The Lynch version was terribly flawed but I'll take flawed brilliance over safe blandly 'faithful' adaptations any day, assuming that this was indeed 'faithful', which is something I've heard about it. I always want to point out though that 'faithful' should also mean 'faithful to the spirit'.
The guy playing Gurney is so wooden; I'm astonished. And Paul doesn't look like he could ever be a hyper-intelligent warrior-saviour. There's a difference between a prodigy who needs some maturation and refinement one one hand, and a brat who improbably, rapidly becomes a saintly genius on the other.
I;'ve seen the actor who plays Gurney in other films (P.H. Moriarty ) and hes usually good. For example, in The Long Good Friday. But his acting here has to be the worst I have evern seen in any movie, ever. Even porn have better acting!
But maybe it wasnt his fault, this has a great cast here but there all flat, similar to what happened in the star wars prequels. The guy who plays Paul always acts like that. Some annoying cocky twat that you just want to punch. The shields are crap too!!
The Lynch movie was a bizarre over exaggerated mess. Anything will be better than that. I actually thought the miniseries and the children of the dune follow up tried to stick closer to the book. They got a few things wrong, like the way the way the reverend mother was acted, also the spacing guild spokesman was utterly ridiculous.
But it nevertheless did a better job of actually depicting the world of dune than Lynch's weird movie.
@allankles The costumes were totally fucked, but my biggest complaint, and one that they repeated from the movie, was the emphasis on lasers and bombs in the big battles. I thought Herbert pulled a brilliant move in introducing shields, so that ironically because of technology people had to go back to fighting with knives thousands of years in the future, It's part of what makes Dune such an intriguing vision.
@allankles I'd have to disagree with you there, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I'd rather Lynch's bold and epic (and yes, flawed) vision that this sloppy, badly written, miscast pile of drek. Scifi should have called it 'Arrakeen 90210' instead.
Looks awful, horrible dialouge, bad acting, set looks like a rip off of Star Wars, And this applies to every video of the miniseries I've seen so far. I don't think I'm going to watch anymore of this.
both the movie and the miniseries have good and bad features. I have the miniseries on VHS and I enjoy watching it occasionally. This of course is difficult as 5 hours of free time is not common in my life. T.T
Seriously the miniseries wasn't as horrible as you make it out to be. Just agree to disagree and let those who enjoy it, enjoy it.
The miniseries had a terrible budget and questionable studio pressures, but at least it follows the plot of the book far more closely, maintains a closer resemblance to the middle eastern inspired culture the book originally contained, kept the villains bizarre but not ludicrous (I'm looking at you extremely stupid heart plug scene), made the desert culture appear the way it was supposed to and didn't replace a perfectly good type of fighting and philosophy with a stupid noise gun. Fuck lynch
i agree with you ultramar(nice naming youself after the ultramarines home planet btw) the syfy version was close to the plot but very much miscast and looked cheap. i wish they would have remade it with the sets from the lynch movie. kinda like the westwood games did.
It's also worth mentioning that you can tell some scenes were taken in a set when the sand painted in the background doesn't match the hue of the sand they used on the floor...
@hamlord87 I agree - Paul was more a boy brought up to be what family and society demanded him to be, rather than have the kind of freedom most of us take for granted. He might perhaps be seen as aloof or detached, but he should not come across as smarmy teenage brat.
@hamlord87 So very wrong, in my humble opinion. It expreses hallecks frustrations and pauls immaturity and lack of grasp and makes paul looks like is is, a bored, frustrated child who has yet to go through his trials to fufill his destiny
the lynch version is better through and through, none of these characters are even close to being right - lol, the first computer game had better acting :)
Awful production through and through. Miscast characters, unfaithful plot, a good line replaced with a castration joke, there was very little to like about the "SyFy" channel's production. Give me the convoluted, quirky, gritty and dark Lynch version any day.
The mini-series was very close to the plot; quite a bit more so than Lynch's version. What the mini-series really lacked in was some of the minor characters were poorly done, and the costuming was terrible.
It's a one of those 'so close, yet so far' situations. The main plot points were there, yes, far closer than Lynch's version, but it felt so... sterile. It lacked zazz. Yes, the costumes were appalling, I guess I managed to block that out. Lynch's version was almost a parody in some spots, but it did have style.
