Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Gobalopper

Miniseries Review

Recommended Posts

Guest Dune Fan

Overall I thought that the miniseries was fairly good. One problem of concern is that the actors did'nt display any emotion at all. Which gave the characters no depth, and I think one of the most important parts of Frank Herbert's books are the characters. Another problem is making the princess Irulan, pretty much a main character when she is not. I was quite dissaponited with the miniseries not following the book as well as I thought it would, but they did a fine job with the budget they had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Grandma Elizabeth

This miniseries was just about as poor as the dreadful Dune prequels to DUNE written by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson...maybe even worse.

The acting, script, costumes, scenery, and special effects were pitiable. No amount of editing would have been able to make a worthwhile movie from John Harrison's abomination. You can't polish a turd.

Granny Elizabeth (age 63)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ron Bikacsan

How can ANY media capture the essence and scope of Dune in just a few hours? The original movie was flamed by its detractors and so will this one be. Frank Herbert left any hopeful screenwriter too big a job to attempt. This series had its pros & cons. Some cons: wooden acting - it seemed as if their Haldol level was too high at times. The final scenes showing the city "burning" were pathetic - looked like they came from a cable access wannabe. The scenes supposed to show the transformation of the Water-of-Life deleted tons of perspective on the legacy Jessica and Paul were inheriting. Some pros: details like when Jessica and Paul were escaping the attack of the Harkonnens and were walking through the desert. The necessary uneven pace to avoid attracting worms was done perfectly. The additional focus on Jessica's ploy to have Paul fit the Fremen legend so they could survive was well-woven into the scenes. Personally, I liked the additional attention given Princess Irulan; it added depth to the plot against the Atreides. There will always be grinches about video versions of Dune, but I say to them, "If you're so good, YOU make a better film!" That includes you too, Granny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jordan

After reading the reviews which were posted about this miniseries, I must say I was quite shocked. I am a long-time reader of fantasy novels, but never really got into the sci-fi stuff, so this was my first glimpse at the Dune world. While I understand that many of you who have a deep knowledge of the novel hate to see this great creation "destroyed" as you put it (as I would be with many of the books which I have read), for a first-timer, this was an excellent experience. One review claimed that there was no emotion displayed by the characters, but I thought that the lack of excessive emotion fit the story perfectly. Maybe this feeling of mine will be reversed once I read the book (which I definitely intend to do). I just hope that all of you realize that, even if this miniseries poorly depicts the story of Dune, the story is still great enough to fascinate people and draw them in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Alan J. Rubin

I have read the first five books and I am trying to read the last, but it does get difficult since the later books are so far removed from the first and second books. I have to admit, that there was a lack of emotion in several of the characters, especially the one who played the Emporer's truthsayer. There was one scene where the acting was so poor it was laughable. I saw the original 4 hour version of Dune and I was so facinated by the story, then that was when I started reading the books. This movie did vary a great deal from the original movie and I am sure which movie realisticly portayed the book, but I think the first one did a better job. This movie was OK but it was not as memorable as the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thorsonal

Overall I think the mini-series was acceptable. I was hoping, really truly hoping, they would actually follow the dialog in the book. But I was disappointed. The show did however capture the flavor of the characters, and the flavor of the Dune universe.

The one issue that I was very surprised about was the initial training of young Paul. The book is about (at least on one level) the growth and maturation of the young heir-designate, to the full-throated ruler of the universe. The way Herbert led the reader through this development was via a series of lessons Paul had to learn, or unlearn to reach maturity. Gurney forcing Paul to fight even while not in the "mood", Jessica's harsh criticism after Paul's first kill to avoid him reveling in the rush of taking a life, the ever growing uncertainty about exactly what his new found power could do, and how to best use it. All of these were missing from the film, and I think the growth and development of the character suffered accordingly.

I would recommend this film, but not without reservations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Barbarossa

I LIKED IT!!! What did everyone expect? It was made for cable TV for gods sake!! They didn't have Lucas or Spielberg type mega-bucks to work with. Given a tremendous literary work of intricate detail; I think Harrison did a fabulous job.

I was most impressed with Chani, Barbora Kodetova, she was just as I pictured Chani and I felt she had a raw, earthy sexuality. I would be interested in starting a Barbora Kodetova Fan Club.

The hats were hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest William

Pitiful lack of emotion in any of the characters. Paul is quite arrogant throughtout the miniseries. You have perceptions about the characters you come across in the book, only to have them entirely dismissed in the miniseries. The Fremen come off as a side show of poorly motivated desert rats and not the hardened warrior population of what was supposed to be a harsh desert environment. You often have scenes where the Fremen and Paul are "camping out" in the desert only in their pajamas. I thought Frank Herbert made it very apparent anyone in the open desert without a stilsuit was very dead. Its something you would not catch the Fremen doing. The mysticism of the Dune universe lacks any meaning in the miniseries and the whole things hurries to the next scene. The first 5 minutes left no doubt that the miniseries was only going to be a visual feast for the eyes--an obvious attempt to make up for the lack of depth to anyone one facet of the Dune universe. The original movie does a better attempt at capturing the plot-line and tone in a couple hours than the miniseries. I understand its difficult to script a book of such massive complexity as Dune into film or TV, but the miniseries was not even an inkling of what the Dune universe imprints on the reader. It seems the forces behind the creation of this miniseries had no or little insight into what Dune really was, or they simply sold out to a commercial version of the book. The whole thing was shallow ... very shallow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Max

