Hacker Cinema
Frank Herbert's Dune
2000 · TV series · 95 min episodes · 1 season
Created by John Harrison
Science FictionFantasyActionAdventureDrama
In the year 10,191, the most precious substance in the universe is the spice Melange. The spice extends life. The spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel. The spice exists on only one planet in the entire universe, the vast desert planet Arrakis, also known as Dune. Its native inhabitants, the Fremen, have long held a prophecy that a man would come, a messiah who would lead them to true freedom.
29 positive8 negative8 mixed9 neutralfrom 54 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
63 comments on Hacker News
A recent example is the Wicked movie musical. It’s not a film and its sequel. It’s two parts of the stage musical produced as a film and cut in half, released a year apart.
The alternative is the 1980s version of Dune, which tried to fit a massive novel into a single mass-market film runtime. It was fantastic, but people who hadn’t read the novel were left very short on story. The newer movies I’ve heard are much better in this regard, and it’s understandable because the runtime of the combined films is longer. The Dune 2000 (AKA SciFi Presents Frank Herbert’s Dune) miniseries was even better in some ways than the original film, largely for the same reasons.
Ender’s Game deserved to be at least two parts, because even the main character got no real character development. You barely learn Val exists, there’s really no Peter, and you barely meet Bean or Petra. There’s no Alai, Achilles, Fly, or Crazy Tom. There’s no zero-G battles at Battle School. The computer game is never even mentioned but is integral to the book. I don’t think it’s even mentioned in the film that Ender is a third child and why that’s important. It could have been a much better film in two or three parts.
Arrival is an incredible film. (And sure enough, as is the story it's based on.) That's even with the discounting factor of the useless rogue bombers subplot.
Blade runner 2049 is an interesting film. Visually gorgeous. Ana de Armas doing one of the best stone-cold scenes I have ever seen. And the whole film having the guts to tell a small story in a big world. Commendable. But I also find myself cringing at how it took a well constructed universe and pretty much dismantled it. So I'm rather torn over what I should think of the film.
Of course, story telling wise the Dune mini-series was far above the first new film. But that didn't make the new film bad, it just made it ... different. And too packed. Dune's story is fundamentally big, sweeping and slow. Squeezing it into a film format will cripple it.
Agreed that the SciFi channel miniseries of Dune is top notch.
There’s also a Children of Dune miniseries with the same cast.
Catch is when I wanted to watch it last these couldn’t be streamed anywhere legally. So I bought them on dvd from fleabay.
> The first part left me quite underwhelmed
The books are chock full of the various character's internal dialog, and when you make the choice to leave that aspect out, there is quite a bit of richness missing.
This version went the "show, don't tell" route. Visually, its amazing, but so much additional information from the book to help you understand the characters, the groups they belong to, and their motivations was left out.
I think the Sci Fi channel Dune miniseries did the best job of putting across the full richness of the book, albeit with a made for TV budget.
Just wanted to say, it's easily the best interpretation of Dune I've ever seen.
So much so that I find myself wishing I had not seen it. It makes the current Dune interpretation movies look downright juvenile. Watch the current movies first, then go back and watch Sci Fi's interpretation. If you don't, you'll be extremely disappointed in the current movies.
> What is the third Dune? Are you referring to films or the two films plus the book(s)?
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0142032/
> I like both Dunes for different reasons.
The Sci-Fi channel did a Dune miniseries, that I thought was decent.
Agreed. I love the weirdness of the Lynch film, but it's not a great Dune adaptation. The SciFi miniseries has the lowest production quality (desert scenes shot in real deserts are a lot better looking than desert scenes shot on a very low budget soundstage), but it's the most faithful adaptation, covers the first three books, and still has its own weird Dune charm.
Villeneuve's Dune is sterile and devoid of charm or personality. I love Dune, and I was bored to tears watching that movie.
There was a 3rd Dune movie, a 4 and half hour epic made in 2000.
With all these Dune movies, maybe someday one will get it right!
That the new Dune movie was widely enjoyed is a testament to the central themes and plot of Dune, moreso than an opinion on Lynch vs Villeneuve.
