Home :: DVD :: Science Fiction & Fantasy :: Space Adventure  

Alien Invasion
Aliens
Animation
Classic Sci-Fi
Comedy
Cult Classics
Fantasy
Futuristic
General
Kids & Family
Monsters & Mutants
Robots & Androids
Sci-Fi Action
Series & Sequels
Space Adventure

Star Trek
Television
Frank Herbert's Dune (TV Miniseries) (Director's Cut Special Edition)

Frank Herbert's Dune (TV Miniseries) (Director's Cut Special Edition)

List Price: $14.98
Your Price: $11.24
Product Info Reviews

<< 1 .. 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 .. 47 >>

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Judge Not, Ye Heretics of Dune
Review: We are a perverted group, we fans of Sir Frank's Epic. No film will EVER be "just right" but this new version comes so very much closer than Mr. Lynch's previous effort. (I can remember nearly having a fit when it rained at the end, a cinematically licensed plot jump that I felt was unforgiveable.) Yes, True Blue Fans, it has its faults but it also has its wonderful and pure moments.

But understand why we love this Epic Saga so much; its scope is nearly unmatched in its genre, encompassing millions of worlds in a richly colored tapestry of awe-filled (sometimes awesome, sometimes awful) events. Good God, it took 3 writers, including his talented son, Brian, to even extend the story!

For the diehard Dune fan(atic), this attempt will no doubt contain a tinge of melancholy but also the added flavor of once again seeing this wonderful story brought to life. We must understand that there is just so much time to tell a story this vast, with so much charaterisation, with so many "wheels within wheels" without losing the intiate altogether.

For those who haven't read the book(s), this movie is a wonderful introduction into the Dune Universe. It does a more-than-admirable job of introducing the characters, their settings and their agendas, although the true flavor and depth of some remain to be discovered in reading the books. It is beautifully filmed with sets to rival anything yet seen, even on the Big Screen.

You can cry if you want to that some minor characters did not get the treatment they deserved. And Linda Hunt would have made a better choice than John Hurt as Duke Leto Atreides (Jesus, he was better than this in "Lost In Space"!) but thankfully, he dies early in the film (about 5 seconds after he comes on screen, if you ask me).

All in all, a delightful romp through one of the Tried & True Masterpieces of Modern Literature. Maybe now someone will tackle the second book?

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: If you're a Dune fan you're surely going to get the new Dune
Review: If you're a Dune fan you're surely going to get the new Dune, but here's my comparisons with the old movie.

Story: since its much longer, there is more detailed story treatment in the new movie. However, it seemed a bit more pedantic to me. They also took liberties in the new movie from the book.

Look: The old movie gave the ancient look to futuristic technology perfectly. The symbolism from the last Russian Tsar was a nice touch, too. Too much CG for my taste in the new movie, the spaceships looked like a computer game. However, the sandworms are much better in the new movie. The old movie worms looked silly, I even laughed out loud in the theatre at the time. These worms and the Guildsmen are better.

Cast: William Hurt slept his way through the movie. Jurgen Prochnow was a much better Duke. The old Jessica was also more sophisticated and alluring, as were most of the women in the 1st movie. The new Jessica is awful. New Chani, isn't as bad. The new Paul is competant but has no messianic qualities. I liked the new Gurney, though. Picard was too upper-class Brit for the part. The new Gurney is gritier, a cockney. The same goes for the new Stilgar. I'd still like to see more ruggedness from the Fremen, but at least they're portrayed more than as just some guys standing around waiting for the next wormtrain. As for the new Mentats, they seem more like ripoffs of Londomoll from Bab 5.

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Where the heck did Duncan Idaho die anyway?
Review: After seeing this miniseries and the original David Lynch theatrical release, I felt compelled to read the book and settle some plot inconsistencies (i.e. where did the weirding weapons go and where the heck was Duncan Idaho really supposed to die? In the Atreides compound during the initial Harkonnen attack or blown to bits by Harkonnen patrols in the desert spiriting Paul and his mother to safety?). The Sci-Fi series got it right.

I did not find Allec Newman annoying as some people did. Sure, he was wooden, but Paul was schooled in the controlling of his own emotions by his mother so that they did not betray him. After the Harkonnen attack his ruthless, unemotional behavior became more pronounced as he was immersed in the grim Fremen culture.

In terms of following the original story, the Sci-Fi Channel series is superior to Lynch's version. Sure, nobody seems to be able to get the fact that Paul Atreides is supposed to be 14-15 when the story starts and that he is described as being much darker complected than either actor who has played him in the past, but things actually happened in the sequence they were supposed to in the miniseries. People die where they are supposed to and events take place in the proper sequence.

Another nice element of the miniseries was the use of knives. Everybody has knives in the miniseries, just like in the book, where knives play an important part of Fremen culture. In the miniseries, characters are more likely to duke it out up close with knives than shoot blasts from weirding modules (which aren't even in the book).