It is very good for TV. Given the SciFi Channels usual budget this was a good mini series. Alec Newman wasn't as arrogant as Paul as Kyle "Whatever His Last Name Is from the horrible David Lynch adaptation. I am glad that John Harrison didn't spit in the face of Dune fans by creating something as silly as "wierding modules". Granted Mr Harrison did take liscense with Princess Irulan's character but he didn't ad that much, he merely moved dialogue from one character to another. I did not appreciate Thufir being made into a "throw away" character, or even the complete silence when discussing Mentats. Mr Harrison gave you NO IDEA what a Suk Doctor was. No IDEA what a Mentat was. NO IDEA who (Count) Fenrig actually was. (Count and Lady Fenrig have gotten shafted by both adaptations), but this is all academic. I enjoyed it no matter how many faults I find. I discovered it more plus's that cannot be ignored. Plus # 1 is that it is NOT David Lynchs adaptation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest riker

i think that they did a great job with the budget that they had to work with. i hope that people that got to see the world of "DUNE" for the first time, got hooked on it and will read the books that frank herbert left for all to enjoy. the books would be a challenge for any director to bring justice to on the screen on tv, but i think that the series did get some of my friends thinking about the books and a couple are waiting for more of the series, when i told them that there are more books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Agathon

Well, I thought it was much better than the Lynch film. Some of the effects were a bit tinny - but they didn't have the case and in any case they were acceptable. I have a couple of questions for some of those who wrote negative reviews. (1) How on earth were the producers expected to make money if they made a film which contained every little thing in the novel. Answer: of course they couldn't - the miniseries had to compromise between being faithful to the novel and being accessible enough so that ordinary non-Duneaholic folks could watch it. We must accept that the avid reading of Dune novels is, and will probably always be, a minority pursuit. If the miniseries had explained absolutely everything it would have been a crashing bore for ordinary folks. In any case those of us who have read the Dune books already know the background - so why do we care? Those who haven't read the Dune books won't know, but they might enjoy it and, as someone else said, they may read the books and have subsequent viewings of the miniseries enriched. (2) Many people here and on other forums are complaining that the characters were wooden. Hey, check out the chess pieces in Herbert's novel. I can't think of a science fiction writer whose characters approach 3 dimensionality - go and read War and Peace or Ulysses if that's your thing. But this doesn't matter so much anyway - like most SF novels Dune is a novel of ideas and these are what is important. So I think it's fair to say that some people were overcome by unrealistic expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Reggie Ray

The mini series followed the book much more closely and I was much enjoyable after reading the book first. I say that because I watched the first Dune movie (old one) before reading the book. I watched it again after reading the book and it seemed that they skipped or changed most of the details. This miniseries was very very close to the book, many scenes I played out exactly how I would have expected them, and I could expect to see what seen would follow the next from reading the book. Parot Kynes, the planetologist, character was very good. The Baron's character was also well done. I also think that when Jessica took the water of life that the portayal of the time space thing was pretty good. The orgy scene after was pretty stupid, they probably could have cut that part out, because it didn't add anything to the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest James Gunter

My own thoughts on the new series:

It's hard not to compare this new series w/ the Lynch fiasco. Can, or should someone look at Harrison's version w/o referring or thinking of the former?

No.

Sci-fi films really just aren't remade these days. Usually the budget could never justify it. Sure they can remake Psycho and other Hitchcock movies (or other classic movies), but they normally wouldn't do the honor in this genre, unless the first time around they screwed up. And Dune happens to be the greatest book written in the genre, or even any genre. So yes, the comparison must be made and the second one damn well be better than the first.

Having seen only part I, it's almost unfair to Harrison without an assessment of the work as a whole.But I think we can get a pretty good idea.

A few points...

Setting

I do like the colors used on the sets to depict the moods and to separate the different houses. Brown, earth colors for the Atreides, red for the Harkonnens, and blue for the emperor. However, the sets seem kind of made in a vacuum. Even w/ the color changes the mood seems dark and well... drab. Sets seem fake, and rather cheesy in places; at least Lynch used real sand so you at least felt that you were on a desert planet instead of a stage. The cgi shot of Arrakeen from the air was impressive.

Acting/Characters

The acting seemed good enough to me. Alec Newman so far seems apt to handle the role, and he does look young enough to play a teenage Paul. Kyle Mcwhat's his name seemed to be somewhat of a dork.

The Baron was much more enjoyable to watch this time around. Lynch's version was just plain sick. I liked the Lynch Helen Mohiam much better. She seemed more powerful and mystic to me, and the fact that she was older than Harrison's version seemed more appropriate.

The test w/ the box seemed to be a direct rehash from the Lynch movie. The Gurney character was acceptable (as good as or better than Captain Picard), as was Duncan, who here doesn't have much of a role anyway - Dune Messiah is the book for Duncan. The Jessica character is acceptable and Saskia Reeves is a talented actor.(The first one looked a bit better though.) Bill Hurt's Leto is fine; he doesn't have much of a role before he kicks the bucket, so he doesn't get to shine.