Honestly, I want to go back and watch the Sci Fi miniseries too, which also had a sequel that goes through Messiah and Children.
I’m surprised that the Sci-fi Channels Dune Miniseries from 2000 hasn’t been mentioned yet. While not a pretty as Villeneuve’s Dune, it does have its own visual charm and is able to tell more story in its 4.5 hour run time. Plus 3 years later they did a Children of Dune miniseries that also covers Messiah’s story.
For me Villeneuve was Part one story drags along taking forever to get to the point. Then there is this 2.5 year wait to get a part 2 release; during which I read the first 3 FH Books, waited 18 months and read the other 3 books.
Don't forget John Harrison's Dune miniseries. That was definitely not the greatest production, feeling like sort of the anti-Villeneuve in terms of scale. But I did get a kick out of how Baron Harkonnen ended each of his scenes with a rhyming couplet.
To me, they're in an odd balance between Lynch's version, and the Villeneuve version. The visuals were much better, but because it was broadcast, were mostly experienced on TV's that couldn't do them justice -- but at the same time, they also weren't good enough for cinema anymore. And in a similar vein, unlike the Lynch version, they followed the books much more closely, which to me made them lose some of that warm fuzziness charm. I also can't say that the acting was particularly memorable to me, which is to say that nothing stood out as so bad as to be memorable, but I can also barely remember who was in it.
And as far as the sequel, Children of Dune goes, that year BSG blew it out of the water for me.
> I don't understand all the love for Dune. I read it, it was ok, and that was it. 3 underwhelming film adaptations is more than enough.
It's the Count of Monte Cristo meets Star Wars, with great world building, pretty good plot and characters and a lot of interesting philosophy, sociology, strategy and tactics. What's not to love?
The scifi miniseries was decent. The 1984 one was...barely Dune, though I enjoyed it. The current one is the first really good adaptation IMO, I don't think it's overrepresented at all.
SciFi did a miniseries, just before or just after they changed their name. It wasn't bad. I think it was about 10 hours.
The problem is that a lot of the payoff is at the end of book 3, and then book four tips the whole thing upside down with some deep religious and philosophical elements that I'm not sure everyone is ready for.
I'm always a little surprised how few people have read Dune relative to Lord of the Rings, but the more I think about Dune the more I get it.
I can see why you might like 2049. To me it’s not the introspection and growth of the character that’s its failing, it’s the poignant multi-second shots of a tree root or a bit of ash that felt overly deliberate and designed to seem meaningful while also dragging out the run time.
Yes - I love the books of Dune (well, the Frank Herbert ones) and I find the old movie entertaining and used to obsessively collect different cuts. I enjoyed the sci-fi channel adaptations, though I didn’t much care for their portrayal of Paul and also I probably haven’t watched them in 15 years.
I felt that the lack of interpersonal rapport and affection, along with his choice of palette, just made the whole thing feel sterile and dull.
My fear is that this becomes the definitive Dune for the next few decades, blowing the budget (both literally and metaphorically) for Dune adaptations on a polished though ultimately bland pair of movies.
Dune Part 1 has a runtime of 2h 35minutes. Assuming that Part 2 has a similar runtime, we end up with 5h of film total.
The miniseries "Frank Herbert's Dune (2000)" in the extended directors cut - has a total runtime of 4h 55 minutes. So very similar in length to the movie.
The miniseries "Frank Herbert's Children of Dune (2003)" has a runtime of 4h 25minutes. So, shorter than the new movie (similar to the regular cut of the first miniseries).
So, it would seem that your typical miniseries has actually less time to work with, than a 2-Part movie...
No it is not. There was Sci-Fi channel miniseries Dune and Children of Dune. Those, despite the lower budget, are much better than than the movie.
I've found a barbell shape to the response. People either seem to really like or hate it. Not too many people I know that are in the middle.
I will say I'm one of the people that really like it. I'm a big fan of the first Dune book and I think it does a great job of being true to the story. It's visually stunning and the score is perfect. My only gripe (and it's a big one) is that the cut the dinner scene. I don't understand that choice at all, but it wasn't enough to ruin the whole movie for me.
