Studio: Lions Gate Home Ent. Release Date: 07/08/2005It’s a mixed blessing, but Frank Herbert’s Dune goes a long way toward satisfying science fiction purists who scoffed at David Lynch’s previous attempt to adapt Herbert’s epic narrative. Ironically, director John Harrison’s 288-minute TV miniseries (broadcast on the Sci-Fi Channel in December 2000) offers its own share of strengths and weaknesses, which, in retrospect, emphasize the quality of Lynch’s film while treating Herbert’s novel with more comprehensive authority. Debate will continue as to which film is better; Lynch’s extensive use of internal monologue now seems like a challenge well met, and Harrison’s more conventional approach is better equipped to convey the epic scope of Herbert’s interplanetary political intrigue.
This much is certain: this Dune is a sumptuous treat for the eyes, with sets and costumes that were conceived with no apparent limits of budget or creativity. In terms of architecture alone, this is one of the most impressive films in science fiction history. And although the special effects fall short of feature-film quality, writer-director Harrison (who rose from an extensive background in TV) admirably tames the sprawling narrative that pits the opposing houses of Atreides and Harkonnen in a struggle to control the lucrative market for the spice melange. This is as accurate as any Dune adaptation is likely to get (i.e., there’s no need for another attempt), and even then, it can be tricky to keep track of who’s doing what to whom. Unfortunately, the film’s biggest flaws are the casting of a nearly comatose William Hurt as Duke Leto, and a wooden Alec Newman as the messiah-to-be, Paul Atreides. These are regrettable shortcomings, but this Dune remains altogether respectable. That Frank Herbert would be impressed is perhaps the biggest compliment one can pay. –Jeff Shannon


March 5, 2010
#1
New, yes! Better and improved, no way!
March 5, 2010
#2
Trust me on this one … having read the entire DUNE series 317 times, I justifiably consider myself an expert … dare I say, even more so than Frank Herbert himself. I can list literally dozens of scenes and characters that don’t perfectly match MY mind’s vision of the story … and I should know. Of course I’m in no position to actually contribute anything to the world of DUNE, except this review and an occasional tirade aimed at anyone who would listen to a sci-fi nerd like myself . . .
March 5, 2010
#3
yay
March 5, 2010
#4
Some may not have liked the origal Dune movie, but it was worlds better than the mini-series. I quit watching after the first episode because the script, acting, and costumes were atrocious. This is the age of CGI like the Matrix and Toy Story 2, yet the Dune mini-series didn’t even have half the quality of special effects needed to save it.
My disappointment about the original Dune movie was that not enough of the Dune world was able to fit in the it. I wanted more. The costume and set designers of the movie were able to put on screen what I could not muster from my imagination with my best attempt. I must admit I started to watch the mini-series with very high expectations, but the show was barely watchable.
March 5, 2010
#5
(Saw this on the Sci-Fi channel last nite.) Just simply awfull. Paul Maud-dib, the Messiah of the known universe is a whiny little jerk. The “special effects” are terrible. The computer generated blue eyes keep drifting off of their eyeballs, the ships look like they are low-res representations. They changed the story, god knows why.
If you pre-ordered this, cancel now before it is too late!