The Worm, although CGI, was pretty kick ass. I wish they had more of it in this first part.

Guild Navigator- hands down the award goes to Harrison; much more impressive than that fat turd in a fish bowl in Lynch's version.

Orinthopters

I wasn't impressed too much w/ the new Harrison version. It was kind of neat, though, as they did show some detail of it's workings in this part. I think the Dune 2000 cut-scene version seemed to be the most like the book. Bastards...

Overall, the mini series is worth watching. I'm not sure until time can evaluate more closely if it actually cuts the muster and was worth $20 million. Harrison did some editing that may be looked upon as artistic to some and to others as ignorant. But a lot of that might of had to do w/ time constraints. Some of the dialog was noticably changed from the book and the scene of Paul and his mother in the 'thopter w/ the Hark. guards was completely omitted, but that may appear in the second part.

That's my preliminary view. No matter the bad parts, a work of this caliber deserves a look no matter what you think of the final overall work. Lynch at least gave us something to look at, whereas before 1984 we had nothing but our imaginations, which in the long run is the ultimate movie version. I'm pretty sure each of us has a take on how the cinematic version should appear, but since most of us don't have the cash for such a project, we leave it to the boys who do. And we get to sit back and criticize.

Having now committed myself to this series for better or worse, I have continuing thoughts on this new series.

I set out with high expectations of this new series since hearing about it last year. That's a long time to get worked up about a subject you hold in high regard. What I don't want to be is negative on this Dune version because no matter what my expectations were/are, there is no way that it could possibly live up to my standards, or anybody's for that matter.

And now for some rambling thoughts:

As I mentioned in my review of the first part, it's the cheesy sets that are really a standout. If this one thing were changed and they went cgi, I think it would have been a much better product.

Part II includes nothing less than an orgy scene, a mickey mouse rat, a puppet show, and more flesh shown in the love scenes than shown in the Lynch film. Now this being the American version and because of our Puritan bullshit heritage, we were shown the G rated version of the series, w/ the chaps in Europe getting to see Chani in all her glory (or more of her glory, anyway.) Let me say this: The new Chani is well endowed, so to speak, although the Lynch Chani was much prettier.

I believe the actors were better cast in the Lynch film (w/ the exception of the Baron H.) Now this new Stilgar seems wrong to me. The actor is short and plump. This is not Stilgar.

The mouse that Paul comes across in the desert was well placed and served its purpose later when the Fremen asked what he wants to be named, he chooses the rat which happens to be...Maud'Dib. The problem was the damn rat had big ears and looked like a stupid stuffed animal. A little more respect in the design would have been appreciated.

Exactly what was the point of the puppet scene? It serves no plot point and seemed to be thrown in for artistic background purposes only. (Granted, it only lasted a few seconds, but when you're pressed for time on this film, this could have been omitted in favor of more accurate dialogue).

The scene were Paul fights Jamis to the death was well done as well as the ritual of Jamis' water removal. Liet Kynes trek in the desert w/o stillsuit was done well,too, ending with his death on a spice blow, as in the book. The only thing they left out was Kynes' conversation w/ his father in these last delusional moments.

And a couple of part I leftover views:

The Sardaukar were not as menacing as they should have been. They entered the series in these Shakespeare tights and goofy hats. I don't think that we were supposed to laugh in this instance. The Harkonnens, however were acceptable - they looked adequately evil in those costumes and Harrison does a good job portraying them as sadistic.

The gom jabbar in this series was more acurately depicted. It is very small and the Dune book says it was no more than 5cm long. Lynch had the flying dildo with a needle in his version. A+ for Harrison here.

I read the Secrets of Frank Herbert's Dune before this series began and they were gushing all over this guy's sets and lighting, and I think that those are the weakest parts of this production.

Again, I am overall pleased w/ the production - I'm just glad there is something at all. The question you have to ask yourself is this: Who would you get to bring Dune to the screen? Remember, Frank Herbert himself thought the Lynch film was good. Most of us thought it was bad. Who then? I doubt even Spielberg or Lucas could do better. We know that Lucas would have some stupid pitiful creature in his version to appeal to kids, and Spielberg would have his own agendas, too.

Well that's my opinion of Part II. When this thing wraps up tonight, I'll be back w/ my final opinion. Thanks for listening.

Well, part three wrapped up Tuesday night, and now we have the complete Harrison vision.

Overall I believe this series can stand on its own and may in time be appreciated for what it is. Harrison had a lot to live up to and I believe deep down we all knew no matter what was put up on the screen we would find a flaw, somewhere, within it. I'm a little appalled at what $20 million bought. I figured that we should have gotten more for our buck. I think if we didn't have the Lynch version to compare to, we would appreciate this version more.

Harrison had an unbelievable task before him. This body of work is very revered by a great many people, it equates itself as adopting the Bible to the screen. Harrison should be applauded for the attempt and whoever else was responsible for bringing Dune to the screen again. And now we will be able to see the rest of the trilogy brought to the screen, and that's a first. I'm sad to hear that they are combining Messiah and Children into one 6 hr series, but again, it's better than nothing.