People that I know who don't like it think it's slow and that nothing really happens. And they're right. It also just awkwardly cuts off in the middle, so it doesn't feel like a complete movie. As a fan of the book, that didn't bother me too much because I realize it's just half the story and they can't make a 6 hour movie. But it is jarring, especially if you aren't already familiar with the plot.
And you are 100% correct that this would be better suited as an HBO miniseries. There's just way too much to cram into a movie. If you haven't checked out SyFy's miniseries and the Children of Dune miniseries, they are surprising good given the low budget SyFy had for it (compared to Villeneuve's budget at least).
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0142032/ was actually quite good (as was the followup Children of Dune).
> Tbh I thought David Lynchs Dune captured the oddity of the universe
What I liked about Lynch's version is hold old everything felt. The Empire was around for a long time and so had become mostly ossified and decadent (which the Golden Path was/is meant to rectify), and you could tell that by the clothes people wore and many of the sets (e.g., the room where the Navigator and Emperor meet).
The Sci-Fi miniseries hewed closer to the story, but everything felt too 'shiny' (no doubt due to budget constraints).
Villeneuve wasn't as old looking as Lynch, but not as shiny as Sci-fi, but somewhere in the middle. The costumes were also pretty good.
I also appreciated Zimmer's 'alien sounding' musical score, and the way it blended in with the sound design many times (the teams ended up working together a lot instead of being strictly siloed like often happens).
The miniseries and especially Children of Dune are so much better that the recent movie.
>I wish they or someone else serializes Dune
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0142032/
The scifi channel miniseries from around 2000 is pretty enjoyable. Has bonus appearances by a then-unknown actor or two, James McAvoy being the one I remember.
The most recent Dune movie I consider the best so far though (besides the book), by a pretty wide margin, so our tastes may differ some.
I have to agree. I don't know what it was, but it all never felt real to me. Actually the Frank's Herbert SciFi miniseries felt more real to me, despite it very obviously being filmed cheaply in a studio. Dune 2021 looks too clean, maybe.
One thing that stands out to me is the scene in Dune 2021 where Paul is outside on Dune talking with a gardener, who is watering palm trees. The conversation is about how many people could live from the water for the trees, and consequently about how atrociously hot Arrakis is. Paul is standing there, in the full sun, in a uniform obviously meant for colder environments. Yet there's not a single indication he's feeling any inconvenience from the heat and the sun. Not a drop of sweet, nothing. Just standing there like it's nothing.
Paul is used to a moderate climate, not (yet) accustomed at all to this grueling heat. Don't just tell us that Arrakis is hot. Show us that he's suffering! Show us how unbearably hot his new environment is!
Are you otherwise familiar with the story? There's a good reason it is recommended to read the book before you watch the movie/series. A book allows you to completely apply your own imagination. My path was: Dune II (game), Dune (David Lynch movie), Dune (game, did not finish), Dune 2000 (game), Dune (remake from 2001), Children of Dune and in 2016 I finally finished reading the book (I started in ~2012). Obviously I knew the story quite well as I played Dune II and watched the movies a lot (though I did not like Children of Dune much). The book felt like a choir, but it was good. Really good. Its just that the movies were good enough. Its why I don't bother reading Fire and Ice, Lord of the Rings, or The Witcher. I've seen the series/movies. We also need to put a book in the age or context it was written. Or, well, 'need to'? It'd be fair. I do the same with older content of movies and series.
There was a movie made about that story book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jodorowsky%27s_Dune
With it there are 4 Dune "movies" out: the 1984 Lynch version, the 2000 Sci-Fi Channel one (a 3 part mini series, nearly a movie), the aforementioned 2013 one, and of course the 2021 Villeneuve one.
Dune in its full glory is simply unfilmable. Between the exposition that can be naturally woven into a novel that simply can not be naturally woven into a movie and the amount of the book that takes place as character's thoughts, to even the little things like the chapter headings being used for flavor text from a future encyclopedia, there's just no way to capture the whole thing on film.
