David Lynch's "Dune" differs from the book. That's why many people criticize it but I don't agree. The whole movie was very well done, visual effects were great for that time and the acting was brilliant. Kyle MacLachlan and Francesca Annis were stunning
David Lynch's version takes some liberties but strings the events of the novel in sequential order but that doesn't make for a good script simply rehashing what you may have read. This miniseries took many liberties but it succeeds where the original film failed. The Sci-Fi miniseries is watchable. I'm still waiting for the adaptation I feel the novel deserves. If you haven't read it do so.
Man I miss the sci fi channel circa 2000. If only they could adapt more classic SF to the small screen instead of wrestling and two morons in the dark looking for ghosts
If they could somehow merge the script of the Sci-Fi Channel version with the production design and costumes of the David Lynch version, the end result would be amazing.
Both versions have sucky moments. The movie is the worst, I think. The overacting, the crappy FX, Paul's D. Hasselhof hairdo - the list can be hours and miles.
The miniseries also has it's its own crappyness, like awful costume designs (Irulan's butterfly dress LOL) and new yet STILL crappy FX. The thing that saved it was that it's easier to see it as a recorded theatre play rather than TVshow. The performances of Alec Newman, Saskia Reeves and others held higher quality.
If only David Lynch could have made Dune more like this. I was a little bit dissapointed by his, I was hoping it would be one of those underrated classics as awesome as "Star Wars" or "The Lord of the Rings." How wrong I was, I have somewhat mixed feelings about it.
This show is so cool, my class was watching this when school was still in but we only saw the first two episodes.....maybe I'll get them from the library and watch it the rest.
actually as anyone who actually read dune would know (assuming intelligence) the lycnh versoin sucked balls because you cant fit something like dune into a 2 and a half hour movie
If they could fit LOTR into a feature length film. They can do it with anything. I haven't seen Lynch's version, and I really enjoy this version, but I think something better is yet to be made for Dune. And it will be feature length. Miniseries' never have enough budget for this kind of thing.
If you watched the extended version you'd see just how much it trumps the Sci-Fi channel's adaptation in how faithful it is to the original story and theme. Sure, the graphics are dated and they took a bit too much poetic licence with the Baron Harkonnen's design, but the key moments that pulled the story together are there. I thought it was innapropriate that they missed the "How does it feel to be a killer?" line after Paul kills Jamis in the SF channel adaptation, for one.
OMG this is so CHEAAAAAAAAAPP compared to Lynch's 1984 masterpiece. Every scene in this made for sci fi version screams B movie. Just terrible all the way through and through. Bad acting, bad casting, cheezy cgi.
Forget this pile and watch David Lynch's masterpiece DUNE.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
totally agree....the film is superb....the tv series is just crap.....the costume design was insane....the desert scenes laughable...and most of the eastern european actors could barely be understood.
Better yet, have someone who has the same level of intelligence and integrity like Peter Jackson who did LOTR to give Dune the respect it deserves as a "kick ass Sci Fi film" comparable to the likes of which of LOTR. I heard another Dune movie or whatever is in the making.
I loved this miniseries, probably because it came out right after I first read the book. I still see it in video stores every now and then, and I sigh lovingly. Maybe one of these days I'll finally rent/buy it for old time's sake.
It's an ok version of the novel as I envisioned it. Very tv. David Lynch-not Dino de Laurentis-made the original-bombed at the box office. Hollywood loved David and Kyle in :Twin Peaks: new places-I love Lynch's dune-brought that book to life-
I agree. I didn't like this version. I much prefered Dino de Laurentis version. The idea of cold space. Washed out colours of green/gray steel. The ideas of 'form follows function'. I loved it. And the 50% of the atmosphere was polished off with the amazing soundtrack by ToTo. Simply my fave movie. And I also loove the ideas of the weirding modules, with sound as ammunition. Now that's sci-fi.
What a great film, much better than the Lynch version in terms of the story. The SciFi Channel can be forgiven almost (!) any sin for going through with a miniseries, then actually doing Children of Dune. Much of how they treated Messiah/Children was what I imagined reading the books. I might just have to revisit this saga on DVD this weekend.
Also, the semi-rebellious Paul was necessary to draw the shocking distinction between what he was and would become, remember Shakespeare fabricated the same attitude in Henry V and for the same reason. As to the spiked hair, I think cracked and wind-dried is more accurate; it happens to men in hot, sunny climates, as they don't use conditioner, and the Fremen wouldn't waste water on that :-).
Paul was suppost to actually be Harkonnen right? Or was it Jessica that was Harkonnen by birth? Maybe his rebellious side was a subtle hint to his true lineage.