@Ultramar4817 I don't think so. Many things were terribly dumbed down. The one thing that the movie got wrong was their portrayal of the Harkkonen as just primitive animals instead of evil and calculating. I can't stand the Paul from this movie, he doesn't seem at all like the brilliant, "thinking at the speed of light" character from the book.
@Ultramar4817 Actually, I felt the miniseries suffered because it try hard to stick to the book - so you end up with a scenes that make little or no sense when removed from their context. I think the Lynch production understood that better and tried to only include what material they could make 'fit'.
Unfaithful? In which sense? They cut a few smaller scenes, and didn't have the same degree of religiosity in it, but considering it was a movie, that's not that bad. Better than making the voice a big yelling attack, and having that weird cat device.
I actually miss the Lynch version's sheild effect, where it produced a visible box around the user, the visual distortions produced by the sheild, along with the kinetic effect actually providing a disadvantage to using body-shields
I also for some reason prefer the Lynch version. Always thought it was much cooler. The shield effects done in that version almost look like the adaptive shields the Borg first used in Star Trek. But, this mini series version is closer to the book in more ways than one. It was nice to see Duncan get more to do in the mini series than in the film. But Duncan went out like a badass in the film version. It would suck to die like that though.
This Paul is obnoxious
TheGreaterGood80 2 weeks ago
Movie´s shield practice looked a lot better
connieplankghost 3 weeks ago
The Lynch version was terribly flawed but I'll take flawed brilliance over safe blandly 'faithful' adaptations any day, assuming that this was indeed 'faithful', which is something I've heard about it. I always want to point out though that 'faithful' should also mean 'faithful to the spirit'.
FrogmortonHotchkiss 1 month ago
The guy playing Gurney is so wooden; I'm astonished. And Paul doesn't look like he could ever be a hyper-intelligent warrior-saviour. There's a difference between a prodigy who needs some maturation and refinement one one hand, and a brat who improbably, rapidly becomes a saintly genius on the other.
FrogmortonHotchkiss 1 month ago
Patrick Stewart was a far better Gurney.
xombimonkey 2 months ago
I;'ve seen the actor who plays Gurney in other films (P.H. Moriarty ) and hes usually good. For example, in The Long Good Friday. But his acting here has to be the worst I have evern seen in any movie, ever. Even porn have better acting!
But maybe it wasnt his fault, this has a great cast here but there all flat, similar to what happened in the star wars prequels. The guy who plays Paul always acts like that. Some annoying cocky twat that you just want to punch. The shields are crap too!!
trydowave 6 months ago
@trydowave Actually, to me the shields were pretty much as I imagined them. Even with the porno acting.
squamish4244 5 months ago
The Lynch movie was a bizarre over exaggerated mess. Anything will be better than that. I actually thought the miniseries and the children of the dune follow up tried to stick closer to the book. They got a few things wrong, like the way the way the reverend mother was acted, also the spacing guild spokesman was utterly ridiculous.
But it nevertheless did a better job of actually depicting the world of dune than Lynch's weird movie.
allankles 10 months ago
@allankles The costumes were totally fucked, but my biggest complaint, and one that they repeated from the movie, was the emphasis on lasers and bombs in the big battles. I thought Herbert pulled a brilliant move in introducing shields, so that ironically because of technology people had to go back to fighting with knives thousands of years in the future, It's part of what makes Dune such an intriguing vision.
squamish4244 5 months ago
@allankles I'd have to disagree with you there, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I'd rather Lynch's bold and epic (and yes, flawed) vision that this sloppy, badly written, miscast pile of drek. Scifi should have called it 'Arrakeen 90210' instead.
EarthTremor 4 months ago
I think Patrick Stewart did a better job as Gurney.
SulliMike241 11 months ago 2
Looks awful, horrible dialouge, bad acting, set looks like a rip off of Star Wars, And this applies to every video of the miniseries I've seen so far. I don't think I'm going to watch anymore of this.