Karel Dobry's Dr. Kynes and P.H. Moriarty's Gurney Halleck (characters who, despite their importance to Herbert's original story, were glossed over in Lynch's version of "Dune") are both given the attention they deserve in the miniseries. I thought both actors did well, as did the actor who played Stilgar (Uwe Ochsenknecht). I liked both Ochsenknecht and Dobry's quiet, understated menace. Despite their lack of emotion and stoic demeanor, you could instantly recognize them as the most dangerous men in the room. In the miniseries Gurney Halleck looks and feels like the battle-hardened ex-slave who would die for his Duke. If anything, Patrick Stewart's portrayal in the movie (when his character was on screen) was too "clean" to be Gurney Halleck.

Hey, Raban even had some dialogue in the miniseries (like he did in the book) instead of wandering around and giggling perversely while eating some indescribable meat product like he did in Lynch's movie. Feyd even gets to do things in the miniseries besides offering Sting's characteristic leer of the Lynch interpretation. Sure, his clothes stunk in the miniseries, but he was shown as being much more dangerous (both physically and mentally) in the miniseries than Sting was in the movie version. Stepping out of a steam-bath and cocking on eyebrow on cue don't concern me as much as the man who looks harmless and has terrible fashion sense, but is a cold-blooded killer. Ian McNiece surprised me as Baron Harknonnen, since I'm used to him in more effeminate, comedic roles. I thought he did a fine job as the Baron, mixing the vicious with the pathetic (now if only I hadn't seen quite so much of him wearing nothing but his suspensor harness...).

The miniseries does have its weaknesses. Once again, the actor who played Yueh fell short. I never once saw the tattoo Yueh had on his forehead that signified his imperial conditioning. How many times is this blasted tattoo mentioned in the book? William Hurt has as much intensity as a corpse. I do think that Lynch's movie made the Bene Gesserit more menacing with their bald heads and black gowns. The Bene Gesserit attire of the miniseries was laughable. In fact, hats were pretty terrible throughout the series. I also like Lynch's interpretation of guild navigators and Harkonnen "garbage bags with green eyeholes" shock troops. However, other visual elements, like the stillsuits (the primary wardrobe of the second half of the story) and vehicles, are more accurate in the Sci-Fi miniseries.

Is it perfect? No. Was it enough to cause me to buy a copy of the book to find out if they did a better/worse job? Yes. Is it more faithful to the original story? Yes.

Rating: 2 stars
Summary: oops the've DUNE it again........
Review: While this version of the book seemed more comprehensive than the 1984 David Lynch version, as in comtaining more of the "story." It completly lacks any of the book and first movies flavor. It took way too many liberties with costumes and key concepts from the book. I mean paul didn't learn what the Kwisatz Haderach was until like the 3rd hour, while he learned that in the first chapter in the book. Another thing that completly annoyed me was that they left out the mentats all together making Thufar Hawats role absoultley usless. And what about the suks. They only mentioned Suk conditioning once and didn't bother to explain what it was. As a whole the entire thing was anti-climatic and the only good character in this version was the little girl who played Alia. The other thing that bothered me was when Paul and Jessica fled into the desert and encoutered the Fremen, Stilgar said "You are fugitives from the Harkonnen and Will be from us too." I almost fell out of my chair when I heard this. It should have been: "Any Enemies of the Harkonnen are friends of ours" (This is from memory so it could be alittle different) As a whole the fremen were supposed to be viscious and pragmatic, yet this version only portraid them as whiny peasants. Sorry for such a harsh review but the Lynch film was better, and rember Dune fans will always be vigilant of false product.

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: Good Adaptation
Review: I agree with Paul below, this was a good adaptation of the book. The main story line was preserved with enough extra information that made the tale fascinating without overwhelming viewers with the tonnage that Dune can throw at you. I thought the costume work was BETTER than the 1984 version as well as the props both equipment and scenery. To quote (as one reviewer did) the Butlerian Jihad as a reason to frown upon the technology presented is a little bit wacko if you ask me. I am definately adding this DVD to my collection. "Long live the fighters!"

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: Not just a good interpretation of a book, but a good movie.
Review: Before watching any of the two versions of Dune I read the book. It was an extremely interesting piece of literature. Then I rented 1984 version of Dune, and hated it. I will not go into the description of that abominable "movie" but will say that Dune 2000 series is not even comparable to the old version. First of all the characters are what they were in the book, baron, who was depicted as a mindless beast in 1984 version is a very cunning and intelligent persona in here. A fact which was a pleasant surprise to me. Paul, Jessica, Leto, and others were also almost perfectly fitting the descriptions from the book. All the important events that were skipped in the old version were included. Although some dialogues and situations were added. The decorations and the setting, which in my opinion are very important to present the appropriate mood were superb. Light filled rooms, decorated walls, giant halls, spaceship interiors. I was amazed to see everything just like I imagined when I was reading the book. Of course, it is not Star Wars. The computer graphics don't look very convincing sometimes, but worms, cities, and the desert looked very beautiful. Even if someone watched this movie without reading the book, I am sure it would be lots of fun. I recommend this to everyone. Especially if you're a sci-fi fan like me, you must watch it.