Well, it was Jessica who was the baron's daughter (ugh), so that would make Paul quarter Harkonnen genetically. That's an interesting point about showing more a more manifest link to his dark heritage. I liked that the director gave the Baron a habit of rubbing his temple, which Paul and later Alia also adopted.
This version had its shortcomings, but it was far more accurate in what mattered in the book, which was the exact replica of what happened to the Atreides in Greek myth, a never ending cycle of almost superhuman beings whose compassion and abilities are forever in conflict.
I do not like the 'rebellious' Paul Atreides! It totally ruins the philosophical stance of the main character. And I think the original looked more princely. And the spiked hair, much too modern!
I think that Lynch's film is a literal one-in-a-million cast. I mean, just look at who's in that film! It's astonishing. And Lynch's vision meets the challenge of adapting the book well, even with the hack-job editing of the DeLaurentis team.
I've never seen this one. It looks a lot better than the other film.
aperson22222 5 months ago
who's voice is that reading off the credits? I hear him everywhere.
Reaverhobbies 5 months ago
David Lynch's "Dune" differs from the book. That's why many people criticize it but I don't agree. The whole movie was very well done, visual effects were great for that time and the acting was brilliant. Kyle MacLachlan and Francesca Annis were stunning
Magnolia296 8 months ago
David Lynch's version takes some liberties but strings the events of the novel in sequential order but that doesn't make for a good script simply rehashing what you may have read. This miniseries took many liberties but it succeeds where the original film failed. The Sci-Fi miniseries is watchable. I'm still waiting for the adaptation I feel the novel deserves. If you haven't read it do so.
rhatcher010 1 year ago
Man I miss the sci fi channel circa 2000. If only they could adapt more classic SF to the small screen instead of wrestling and two morons in the dark looking for ghosts
mysterio5005 1 year ago
I think it's time to look forward: Dune (2012)
ius0 1 year ago
If they could somehow merge the script of the Sci-Fi Channel version with the production design and costumes of the David Lynch version, the end result would be amazing.
avi8r1 1 year ago 3
Both versions have sucky moments. The movie is the worst, I think. The overacting, the crappy FX, Paul's D. Hasselhof hairdo - the list can be hours and miles.
The miniseries also has it's its own crappyness, like awful costume designs (Irulan's butterfly dress LOL) and new yet STILL crappy FX. The thing that saved it was that it's easier to see it as a recorded theatre play rather than TVshow. The performances of Alec Newman, Saskia Reeves and others held higher quality.
thebbeenn 2 years ago
This is based more on the book the the original film.
lkjhgfdsaas 2 years ago 2
If only David Lynch could have made Dune more like this. I was a little bit dissapointed by his, I was hoping it would be one of those underrated classics as awesome as "Star Wars" or "The Lord of the Rings." How wrong I was, I have somewhat mixed feelings about it.
desotowrong 2 years ago
mixed feelings? I have two words "weirding MODULES!"
watkinsonatdal 2 years ago 3
This show is so cool, my class was watching this when school was still in but we only saw the first two episodes.....maybe I'll get them from the library and watch it the rest.
ishouldplayzelda 2 years ago
actually as anyone who actually read dune would know (assuming intelligence) the lycnh versoin sucked balls because you cant fit something like dune into a 2 and a half hour movie
Darklordryu 2 years ago 10
This version's design and script with Lynch's mega-budget would have made a kick-ass movie.
bankger2 2 years ago
If they could fit LOTR into a feature length film. They can do it with anything. I haven't seen Lynch's version, and I really enjoy this version, but I think something better is yet to be made for Dune. And it will be feature length. Miniseries' never have enough budget for this kind of thing.
MrsNezbit 2 years ago
@Darklordryu
If you watched the extended version you'd see just how much it trumps the Sci-Fi channel's adaptation in how faithful it is to the original story and theme. Sure, the graphics are dated and they took a bit too much poetic licence with the Baron Harkonnen's design, but the key moments that pulled the story together are there. I thought it was innapropriate that they missed the "How does it feel to be a killer?" line after Paul kills Jamis in the SF channel adaptation, for one.
Coillscath 1 year ago
@Darklordryu This one was longer then the 80's version which was less then an hour and a half.
YamiPoyo 1 year ago
OMG this is so CHEAAAAAAAAAPP compared to Lynch's 1984 masterpiece. Every scene in this made for sci fi version screams B movie. Just terrible all the way through and through. Bad acting, bad casting, cheezy cgi.
Forget this pile and watch David Lynch's masterpiece DUNE.
chaucer44 3 years ago
Eh, I don't think the movie is that good
But the miniseries is cheap looking in all aspects really, but not bad
I hope they do another version, either a well funded and executed miniseries or a good movie
Usul573 2 years ago
This man is 100% correct.