SilverMcdowell1992 11 months ago
@SilverMcdowell1992 The 2003 Children of Dune miniseries was much better, IMO.
squamish4244 5 months ago
They reversed the lines, how utterly stupid.
bullmeecham 1 year ago
I like what Lynch did with Baron Harkonin , but I like the mine series better. Would love to see McNeice in Lynch's baron make-up & sfx
jdmitchell2 1 year ago
"Mood is a thing for cattle and women, young pup. Mood is not faw fightin'!"
...
ಠ_ಠ
...
Weak. Whole scene is.
Banzay27 1 year ago
both the movie and the miniseries have good and bad features. I have the miniseries on VHS and I enjoy watching it occasionally. This of course is difficult as 5 hours of free time is not common in my life. T.T
Seriously the miniseries wasn't as horrible as you make it out to be. Just agree to disagree and let those who enjoy it, enjoy it.
smirkingskeptic 1 year ago
The miniseries had a terrible budget and questionable studio pressures, but at least it follows the plot of the book far more closely, maintains a closer resemblance to the middle eastern inspired culture the book originally contained, kept the villains bizarre but not ludicrous (I'm looking at you extremely stupid heart plug scene), made the desert culture appear the way it was supposed to and didn't replace a perfectly good type of fighting and philosophy with a stupid noise gun. Fuck lynch
gutsandr 1 year ago
I prefer the MacLachlan/Stewart fight.
katey1dog 1 year ago
God, Paul was such a wanker in the miniseries! He's like Anakin Skywalker, completely unlikeable.
gullivera 1 year ago
i agree with you ultramar(nice naming youself after the ultramarines home planet btw) the syfy version was close to the plot but very much miscast and looked cheap. i wish they would have remade it with the sets from the lynch movie. kinda like the westwood games did.
ryuken311 1 year ago
Patrick Stewart will eternally be the best Gurney Halleck.
bodybag22 1 year ago
@bodybag22 i totally agree!
ryuken311 1 year ago
I gotta say, the dialog matches the book like, 100%
MAJORdorMo1992 1 year ago
Huh? This is just wrong. Paul and Gurney will always be MacLachlan and Stewart! And this scene is so much better in the Lynch version
sondano 1 year ago
series not even close to par
vingchick 1 year ago
this paul is a dickhead
frostflow 1 year ago
Patrick Stewart is a MUCH better Gurney.
Voxateuri 1 year ago 3
I don't like gurney OR paul... absolutely terrible
dantehunter 1 year ago
I'm sorry, but who wrote this scene? It's damn horrible. If paul says he's not in the mood right after the fight, he comes off as a fucking idiot.
Magicdoor 1 year ago
@Magicdoor Umm....yeah dude....the dialogue was originally written by Frank Herbert. You know, the author of the book.
Wraithldr13 1 year ago
the sequence is wrong
Magicdoor 1 year ago
It's also worth mentioning that you can tell some scenes were taken in a set when the sand painted in the background doesn't match the hue of the sand they used on the floor...
bathedinmercury 2 years ago
WTF ? ? ?
Gurney is so old ?
And where the hell is his scar ?!?!
Ahhhh.....another awsome book ruined by a stupid movie...
trombaraider 2 years ago
Gurney appears to be very sluggish. Must be all the Spice Beer....or maybe he's not in the mood. To act.
Toyotomi 2 years ago 3
Feign within a feign noob.
Eskiiiiiii 2 years ago
Just after Gurney says "Look down, lad", what if his erect dick was sticking out of his trousers instead of a knife. LOL.
VenomFrogX 2 years ago 25
@VenomFrogX "IT'S TOO BAD DUNCAN ISN'T HERE. Then I could get a real workout!"
CaptainPengu 1 year ago 3
@VenomFrogX I lol'd pretty hard a year later
xxInternetIdiot90xx 7 months ago
The sequences is all wrong. It makes Halleck looks like a loser here, and Paul a spoilt brat.
hamlord87 2 years ago 19
@hamlord87 agreed. makes me sick.
187Unseen 1 year ago
@hamlord87, the film version is pretty much 100% to the book, this version is way wrong.
cirian75 1 year ago 2
@hamlord87 He was a bit spoilt to begin with.
BVargas78 11 months ago
@hamlord87 I agree - Paul was more a boy brought up to be what family and society demanded him to be, rather than have the kind of freedom most of us take for granted. He might perhaps be seen as aloof or detached, but he should not come across as smarmy teenage brat.