The biggest problem w/ this production was the sets. Bottom line was that they just looked cheap and it felt fake. As hard as it was for Lynch to film in an actual desert, it came off w/ more of a Dune feel.

As I've said before, the Harrison version has some good points in the translation. The gom jabbar was true to the book. The weirding way was more realistic than was previously brought to the screen. The worm was graphically better, and the guild navigator is more realistic, actually looking more like the creature was human at one time and had gradually changed into the spice created creature that it had become. I liked the Baron Hark. much better in this version. It didn't make me sick like Lynch's version did. The caliber of acting was better in Lynch's version, but some of the characters in Harrison's were more fleshed out, the princess Irulan and Stilgar come to mind (even though the stature of this new actor was miscast). The top billed William Hurt as Leto, was a bit of a disappointment. Hurt is an excellent actor - catch him in Gorky Park for instance and you know that this guy can act. He played a part that exited too early to really get to know the character. And what he did play came off as wooden. Oh, well.

Some of the costuming was suspect in this production. The sardaukar looked like they just came off a production of As You Like It and then showed up in Dune w/o costume change - "Here we are, the universe's badasses!" Yeah, right. The witches costuming was kinda silly here, too, with these hats that had those wings coming out the back of them. What were they thinking?

The series can be compared to a BBC production. In fact, years ago I had hope the Brits would come up w/ something like a masterpiece theater version of Dune, where the focus would be more on the story than worrying about special effects.

I don't care what else is said about this new production, I'm happy to have been able to see it. I look forward to the next installments, even though I know not to expect too much with the sets.

Hope you canucks can see the series soon. I don't think you should be too disappointed. Now that you've had several people's views of the production, you get to decide and critique it for yourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ben Furness

Well like I said in my last e-mail I was sat in front of the t.v. with vcr remote in hand waiting for the epic Dune mini-series to begin, hoping for the book to be finally be done justice. Just the thought of the book going from a condensed movie that was not the easiest to follow to a full 6 hour indepth story telling extravaganza that I did'nt have to wait up to 2 years for each installment filled me with so much excitement that I was nervous about being disappointed, From now on I'm not going to expect anything from any movie or mini-series.

Don't get me wrong I did like the first installment but there were just too many mistakes and bad judgements made by the makers.

Hear are my personal thoughts about what was wrong in Dune:

Who had the bright idea of making the Harkonnen so camp?

Was the costume designer also used for the Flash Gordon movie?

The costume Dept. has also destroyed the image of the bene geserit, thanks alot!!

I was hoping that the ornithopters would look like they have always been described, again no joy.

Who forgot the first thing you would notice about a mentat??? (red lip stains)

Does an invasion of an entire city really take only 45 seconds??

Who ever did the casting should have a word with Westwood Studios because at least Westwood found actors who looked the part and acted the part as they should have.

Another thing, if the makers of this mini-series decide to do any of the sequel books ( which they should, but listen to web sites like this!!), then they should hire the same people who did the cutscenes for dune 2000 as they worked and gave they right atmosphere which is something the series lacks so far.

Back to the casting here is a quick list of characters and what I thought:-

Duke Leto--- Looked the part but did'nt have the same passion as in the origional movie, in the books he was fiercley loyal to all of his men. In this it was more like he was thinking I can't be arsed.

Baron Harkonnen--- Nice dress, I know he likes young men but this is taking the piss. Where is the dark evil, plotting, diseased lump of fat that we love to despise? No offence Ian but it looks more like a camp play than an Evil house intent on trying to control the empire.

Paul Atreides--- Looked the part, young, unsure about the move to Dune or his dreams/visions and generally aware that it's all a trap. But the way this all is potrayed is all a little plastic and unsure which kind of undermines the character a little.

Thufir Hawat--- If the origional actor watched this then he has just seen the image of the mentat being an efficient, fast, tactical human computer destroyed. This guy was basically left in the back ground looking like he was way out of his depth. Sad really.

Pieter de Vries--- See Thufir Hawat.

Doctor Yueh--- This guys expression did'nt change throughout the whole programme, or did I miss something? Once again the origional actor (Dean Stockwell) has got to be very unimpressed. No passion, nothing to make you feel for the character and not much interaction with other cast members.

Lady Jessica--- I don't think she was in a scene long enough for me to say too much about her. I will save comment untill the rest of the series has been aired.

Shaddam IV--- I have to say the same as for the lady Jessica, although it did take a second or two to find him on the screen thanks to the costume and back ground blending together well.

Reverend mother Mohaim--- What the hell were the casting dept thinking? Bad acting, bad acent, bad outfit, Just plain bad.

Again they have managed to destroy the image of how she was supposed to look (black abba robe anyone?)