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I liked the sci-fi miniseries well enough. (As I've said before on HN, watch it as a very well-produced theater production and not a somewhat poorly-funded movie and it's really quite good.) So I'm not saying it's impossible to film something Dune and for it to at least be good. But it'll never be able to stand in for the novels.
I would be amused to see some series get far enough to try to film Chapterhouse Dune, though, which in my opinion is even more complicated than the original Dune in the ways that would matter for a film. Books 2 and 3 would be generally simpler, you can tell they didn't get as much love. God Emperor of Dune I believe holds up better than 2 & 3, but it is still narratively simpler than the original Dune. The final truncated trilogy is quite complex, though.
Nobody seems to mention the mini-series - I thought it was the best Dune rendition to video/film. I hated the Lynch version. Sting totally turns me off.
I read the book in the early seventies; never liked the prequels/sequels. I'm also not that keen on the mutant Paul/Sandworm god. That didn't work for me.
The 1984 movie did a better job of efficiently explaining what was happening.
Two good examples are the pain box and the slow blade penetrate the shield in training.
While the new Dune movie mention how they work - they just do a bad job of communicating that as effectively as the 1984 movie. To really appreciate this movie, you either needed to have read the book, or watched the prior movie (1984), or the TV mini-series'.
They also introduced things from the book, like how to walk in sand, and the visions of the jihad, but describe them poorly, and leave the viewer wondering why they're even mentioned. It's just badly written.
...but there were other issues with the movie as well. Long useless sequences of sand visuals that added nothing to the story - and that annoying scream sound that left our eardrums ringing, for no other purpose than to try to make the audience feel like an uneventful scene is somehow important to the plot.
A lot of people complained about the voice-overs in the 1984 film but they actually added a lot of value by efficiently introducing concepts to the viewer succinctly - especially the intro in the beginning which sets up the universe.
The best take on this universe after the book is actually SciFi channel mini-series in 2000 and then the Children of Dune in 2008.
> the story was cheesy mysticism in a Game of Thrones sauce
I've not seen the new movie yet, but the biggest problem I have with Lynch's movie is that it treats the mysticism as serious/plausible; yet a key part of Dune is that its religions are social engineering tools, managed and spread by the Bene Gesserit over thousands of years. In particular:
- Their "Missionaria Protectiva" programme spread the meme that Bene Gesserit members are supernatural witch/sorceress-like figures, who should be revered and assisted.
- The "Kwisatz Haderach" is the end-goal of their breeding programme: a male who can survive the Bene Gesserit training. As part of this 10,000 year plan, a religious meme was propagated that a messiah would appear in 10,000 years time. Hence when Paul appeared 10,000 years later (one generation early, since Jessica was meant to have a daughter), he could cash-in on the religious capital the Bene Gesserit had built up, and use it for his own ends. Note that others came close, including Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen and Hasimir Fenring (plus others who are mentioned in later books).
Yet Lynch portrayed Paul as a messiah to the audience, showing the audience a world of "cheesy mysticism" rather than letting them in on the scheme. (The miniseries did a better job of showing Paul's helplessness, despite his prescience; and his guilt for the inevitable genocide that will occur in his name)
The Dune miniseries is about 4,5 hours long. If the second Dune movie will have a similar length to the first one, the pair is going to be more than 5 hours long in total. So the movies wouldn't have to be more compressed. That surprised me a little.
Have you watched the SciFi (before it was SyFy) channel Dune and Children of Dune miniseries? Probably about 12 hours long, I enjoyed it.
I've read the novel several times over the years, and watched both he 1984 Lynch production and the mini-series several times each. IMO, the new movie is better than both previous screen adaptations. It follows the book pretty closely, only omitting some details, and not adding any McGuffins or other needless new plot points (coughweirding modulecough).
I certainly have my nits to pick. But, they are truly nits. Friends have reported non-Dune fans (never read the book or watched other adaptions) can get a bit lost, particularly children. But, my wife and I loved it and hope part 2 gets procured in a timely manner.
