better than Lynch's, but not perfect
Review: I definetely like this Dune more than Lynch's one. Lynch's one was more emotional but this one is certainly more space-opera-like. There some people complaining about graphics but I do not agree with it. It was fine - I like architecture - it was "imperial". I would give it full 5* if not for some moments that were very weak - mostly because of "wooden" actors play. The worst performance was in my opinion Baron Harkonen - it was artificial and completely unrealistic. Also "visions" of JEssica were cheesy. I also did not like Chani. Stilgar would be fine if not for painted face. Generally these blue Fremen eyes were very unrealistic - blue eyes does not mean that they emit light. But I like graphics, I live music and I like it. It is not 'Empire strikes back' but it is certainly better than 'Phantom Menace' - not in graphics details but it is straightforward and direct. But in general if you like SciFi or you like Star Wars you should enjoy this movie. However in my opione the 2nd part" "Children of Dune" is better. Leto, Ghani, JEssica and Irulan are pretty good there (excluding some stupid Leto stunts: roaring,fist in the sand and fast run).
Rating:
Summary: Dune
Review: Having read the Dune series, including Brian Herberts books thus far - I would recommend this DVD, but still prefer the 80's movie version. The perks to this DVD is that the "Children of Dune" will probably be on DVD soon and the actors are basically the same as this DVD. Great for a made for TV movie. Would have liked the actors physical attributes (like Jessica's red hair) to have been utilized more - but it's a great introduction to Herbert, and a need to own for sci-fi fans.
Rating:
Summary: Done right
Review: This is Dune done right. This is what you get when someone who understands the source material is involved in the film.
|