Just a quick note about part two. Fantastic, they actually managed to pull the whole Fremen thing off very well, with the slight exeption of the fremen in a village! My girlfriend was able to understand what was happening and she has never read any Dune book. The pauses in the lines are still their but we can't win them all. Hope part three is even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are never going to see Dune on film as it was in the novel, becuase Dune is a subjective thing. Everyone see's it differently. The only way to enjoy this miniseries for us who love Dune is to go into it not thinking about Dune. Look at it as if it was an original production, and not based on Dune. Do that and you will be pleasently surprised. I enjoyed the miniseries, although it wasn't exactly as I had expected. The costumes were bad, and the directing not on the level I had expected (I thought this would be shown more like a movie, instead it came across like a play) and the acting in some parts was lacking. For there extremly limited budget, the sets were supurb as were the graphics. What really annoyed me about the miniseries was the pause between lines, once again it gave me the impression I was watching a play and not a miniseries. Alec Newman did an all right job portraying Paul, except in the scene when he puts on the ducal ring and when he creates the fedakyn. He didn't seem like a strong messiah figure at all, he seemed weak, like he was begging the fremen to do what he asked. As for his whinyness, I didn't really see it but if you re-read the first part of the novel you can understand why Harrison thought he was whiny. In my mind Paul of the book was arrogant, but he oculd be seen as whiny. I didn't like them not showing Yeuh until when he attacks Leto, in my opinion that was a big mistake, and I didn't like the way they jumped from scene to seen without going into any detail. They tried to hard to get every scene in the series and didn't explain or show enough of any of them. If I hadn't known already what the voice, spice, mentats were, I would have been lost. Some of my friends who know nothing about Dune had to ask me each day what was happening. The weirding way, while closer to the novels than Lynch's was still screwed up. Why can no one get it in there heads that the weirding way is not some super weapon or power but a simple method of combat used by the bene gesserit! Now that we have the Bene Gesserit moving faster than light, how the hell is Harrison going to make Miles Teg seem so powerfull? Another major problem was the death of the characters. Duncan gets blown up. How are they going to make a ghola out of him? Thufir gets blown up. He should have lived to the end. Rabbans death was ok, and so was Feyd's and Jamais's. The worst part, however, was the use of projectile weapons. No one had shields, I felt like I was watching the Dune prequels on tape, not FH's original novels.

The best part had to be Alia. That little girl played the part perfectly. Can you say Children of the Damned?

Paul talking to Jessica in the vision was also a great part, in that scene Alec actually seemed powerfull. I missed the "My mother is my enemy" scenes though. They didn't really explain Paul's or reverend mothers powers too well, and I didn't think the water of life serminony was adequetly represented by the descriptions given in the book.

If you read all my problems with the miniseries, virtually everyone circles around the difference's between it and the novels. I throughly enjoyed it, so did my friends who knew nothing about it, and a couple are going to read the books now. So if you look at it on its own, it will be good, as a representation of the novel, its better but becuase of what Dune is it will never be perfect. Oh well, maybe in 15 years we will have an even better veresion. For now I'm pleased with this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Laura-Chani~Alia

First of all, I would just like to state that I am a 16 female who has always like the first Dune movie and have just recently started reading the book so if sounds a little juvenil or confusing, you'll know why.

The thing that I liked the most about the mini-series was seeing all of the parts oe the book that were left out in the first movie come to life. But I felt that most scens were cut short so tat if you didn't know anything about Dune, you wouldn't know what the hell was going on. And the one thing in the origional I most injoyed, was the fact that they always said what characters were thinking. But by not doing this in the miniseries some parts were chaged which I didn't like. Let me just give an example, the scene with the hunter seeker: Why was there an extra maid present? My opinon is that there would be know way to know what is was unless you saw the old movie or read the book, therefor there solution was to add some in there so Paul could explain what the hunter seeker was, and what was happening.

WORMS- The first worm that was shown was great. I loved the way it looked, but after they just sucked!

SETS- I would have to agree with what most of the people have said so far, that the sets were good with what they had to work with. But the Harkonnen set just didn't give off that evil vibe. They also did a good job portraying Arrakken(spelling?)as a city or village not just the castle or srong holdor whatever it is.

The little garden set that Jessica finds in the castle, not what I pictured it to be at all when I read the book, but at least they showed there verson of it.

SPECIAL EFFECTS- For the most part, I thought that they were very good. I would have to say that the Guild ships were my favorite. And the veiws of cities and planets were pretty good also.

CHARACTERS:

Duke Leto- He was ok, but he didn't have that pasion and intensity that the Duke should have. You can tell that he has been acting for so lond, that now he is only in it for the paycheck.

Lady Jessica- She good, but I thought that the origional was so pretty, that this one didn't quite live up to my standards. Also she seemed to talk exactly like Deana Troy from Star Trek.

Paul- He seemed evil and/or arrogent at times and I don't think he played the role quite right.

Chani- perfect, I loved her. I think she did a great job and i evn liked her better than the origional, she has that exotic quality that says Fremen.

Baron Harkonnen- he was exactly how i pictured him, but he just wasn't evil enough. And what was up with making him rime all the time? that was just stupid.

Princess Irulan- Can we say slut? But my older brothers seemed to like this change that they made in her. i think they should have dyed her hair blonde though, i mean come on.

Feyd- Although Sting was great in his role this guy Matt Keeslar that played the new Feyd is so fine!!! They should have givin him a bigger role because they made seem like a nobody!

Stilgar- didn't like him at all, he was short and fat and lookes like a drinker and a smoker. This can't be Stilgar! Thats just not how he should look!

Emperor Shaddam IV- I don't know what to say about him so i'll just go on.

Gurney Halleck- I actually liked him, I thought that he did well portraying Gurney, but for some reason I couldn't stand his accent!