Stuurm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
totally agree....the film is superb....the tv series is just crap.....the costume design was insane....the desert scenes laughable...and most of the eastern european actors could barely be understood.
lamontsphurba 2 years ago
It's not like Sci-Fi can't do it with a bigger, better budget, either- Wish they would give the Dune Saga the "Battlestar Galactica" treatment.
magog1138 2 years ago
Better yet, have someone who has the same level of intelligence and integrity like Peter Jackson who did LOTR to give Dune the respect it deserves as a "kick ass Sci Fi film" comparable to the likes of which of LOTR. I heard another Dune movie or whatever is in the making.
zinki120 2 years ago
I loved this miniseries, probably because it came out right after I first read the book. I still see it in video stores every now and then, and I sigh lovingly. Maybe one of these days I'll finally rent/buy it for old time's sake.
RunMan327 3 years ago
It's an ok version of the novel as I envisioned it. Very tv. David Lynch-not Dino de Laurentis-made the original-bombed at the box office. Hollywood loved David and Kyle in :Twin Peaks: new places-I love Lynch's dune-brought that book to life-
captainkeoni 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this movie sucks ass!
an unneccessary version for all you slow minded
Suffko 3 years ago
I agree. I didn't like this version. I much prefered Dino de Laurentis version. The idea of cold space. Washed out colours of green/gray steel. The ideas of 'form follows function'. I loved it. And the 50% of the atmosphere was polished off with the amazing soundtrack by ToTo. Simply my fave movie. And I also loove the ideas of the weirding modules, with sound as ammunition. Now that's sci-fi.
Domzdream 3 years ago
i agree 100%. most people do not realize that Frank Herbert was there with David Lynch as he made the movie. and Frank Herbert liked what he saw
Colton5 3 years ago 3
when did this show on tv?
twisted709 3 years ago
In the autumn of 2000.
ZemplinTemplar 3 years ago
What a great film, much better than the Lynch version in terms of the story. The SciFi Channel can be forgiven almost (!) any sin for going through with a miniseries, then actually doing Children of Dune. Much of how they treated Messiah/Children was what I imagined reading the books. I might just have to revisit this saga on DVD this weekend.
synthlord 4 years ago 2
has anyone this song?
mika885 4 years ago
Is the song in this trailer also on the soundtrack?
BobaMatt 4 years ago
Also, the semi-rebellious Paul was necessary to draw the shocking distinction between what he was and would become, remember Shakespeare fabricated the same attitude in Henry V and for the same reason. As to the spiked hair, I think cracked and wind-dried is more accurate; it happens to men in hot, sunny climates, as they don't use conditioner, and the Fremen wouldn't waste water on that :-).
Jacobitess 4 years ago 3
Paul was suppost to actually be Harkonnen right? Or was it Jessica that was Harkonnen by birth? Maybe his rebellious side was a subtle hint to his true lineage.
ZugBub 4 years ago
Well, it was Jessica who was the baron's daughter (ugh), so that would make Paul quarter Harkonnen genetically. That's an interesting point about showing more a more manifest link to his dark heritage. I liked that the director gave the Baron a habit of rubbing his temple, which Paul and later Alia also adopted.
Jacobitess 4 years ago
This version had its shortcomings, but it was far more accurate in what mattered in the book, which was the exact replica of what happened to the Atreides in Greek myth, a never ending cycle of almost superhuman beings whose compassion and abilities are forever in conflict.
Jacobitess 4 years ago 3
Is the Baron supposed to be homosexual?
hanshotfirst1138 4 years ago
Yep, he is. I always regard him as a hilarious vilian anyway. Sadistic redhead - lol... :-DDD
ZemplinTemplar 4 years ago
yeah he is, mostly likes young boys
ZugBub 4 years ago
This is one of the many things, IMO, handled incorrectly in the prequels. In Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson's books, he's a homosexual. So what?
In Frank Herbert's book, however, he's more of a pederast, that is, more of a sexually deviant pervert rather than merely a homosexual.
BobaMatt 4 years ago
I do not like the 'rebellious' Paul Atreides! It totally ruins the philosophical stance of the main character. And I think the original looked more princely. And the spiked hair, much too modern!
R055HP 4 years ago
I think that Lynch's film is a literal one-in-a-million cast. I mean, just look at who's in that film! It's astonishing. And Lynch's vision meets the challenge of adapting the book well, even with the hack-job editing of the DeLaurentis team.
hanshotfirst1138 4 years ago
I liked the original better the Baron wasn't so gross in that one but maybe if i saw the whole thing i might like it.
jirdimaster 4 years ago
The boil ridden, murderous, greasy baron of the original was less gross than PH Moriarty?
BobaMatt 4 years ago