Rating: 2 stars
Summary: Eghh, David Lynch's version IS better...
Review: Well, I was able to rent this VHS version from Blockbuster Video before purchasing the DVD version that comes out in March 2001 and I'm glad I did. I don't know if I will purchase the DVD version as the movie was not as good as I was expecting. The movie trailer for it looked great, complete with eye-catching special effects and tantalizing snippets of dialogue. After the 1st hour of viewing the actual movie I thought I was watching a bad TV version of Babylon 5. I'll go through my likes and dislikes to better illustrate that I'm not giving a biased opinion. Likes: I liked that Harrison stayed true to about 3/4 faithful to the book, which is 2x more faithful than David Lynch's 'theatrical' version did. It gets better as the movie progresses, and I liked some of the story angles Harrison took. Dislikes: First, the costume designer should not be allowed on another movie set it was sooo bad! Dune is a science fiction novel based on worlds' that have no linking to our own (which assumes their styles re not derivative of our own)...not blatant Japanese kimonos and derivative styles, and as one fellow Amazon reviewer put it "a tortilla chip strapped to the back of Fayde, and the dumb looking helmets for the Mentats". The costuming and even some of the set designs were horrible, and it really shows just how much David Lynch's version's costuming & his stunning visuals were far better. The acting in the new version was very wooden. I liked the man who portrayed Gurney (although no substitute to Patrick Stewart!) and a couple of others but that's about it. I hated that Harrison characterized Paul as a snotty-nose brat, in the book he had the skill adaptation of a Mentat & Bene Geserit teachings...he would not have shown the emotions he put forth with Paul. The story line was drawn out a bit too much, and could have easily been encapsulated in 4 hours instead of 6. One other note, the VHS version is not the complete movie (about 30 minutes have been edited) - the DVD version will be the complete version (and cheaper too), but again, I just don't know if I want it. The only thing it made me realize is how GOOD Lynch's theatrical version (& even better, the 3 hour Alan Smithee TV adaptation of Lynch's if you can find it) really is!

Rating: 1 stars
Summary: Far less interesting than the original
Review: My hopes were extremely high for this adaptation, as I am a fan of the books and of the 1984 film version, and I was very, very disappointed. The acting is terrible... Duke Leto has no personality, Paul is a whiny baby during the first couple of hours, and the supporting cast has nobody even remotely interesting. They managed to use nearly the same dialogue as the 1984 version, and add in long periods of looking at the desert, apparently to kill time.

The producers of this fiasco would have been better served to have tried to do a sequel to the 1984 version, than rather to copy it using worse actors and worse effects. The Dune series of books deserves far better treatment than this. My advice is to get the 1984 version and read the entire series in paperback!

Rating: 1 stars
Summary: Bene Gesserit DO NOT throw up!!!
Review: Let me begin by saying, I've read all the books, including the hideous Chapterhouse and moderately entertaining new prequels about House Atreides and House Harkonnen. I've seen the original movie in all its different avatars. Ergo, I had to watch this horrid adaptation from beginning to end. It's like watching a car wreck. I can't decide if the casting was atrocious or if the actors should have their vocal chords removed before they mutilate something else. Then again, it may have been the writers and producers.

I think the title of this rant says it all. Not only did Jessica succumb to morning sickness, but Paul was positively petulant. Baron Harkonnen was not fat or gross. The stilsuits, when even in evidence, were poorly constructed. Where were the catch tubes?

Okay, so you think I'm nitpicking about a director's "poetic license". These people changed integral parts of the story for NO GOOD REASON!!! What needed to change about the opening "Arrakis...Dune...Desert Planet"? They made Emperor Shaddam IV a pathetic puppet of Count Fenrig. Worst of all, Feyd was sleeping with Irulan, for Bog's sake!

The beauty of Dune, the book, and even Dune the doomed Kyle McLaughlan version, was the plans within the plans and the extra-ordinariness of people 10,000 years from now. That earlier big-screen version was full of pagentry and pomp and danger and meticulous attention to areas of the book which a fan could not help to note. For example, the first movie showed the scars from nose plugs in the men's beards. In this version, some of the Fremen were actually clean shaven. And for the love of little green apples, one does NOT picnic in the open desert!!!

I would give negative stars if Amazon would let me. It is a shame, because a miniseries is the only way to tell this story even remotely adequately. I hope these idiots haven't ruined prospects for the next daring adventurers to take this on. Someday someone will get it right <sigh>.

Rating: 1 stars
Summary: Short and sweet...
Review: Im going to be short and sweet with my review. Im really glad that i rented this film instead of bought it. This has to be the WORST version of Dune that i have ever seen and i would rate it as one of my worst 5 movies of all time. Yes, there were differences between this version and the one from '84. This version is truer to the book in some respects, but i swear that noone proofread the script before they started filming. Lots of scenes didnt even make sense because they would leave very important details out. There were no real actors, the backdrops were a joke, and they didnt pay nearly the attention to water that either the book or the original movie did. Im a big time Dune fan. I was hoping that this version would cover parts of the book that the original did not. But, i didnt even bother watching the last hour of the movie. Sorry, but the film sucked.


<< 1 .. 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 .. 47 >>

© 2004, ReviewFocus or its affiliates