Rabban- i thought he was great, but his death scene sucked balls, and why did that little kid take his head? that was just a waste of time could have been used somewhere else.

Guild Agent(s)- Stupid, Stupid, Stupid!

Dr. Yueh- Did I miss something? Wasn't he supposed to have a tatoo on his forhead, or did i just make that up? And why did they wait untill he betrayed the Atreides to put him in the movie?

Duncan Idaho- I thought that he was ugly but he did a good job. and his death scene was much closer to the one i read in the book, but wasn't he stabbed by Saddukar? not blown up?

Dr. "Liet" Kynes- he looked evil but in a good way. I really liked him, a lot!

Alia- she was good, but she looked to old for the part in my mind. I don't think anyone could be better than that little girl, what was hr name? Alicia Roanne Witt, that girl was good!!

Reverend Mother Mohiam- I just want to say that they did a shity job portraying the Bene Geserit! And there outfits were horrible! who ever did that should be takin out side and shot!

Thufir Hawat-he was a pussy

Although I have so much more to say about the miniseries i am going to stop, because i am so sick of typing! I don't see how you people do this! Thanks for taking the time to read what I had to say though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Generic idiot

Truthfully, this thing was bound to fail. SCI-FI could never muster up the talent resources as well as cash to front a miniseries that could emulate Frank Herbert's vision. Even with the extra hours than the David Lynch version, there's no possible way you could fully explore the vast universe that encumbers Dune. The best a director could do is skim aling the surface. I don't mean to sound perssimistic, but I've been a film student for 2 years so I can assure you, Lynch couldn't do it, SCI-FI couldn't do it, neither could Fellini, Cameron, Burton, Spielberg, or even Fritz Lang pull it off. The fact is, it doesn't translate to screen unless you do it word for word. The art of adaptation for movie makers can't justify the complex weavings of Herbert's masterful little yarn about Arrakis. The idea of film makers to transfer to screen in to give the audience the GENERAL feel of the novel and only the most crucial parts. Dune simply has too many. All you can hope to do is cover the general story that Paul avenges his father's death and brings a golden age to Arrakis. The only possible way to show the immense story to an audience is if it lasted around 20-30 hours.

As for the characters, William Hurt's a good actor, but not fit for Duke Leto at all, he best plays someone who's either vulnerable or troubled, not a leader of an empire. His best movie was "Kiss of the Spider woman" if you'd like his best portrayal of what he's more akin to depicting. (Dark City too, but it was just a supporting role.) Don't get me started on Paul. Kyle MacLauglin was far superior to the whiny regent in Dune. The only noble I can see reflected from his tone of Paul would be Prince Charles.

But I digress, for the stringent budget they did what they could. The subltle ambiance wafting throughout the mini-series was "We're mocking art, but we've got a deadline, so lets make the best mediocre melodrama we can that're make David Lynch look good." Long winded atmosphere emitted, yet all to true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Yim

Okay I am pretty new to Dune. I've never read the book(s) or saw the original movie but I have to say I really loved the miniseries. Seeing it as any other movie with no other reference about is probably the reason why I don't sound as pissed as some of you are about the miniseries. I recorded all three parts and watched it a couple of times and I love it. Someone had wrote in that they didn't like the staging of it, that it looked too much like a play - I loved it! I especially loved the transitions of the miniseries and that goes with why I liked that play set-up staging of it because first of all, you don't see too much of that kind of direction in much of anything these days and second this kind of staging had a very eerie feel to it that I felt set the mood. I liked the costumes, they weren't too lavish, considering what they were working with but I felt they worked nicely. The thing that really just swept me away into the film was the cimetography (spelling?). The way Aarkis was shot and how the desert was shot was stunning. I think the only part they really fumbled at was when Paul and Jessica were running from the guild ship and we saw a front view of them, that very shot cracked me up because it looked so fake and it just turned me off. I'm not sure of his name, Alec Newman? The guy who protrayed Paul Atredies, I thought he was amazing as the character and an actor, he had great intensity and he was hot! I also liked how Leto and Jessica were protrayed and yeah, okay, they may not have outshined the original actors or lived up to any expectations but if you'd just forget about the orginal film and the books for just one minute and just take a look at them without a judgenmental mind wouldn't you have just given them a thumbs up for their acting? They were amazing, all of them. I liked Chani too. Overall they told the story fairly well but I had to watch it a second time to catch the things that I have missed, like before I did not know that fayde and the red-head bald guy were brothers. I think definately they should have elaborated some parts to show who exactly the characters were, because there were a lot of them! Servants, Chani, the revern mother, Dr. Liett and etc. After watching the miniseries I think I'm going to go and rent the original movie, and if I get a chance I'm going to try and pick up the book and if it's like ten times better than the miniseries, I would then understand what you people were raging about. But having not read the book or saw the original, I thought the miniseries was just epic and gorgeous, smart and just visually arresting. If anything I hope the next miniseries they're planning on shooting is just as good. Thank you for listening to a new-comer like me and happy new year to everyone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jo Mama

I've been hearing a lot of people talking about how much better the miniseries is than the movie, but then turn aorund and criticize the miniseries for not being true enough to the book. I fundamentally disagree with that position.

David Lynch directed a FILM. John Harrison directed a MINISERIES. There is a very big difference.

