William Hurt as Duke Leto? (whining)"They have tried to take the life of my son..." Yeah, way to emote there, Billy. Hey, next time could you try to out-act the dress dummy your wardrobe is hanging on?
Oh, and while we're on the subject of Wardrobe, who in the hell decided that dressing Baron Harkonnen like Otho from Beetlejuice, but in drag, was a good idea? And then having him speak in perverse rhyme? I say: Lynch's Dune Vladimir versus this travesty. My money's on the flying heart-plug ripper!
And that pipsqueak they got to play Paul.
Ugh. Just...UGH.
As I said over on the Dune(1984) boards: FAT, BALDING FREMEN?!? Yeah, thanks for the Maula pistol and Krysknife, Stilgarowitz.
You can argue all you want about the things that Lynch got wrong, but as to look and feel, he got a hell of a lot closer than this...thing that looks like it was produced in a warehouse in Prague. Come to think of it, it WAS produced in a warehouse in Prague and it shows.
Sci-Fi had millions of dollars to blow, and they still got it WRONG.
Also: Brad Dourif absolutely ruled as Piter DeVries. There can be no other.
I agree that most of the truly memorable characters from Lynchs version will never be matched by anyone else. Piter just ruled Sting was a great Feyd and Dean "Ziggy says" Stockwell also fits in his role as Yueh.
But the Baron was just over the top. I loved the new version of the Baron which still is evil but also has style. Also I never liked McLachlan he always looked like a little weakling to me. Not to talk about his stupid hairdo.
----------------------------- Sir i have one last question.
I agree with most of your points. Yes, William Hurt sucked, but that's unsurprising, considering it's William Hurt. The set design was bad, too.(But Sci Fi channel didn't have Gieger working for them.) And why the heck did they have computerized voices playing in the background of the Atraidies ship? Anyone who's familiar with the book and knows that computers were outlawed and the civilization had turned mechanical would know better than that.Oh yeah, and most of the dialouge was crap. All that being said, I feel compelled to defend what *I* beleive to be the better parts of the movie. Lynches '84 version delt almost exsclusivly with the religious mythology surrounding Paul, which was only a little less than half the book. In this version, we get to see the political influences behind the mysticism, which was nice. Harkonnen in Lynches version was cruel, yes, but he was also an idiot. The newer version does more justice to the character by showing a villian that is not only bad, but clever.(I do admit the rhyme thing was dumb,though.) The ending too, I thought was better, including the exact words from the book. So really, I think the best way to do justice to Hurberts work is to splice the films together. Have the actors, set design and mysticism of the origional, and the political focus with the ending of the newer one.
I will say that the 2000 remake was more closely adapted to the book, but I still think it was terrible because I ahve been watching the 1984 vesion since I was about 5 yrs old... Things like this just stick on you... even slightly different wording can throw you off...
Just to throw my 2 cents in the 1984 version made it on the IFC channles as one of the worst films ever made alone with "Howard The Duck" and lots of other. only saw the 1984 virson once with my mother i did like this one better other than it VERY long winded and hard to sit thru all at once i only got the DVD so i could take control of the TV in the liveing room and chase everyone off. put it in my hole house runs and hides in their rooms. then i turn it off and find something better to watch. truthfully i would raither play the old Saga game and hear "Reporting" "Acnoage" and "yes sir" "Moveing out" then to sit thru this movie.
Time to justify that. I liked the old film but I felt that the graphics it used for the shields were terrible, more importantly I was never happy with the "Voice guns" that Paul gave the Fremen in that. It missed the point of the books, the fremen aren't better armed just better fighters. The new one did far more justic in that aspect. I did prefer the casting of the old one, paul is far too old in the new film and too arrogant. But I felt the costumes in the newer film were far better, I mean who decided all the bene gesserit are bald?
The main problem I have with the new film is the involvement of the princess, in the book she is barely a bit part they shouldn't have tried to make her a heroine.