EarthTremor 4 months ago
@hamlord87 So very wrong, in my humble opinion. It expreses hallecks frustrations and pauls immaturity and lack of grasp and makes paul looks like is is, a bored, frustrated child who has yet to go through his trials to fufill his destiny
preachermuaddib 2 months ago
0:59
best line ever
tuggray 2 years ago
Saying the costuming is terrible is an understatement.
hamlord87 2 years ago
the gurney in this version can`t act for shit!
lamontsphurba 2 years ago 2
I like Paul better in the Lynch version better. This Paul is an arrogant asshole.
Radb707 2 years ago
the lynch version is better through and through, none of these characters are even close to being right - lol, the first computer game had better acting :)
stocktakerbillybob 2 years ago
Paul is being kind of an ass in this scene.
Naxwell 2 years ago
He's trying to get under Gurney's skin so he makes a mistake.
basbalfrk 2 years ago 3
Awful production through and through. Miscast characters, unfaithful plot, a good line replaced with a castration joke, there was very little to like about the "SyFy" channel's production. Give me the convoluted, quirky, gritty and dark Lynch version any day.
MightBiteYa 2 years ago 6
The mini-series was very close to the plot; quite a bit more so than Lynch's version. What the mini-series really lacked in was some of the minor characters were poorly done, and the costuming was terrible.
Ultramar4817 2 years ago 17
It's a one of those 'so close, yet so far' situations. The main plot points were there, yes, far closer than Lynch's version, but it felt so... sterile. It lacked zazz. Yes, the costumes were appalling, I guess I managed to block that out. Lynch's version was almost a parody in some spots, but it did have style.
MightBiteYa 2 years ago
Just watching it again - I'm really reminded of how fucking atrocious the costume design was.
That and they clearly didn't get the concept of an ornithopter.
ProphetTenebrae 2 years ago 5
Also acting was poor, save for a few.
bfahren 2 years ago
@Ultramar4817
The casting is awful. The style Lynch brought to the 1984 film brings so much more. This is cheese and needed a bigger budget.
deaethcoil 1 year ago
@Ultramar4817 I don't think so. Many things were terribly dumbed down. The one thing that the movie got wrong was their portrayal of the Harkkonen as just primitive animals instead of evil and calculating. I can't stand the Paul from this movie, he doesn't seem at all like the brilliant, "thinking at the speed of light" character from the book.
darfunkelidas 1 year ago
@Ultramar4817 Actually, I felt the miniseries suffered because it try hard to stick to the book - so you end up with a scenes that make little or no sense when removed from their context. I think the Lynch production understood that better and tried to only include what material they could make 'fit'.
EarthTremor 4 months ago
@MightBiteYa
Unfaithful? In which sense? They cut a few smaller scenes, and didn't have the same degree of religiosity in it, but considering it was a movie, that's not that bad. Better than making the voice a big yelling attack, and having that weird cat device.
harlequin2262 1 year ago
that is some crap-tastic acting right there.
Misri83 2 years ago
agree 100% not what i imagined in the book diffrent in every way shape look and form
bluballzzz 2 years ago
I prefer the original Lynch version as well.
katey1dog 3 years ago
What kind of Gurney is that?
nubeleventy 3 years ago
I actually miss the Lynch version's sheild effect, where it produced a visible box around the user, the visual distortions produced by the sheild, along with the kinetic effect actually providing a disadvantage to using body-shields
weldonwin 3 years ago
damn right, and when duncan buys it? just like it was writ.
Gathol 3 years ago
I also for some reason prefer the Lynch version. Always thought it was much cooler. The shield effects done in that version almost look like the adaptive shields the Borg first used in Star Trek. But, this mini series version is closer to the book in more ways than one. It was nice to see Duncan get more to do in the mini series than in the film. But Duncan went out like a badass in the film version. It would suck to die like that though.
alucard624 3 years ago
Weren't the sheilds effects in the David Lynch version of Dune created using early CGI?
mccarthystuart 2 years ago
Cool
Atreides22222 3 years ago
Blimey, guv'nor!
newagent 3 years ago 2
Don't you mean "Blimey guv'nuh!"?
BlackLink27 3 years ago