I just can't understand how anyone could possibly think that the miniseries is better than the film. The miniseries SUCKED! The acting in the miniseries was weak(with the exception of Chani) all around- especially in comparison with the film. I mean, come ON! William Hurt as duke Leto?! Gimme a break! And that guy with the accent playing Stilgar, Puh-Leeez!

And what about the effects and the sets? That shit was ridiculous! Think of the cheezy spandex stilsuits, the horrendous blue-screeing (e.g. Paula and Jessica running form the ornithopter- it was like somehting out of a low-budget local TV commercial). And the worms? That whole ridiculous scene where Paul is meditating/having visions and the three slinkys with penis heads on them are wobbling around, come on, I've seen high-school projects with better effects than that. But the real capper was all the scenes where you could see the backgrounds painted on to the walls and ceiling with high-gloss paint. That was just over the line, straight out of some casino on the outskirts of Reno, NV. Just pathetic.

Now lets look at Lynch's film. It has its bad storytelling moments, and some of them are quite egregious (e.g. the weirding modules and the whole rain thing). It, too, suffered from some poor acting and scripts (e.g. the emperor in his dialogue with the guild navigator- he is TERRIBLE! and the part where Paul and Jessia escape the worm early on Jessica is little over the top with the whole crying thing.)

But, Lynch has something very important that Harrison doesn't- he was first! I don't konw if it occurred to anyone, but much of what was in the miniseries WOULDN'T EVEN BE THERE without the movie having come first. Lynch's film was HUGE in defining what a Dune movie should look and feel like. I mean, the Baron Harkonnen was almost a direct copy of lynchs version- outfit and all. Lynch created a much deeper work and left an indellible impression on moviemaking as a whole with his version of Dune. John Harrison merely presented a bad reader's digest version of the plot of the novel, without concern for tone, feel, or depth. It looked like an episode of Start Trek The Next Generation For crying out loud! I don't think Harrison should be taken out and shot or anything for what he did with his 6 hours, but I don't much think he deserves to get paid for it either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Lincoln Foran

Ok, so the miniseries had a few flaws. The backgrounds were often poor, and the deserts weren't that great. HOWEVER: The acting was relatively good. Saskia Reeves' (Jessica)performance was great, and the "early" Paul was good. The special effects were not that bad. One thing to remember is that the entire budget was 20 million dollars, a paltry sum compared to those spent on horrible summer "blockbusters", ie "The Phantom Menace." Also, those who complain about the performance of William Hurst (Duke Leto) must remember that he was only in the first 120 (give or take a few) pages of the book. He is killed 3/4 of the way through the first episode. His performance was good. Speaking as an actor myself, it is hard to portray a part where you die in 1 hour 30 mins. Next, the Baron Harkonnen was incredibly repulsive, and his nephew Feyd was not to bad himself. 100x better than the movie. The Emperor and his daughter, Irulan, were also well portrayed in the series, with Irulan slowly evolving into a major character. My only regret is that Count Fenring was not developed enough. Finally, the Costumes were not that bad. I think that with the exceptions of the Emperor's metallic body suit, the Baron's constantlack of clothing and the Bene Gesserit robes, the costumes looked very good. Much better than those P.O.C. "Phantom Menace" costumes.

The only major thing I hold against the Dune miniseries is the use of guns and explosives by the Sardaukar, Atreides, and Harkonnen, but unless you are a Dune zealot you will not care.

Overall, I'd give Dune ****, so you should definetly see it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sam

You know, I wouldn't put too much stock in these supposed "reviews." Hell, 90% of them couldn't spell, and the other 10% have no understanding of grammar! I guess there IS a reason movie critics go to school after all -- you have to learn how to spell and not mangle every other word. Geez, how do you expect someone to take your "reviews" with any grain of salt if you don't even take an effort to write correctly?

Now onto the mini-series. I enjoyed it for what it was. A TV show, a TV version of Lynch's movie. Granted, I've never read the book, and I suppose that's a plus from my point of view. Unlike many of these "reviewers" I didn't go into this movie with a chip on my shoulder. The "It was better as a book" is such a cliche, I'm always dumbstruck when someone uses it in reviewing a movie. It's a MOVIE. It's supposed to STAND ON ITS OWN LEGS or FALL ON ITS OWN LEGS. Comparing it to the original source book is ridiculous. Movie adaptations are interpretations of their source material, not DIRECT TRANSLATIONS. If people (re: the TV and movie viewing public) wanted a direct translation of a book, they would READ THE BOOK.

The Dune mini-series, by itself, was a good movie. I could have taken at least 2 hours, or one whole part, out of the movie, though. A lot of the scenes were unnecessary. AFter all, we KNOW the bad guys are bad, we don't have to keep seeing them hatching plot after plot or acting "bad." The scenes with the Emperor at his palace were useless to the overall story. The first scene, where the first plan was hatched, should have been enough. The rest were all just padding for a 3-day mini-series. We KNOW they're bad.

I did not particularly care for many of the scenes involving the worms. I thought they looked too fake. The scene where Paul is confronted by 3 works reminded me of a 3-headed plastic dildos flailing around. It was kind of disturbing, to say the least.