End of the day I still like the old film and Sting rocked in it!
I’ve read some of the comments on this page and all I have to say is that I love the Dune mini-series, it goes into more depth then the movie but if you watch both on the same day like I have you will pick up some information on one that is not on the other. Like with the spice and why it’s important. In the movie it explains it more then the mini-series. Well I’ve put in my two cents.
No way that it sucked, and no way was it nearly unwatchable! I loved the books, and definitely prefer the David Lynch movie over the mini series in terms of book interpretation, but I thought the mini series was good entertainment and a fresh approach on the story.
The whole thing with the costumes was that they were trying to give it a super-futuristic look! I'm glad the costume designers said to hell with conventional thinking and went way over the top; it really adds a big visual impact to the overall storytelling.
Padwanna.
--- The internet has the ability to turn sane people into ranting fools!
<<<<Yes, William Hurt sucked, but that's unsurprising, considering it's William Hurt>>>>
He's one of the greatest actors that has ever lived. He basically owned the 80's. But he was wooden in this film. Atleast he was better than the last guy.
I liked this version more than the Lynch version. And I don't care what anybody says, I loved the costumes in this series, especially the Sardaukar ones.
That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it!!!
If Plan A doesn't work, you should have a Plan B, not Plan A recycled
Have you guys happened to see what the budget was for this film? $20 million!
In Hollywood, $20 million will barely buy you a 90 minute romantic comedy with a cast of unknowns! Sci-Fi had to recreate one of the most epic sci-fi novels of all time on a shoestring budget.
Yes, the Fremen village is clearly on a soundstage. Yes, you can clearly see the flat painted backgrounds.
But I give them an "A" for effort, and the end result is actually pretty good. They came much closer to the spirit and plot of the novel than the Lynch version. The special effects are decent and the music is terrific (Graemme Revell is amazing as always).
Also, one of the most impressive things for me was how they represented the Fremen's culture. The Fremen religion is a combination of Islam and Buddhism (called Buddhislamic in the novels). The film did a great job of presenting the day-to-day life of the Fremen, as opposed to Lynch's version which simply glossed over it.
Now, the miniseries does have its problems, of course.
Number 1: The Baron. I miss the "floating fat man" from the Lynch movie, in both appearance and presence. The Baron is supposed to be disgusting and feral, not "fluffy".
Number 2: Overall, I was happy with the casting. They fit the description within the book, except for:
[FEYD] Nothing - NOTHING - can beat Sting's Feyd. The one in FH:D was just too "pretty", like a mean college jock. Sting's Feyd reminded me of a creature like a velociraptor. A pure killing machine devoid of conscience and a hair on the wrong side of sanity.
[LETO] Lynch's Leto (JĂĽrgen Prochnow) looks exactly how Leto should. Thin, with black hair and a hawk nose. William Hurt is just too "soft". When he tries to show anger, he just looks like he's about to cry.
[DUNCAN] According to the book, Duncan's supposed to be very handsome and "dashing". He is, after all, a Swordmaster of Ginaz, a highly trained warrior. The guy they used in this movie looked like the bassist from that band Bush - scrawny and wimpy. My wife was most disappointed.
Number 3: Irulan can go to hell. I don't know why they decided to make her such a prominent character in this story. All she did in the book was provide bookend comments and become Paul's trophy wife in the end.
The good stuff in the mini far outweighs the bad. The bad? Some of the costumes are silly (especially the hats) and I could have done without all the gunplay. The mini stuck much closer to the novel, which I loved, and I don't mind at all that Irulan was made a character, as it helps put the end in context. The Lynch film did better with the shields (they're memorable, if nothing else) and stilsuits. And many of the supporting characters gave more memorable performances.
But you raise an interesting point. Which is the better casting? Mini or Lynch?
Paul [Mini] Kyle MacLachlan never worked for me, never looking the right age, and stuck with 80s hair. I think Alec Newman did a great job covering the many eras of Paul, and was able to pull it off physically as well.
Duke Leto [Lynch] JĂĽrgen Prochnow looks the part more than Hurt, though we don't quite see as much of him.
Lady Jessica [Mini] No contest. Saskia Reeves is just beautiful and has such grace that I was really disapointed to see Alice Krige take on the character in Children of Dune.
Baron Harkonnen [Mini] Lynch's sense of the grotesque is one of the things that makes the movie less palatable, and his Baron is just disgusting and one-dimensional. Ian McNeice makes him a better manipulator, wheels within wheels.
Feyd [Lynch] Sting rocks out, though I didn't think Matt Keeslar did too bad.
Rabban [Draw] Either way for me. Smith had more of a family resemblance, while Kish was more imposing. Advantage Lynch.
Chani [Mini] Sean Young has never been a good actress in my eyes, and Barbora Kodetová may still be a rookie, but her exotic looks and accent go a long way selling her as a Fremen. It works for me.
Stilgar [Mini] You might have a problem with a middle-aged, paunchy Fremen, but Uwe Ochsenknecht has more apparent wisdom and makes a more credible father/leader than Everett McGill "hero-type".
Shadout Mapes [Lynch] There's no beating Linda Hunt on this one. Vert memorable.
Gurney Halleck [Lynch] Patrick Stewart of course. Doesn't help that I thought Moriarty's acting showed he didn't understand the story.
Dr. Yueh [Lynch] Dean Stockwell immortalized the character. There is no other.
Piter Devries [Lynch] Again, can't beat Brad Dourif. And you know what? When it came to these memorable roles, I don't think they even tried beating them.
Irulan [Mini] It's not just that she gets an expanded role either, Julie Cox just has a better casting than Virginia Madsen on this one.
Dr. Kynes [Draw] You'd think it'd be hard to beat Max von Sydow, but I'm quite attached to Karle Dobry's Liet. Advantage Lynch.
Reverend Mother [Lynch] The mini's looks too young and very silly in that hat.
As for the rest, I have no preference. So it's a draw when it comes to Thufir, Duncan and the rest. Counting it up... it's a draw along the line. If I fit in the "advantages" and the better-looking Navigator on Lynch's side, well the film gets the better cast.
I agree with your casting comments, and assessment of the mini, although I thought Alice Krige did a marvellous job in 'Children of Dune' - IMO she steals most of her scenes.
Well, I found the plot and information, scope, ect. to be more accurate and true to the spirit of Frank Herbert in the Mini. The only problem I had were the costumes, the backdrops (which took away from the experience since you could tell that they were fake), and the part in which Paul takes the Water of Life. Overall, I think that the Dune mini series is better. Children of Dune, however, beats them both. Not even a competition.
Hope is a heavenly jewel with starlight radiating from its facets.
I agree with your casting points, but little can be said about 20 million 'not being enough to make a romantic comedy with a cast of unknowns', Season 1 of '24' the TV series cost 35 million. It was a 20 hour series that, in appearance, shared the production value of a 2 hour feature. Budget restraints are one thing, excuses and lack of creativity are another. (Blue screen with decent lighting effects, guerrilla filmmaking, not that expensive)
20 Million will buy you decent sets (sets are the cheapest part, in the end), great actors who're just not popular (Malcolm McDowell, for instance). The miniseries could have been done insanely better.
On the other hand, without having read Dune, the Lynch film would most likely have been near incomprehensible since the majority of the book's plot and dialogue goes on inside people's heads and Lynch sort of kept it that way. And the...gun...things were a bit, um... But by far the Lynch film had the better casting and look, and in an adaptation of such a grand and complex novel, it's the best you can hope for.
The miniseries was like a highschool drama club play, only with worse costumes.
The lynch version is laughable. I only have one and I only need one example. Weirding modules! There not even in the freakin book!
They replaced the coolest weapon ( the crystknife ) and changed it with some crap device that fires a burst of energy when you yell out a word. Yeah, And monkeys attack people out of my ass when I scream ' Thunder!'