But overall, the movie was mildly entertaining. Three days worth of material? Probably not. Two days, at the most. Or, better yet, a 3-hour mini-series might have been better. Lynch managed to condense the story under 3 hours, I don't see why the creators of the mini-series needed 3 days to tell their story, for a total of 4 to 5 hours, minus commercials.

Perhaps just a little point of irritation: I don't know if the creators of the mini-series intended it to be so (I think they did myself), but the pronunciation of the major characters' names, the planet, and the bad guys were very DIFFERENT from the pronunciation in the movie. I believe Lynch's use of the pronunciation was better. They gave it more resonance and emphasis. The pronunciation in the mini-series just came out flat and without any real impact. This was a bad choice by the makers of the mini-series. A very, very bad choice.

Grade: Mildly entertaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest John Rose

The first time I saw Dune was Lynch's movie version. I thought it was okay at best, with all the overacting (Jessica crying after the worm attack and Gurney saying, "Good Lord, what a monster!"), and the shooting through of key sequences (they went throught the whole "New Reverand Mother" thing in about four minutes and three lines of dialoge). That was bad, the miniseries was worse. This monstrosity does not pay homage to the book I am reading.

The main thing I find is that the characters don't fit the descriptions Frank Herbert wrote. The movie accomplished this to an extent (except for Gurney), but the miniseries did not. They also screwed up the look of the technology (like the rotor-winged ornithopters) that the movie did a decent job of replicating.

But the biggest sin of all was the sets of Arrakis. The whole "running on a painted backround" feel of the desert scenes left me rolling with laughter. Don't forget how the backround remains sunny at night. Another problem is the worms, like how their skin looks like plastic, or that they bear a striking resemblence to a certian male body part. It is just plain wrong.

Despite being cheesy, inaccurate, and a little too long (six hours!!?), the acting was better than some miniseries out there, and the non-worm effects were presentable. Still, once I finish the other half of the book, I know I will have much to gripe about when it comes to this sub-par version of a literary classic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Knightsun

I'll go through several categories comparing the Lynch, Hartison and comments from the novel.

The Script: By far the most important part of any film. If the script isn't any good, then don't bother. Harrison's script is far superior, the main reason being he had more time on screen to do so. More time to carry out the story and action. The downside is some of the scenes cut, Duncan's death, the ornithopter escape. For the most part I really liked Harrison's script. Lynch's script was some what confusing if you had not read the novel. But it was as good as a two hour Dune could get I suppose.

Casting/Acting: The two really have to go together. The acting in Lynch's is far superior, with an international cast. Both Paul's were good, Kyle MacLachlan looks way more like Paul, and is a better actor too. And as for Gurney as everyone says, no one, absolutely no one could play Gurney the way Patrick Steward can. But Lynch's isn't perfect, I rather liked the Harrison Baron more. He was more intellegent, not a raving mad man. Feyd was more of the way I pictured him in Harrison's too. But for the most part Lynch's casting was near to perfection.

Scenery: Although in my opinion, I though neither versions showed the granduer of Dune in the way I imagined. Lynch's version IS out in the desert and has more an epic feel. The seitch life feeling was better portrayed in Harrison's, but he took a bad blow with the stage like panarama pictures.

Cinematograhy: Both versions have good taste in camera work. I have to lean more on Harrison's though, he had Sitoro. The angualr views for Harrison's, I did like the darkness of Lynch's though.

Costume/Art Direction: Both once again have good elements. Lynch's Atreides uniforms were absolutely perfect, the Harkonnen and Sardukar uniforms were pretty cheesy though. I liked them more in the harrison version. The seitches in Lynch's were more futuristic, the way I pictured it. Arakeen was closer in Harrison's though.

Action: Lynch and Harrison both tried there hands at the action. Harrison came much closer, but not the entire cake. The absence of Duncan's death, fighting off ten Sardukar was a disapointment, as was the worms not crushing anyone with tons and tons of sand like Lynch's. The lasgun/shield tactic is yet to be done. But Harrison's hand to hand fighting was for the most part, almost right on the money.

Overall: I lean towards Harrison's version, more time to tell gives me more feeling of Dune. More is covered, more is shown. Lynch's casting and costumes were far better though. I belive with the Lynch cast, Harrison's story and axtion we would nearly have the perfect Dune. Being around about 3-4 hours long. So it could be theater worthy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pidge

i recently saw the original Dune by Lynch, and i thought that the miniseries was far better. the miniseries in my mind, had better casting, and Alec Newman was a better Paul Maud'dib than Kyle McLachlen. the miniseries, followed the book better, but where was CHOAM? In the book Dune, CHOAM played a big role, but i didn't even hear it mentioned in the M.S. the movie also seemed very rushed. but the worms did look cool in the movie. when u first see the worms in the m.s., it looks really cool, a lot cooler than in the movie, but then they start to look faker and faker, like when paul is meditating in the 3rd part, and the worms are waving around, some say they looked like giant dildos. i wouldn't go THAT far, but they could've looked a bit more realistic. some people keep on gripin and gripin, but hey! it's a thing that was made for T.V. i don't think anyone is expecting this Miniseries to go up for an oscar. so for anyone who keeps on complaining, get over it, and don't watch the miniseries ever again! stick to the book or movie and don't rip on the miniseries any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...