The film started off like the book, but after I saw that. It was done for me. what followed was a tormenting 2 in a half hours or so of the baron looking and acting like *beep* , the horrible lynch take of the fremen, those 'alien' robotic stillsuits, the actors acted like they didnt know what was going on, The heavily paced editing and Those beni-gesserit / shani'o connor rejects. Oh, and sting was in there, dont know why, I guess he was playing feyd or himself in that matter.
Its a horrible film! admit it guys!
The Mini-series may have its flaws, But it still is entertaining to watch. Stilgar kicks ass in the mini-series!
adventure is nothing but a romantic name for trouble.
I prefer the Mini over Lynch's version. Several reasons:
- The Mini sticks closer to the book and does the story more justice
- I really loved the surreallistic backgrounds of the Mini, they were very aesthetic and gave you the feeling of a different world
- The Fremen are way better than in Lynch's version; I acctually always hated Lynch's portrait of the Fremen. The Fremen in the Mini are more like I picture them, more islamic-beduine-like. This also goes for clothing. Who would wear black in the desert?
- The baron in the Mini is more like he is in the book; Lynch's baron is just stupid and disgusting
- The shields are more realistic in the Mini than in Lynch's version
There are some points where there is draw, like in casting and in music. But overall the Mini is better in almost all aspects.
"- The Fremen are way better than in Lynch's version; I acctually always hated Lynch's portrait of the Fremen. The Fremen in the Mini are more like I picture them, more islamic-beduine-like. This also goes for clothing. Who would wear black in the desert?"
first off a nitepick: There are beduine tribes who DO wear black in the desert... google away I'd say
Now, I recently saw Lynch's version on tv here and have also been watching the mini and "Children of Dune" this weekend. Eitherway, I love the story. I've read Frank Herbert's book a long long time ago and I won't comment on accuracy coz I just don't remember (all I vividly remember it took me a long time to finish it, but then again, I was alot younger then ;)) but one way or the other they both have a good storyline imho. I still find it a fascinating story.
Both however suck when you look at visual effects etc. Ok, granted, Lynch's version is 21 yrs old so what do you expect nowadays when you're all used to the stuff they do now. In the mini's what bothered me the most is it's so obvious that they are on soundstages etc. Wide angle shots (like the city) are cool... obviously fake but still cool... I do believe I've seen better. The Fremen are better done in the mini but I liked the stillsuits from the movie over the ones in the mini. They looked like they could really hold water like they say they do... you know, the blugy pockets in stead of the mini's overall with some flimsy tubing.
Casting: Lynch's Leeto is way cool, pochnow(sp?) I think is great, he looks like a duke (and perhaps also because I liked him as the captain in Das Boot). Gurne(sp? I suck at names) I think was better in the mini. Everytime I see Steward I can't help expecting him to say "make it so" or "number 1?"... But he's a good actor nontheless (strangely enough I didn't have that when watching X-men and X-men2).
So in the end it's a draw and neither of them will ever be on my list of best movies/series ever... it's the story that's way cool. Hope they one day will make a remake with some descent visuals.
I admit the fluffy hats got me giggling too, but... Look at the past history of our world and tell me what is so logical about many an elite's units headgear? You don't even have to look at honour guards or grenadiers or janissaries... Many if not most british commandos actually wore those red berets to combats!
Hypothesis: to identify them as members of an elite fighting force thus instilling fear in the hearts of their opponents.
I made the mistake of watching the miniseries just after rereading the book. Gawd... I heard it's accurate. Anybody who thinks that is a tard. Just one example: In book: Paul is 15 upon entering Arakas and besting Jamis (Though he acts as an adunt) In series: Paul looks 30!!! Though he acts like a whiney brat! Let's run away crying out of the room. Gawd.... Anyway, I'm too lazy to write a thoughtful critique. Lynch, despite his inaccuracies, better captures the spirit of the story. This is not a matter of discussion.