My standard advice for people reading the books with the movies/mini-series mixed in:
Read the first one. It's not for everyone, it's a little dry, POV is all over the place, and it's very political and thoughtful. It can be a slow read, but it's worth it.
Watch the Lynch movie. (Lament that this could have been Alejandro Jodorowsky's Dune if so inclined.)
Watch the Sci-Fi Channel's Frank Herbert's Dune.
(Probably watch the Villeneuve Dune due out in December this year.)
If you happened to like it, read Dune Messiah and Children of Dune. You'll probably like these books as well. (If you didn't like Dune, it's okay to stop here.)
Watch the Sci-Fi Channel's Children of Dune.
If you happened to like those, try God Emperor of Dune. Be warned it is extremely different from the previous books. It's become my favorite book in the series after multiple re-readings of the entire series (previously was Dune Messiah), but it is certainly not for everyone. It's okay to quit here.
If you made it through God Emperor, read Heretics of Dune.
If you enjoyed it, read Chapterhouse: Dune. (If you didn't enjoy Heretics, don't bother).
Lament that it is over.
If you must, read Sandworms of Dune which is written by the son, but is supposedly based on the father's notes. It is the least bad of the books I've read by the son. Don't read anything else.
Edit: Formatting
I'll use the "fear is the mind killer" [1] quote when I'm upset or anxious quite often. I really should add this one to my arsenal as well. I've never thought of Dune as a self-help book but I might now. Weirdly enough I'm also currently re-reading it, after watching the miniseries due to quarantine, and I'll try to find more things like this during my reading.
[1] “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
I enjoyed the TV mini series:
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0142032/
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0287839/
Ed: apparently the upcoming movie will get a companion TV series about the bene gesserit:
https://www.engadget.com/2019/06/11/dune-the-sisterhood-warnermedia-series/
I played Dune 2 first (in ~1993), then saw Lynch's Dune, then played Dune 2000, and then saw the Dune miniseries and Children of Dune (which, in a fan move, I posted on Usenet and got me my first and only DMCA warning from the MPAA :^). 10 years or so later, I bought the book Dune, and a few years later I finally read it. It is a legendary book indeed, but I wish I read the book first.
If you can, please read the book first before seeing/doing anything else in the universe. Don't let your imagination be spoiled!
(I'm not very interested in reading the sequels. Children of Dune was a terrible movie, IMO.)
Which makes me wonder what I missed with regards to J.R. Tolkien and George R. Martin.
Terrific read, can't wait for the sequel.
Having read the book once, and having seen the Lynch movie, and the miniseries (as well as Children of Dune) various times, I don't hold my breath to see a remake of Dune. At some point there's this thing where there's a certain fatigue of familiarity which is hard to impress.
I believe I'd gain more from reading the sequels. For my child however (who never read/seen Dune, and is too young for it now), I'd wish a remake for her, yes. However, the same is true for Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" and "The Diamond Age" the latter of which reminds me somewhat about Dune.
Part Two is about the games spawned from the Dune universe. The author (or someone else) could write an article about the audio in the Dune movie/mini series, as well as the music inspired by the Dune universe.
Many other famous actors such as Virginia Madsen, Brad Dourif, and Juergen Prochnow (also famous of Das Boot) were not mentioned either.
I was glued to my tv for it. But they were still bound by early 2000s tech and budgets. Dune hasn’t seen the commercialization that the Harry Potter, Star Wars, Star Trek, nor guardians of the galaxy universes have. But it could be made into a similarly action packed film series. Though I’d argue Dune is closer kin to LOTR/hobbit/Tolkien.
My guess is that dune suffers from a dead author and it’s long passages on how societies work. Someone would need to translate the plots and central themes and ideas to the screen.
A series that lasted more than one season? Brilliant!
Devil's advocate would raise the example of Dune perhaps, with a fairly decent IMO SyFy network TV miniseries, a lot more nuanced than the film and far more from the novel but didn't have the staying power of either of the two film versions. (Not that any of the film versions or the miniseries seems to be broadly loved)
It's a Messiah story set in the far future. I included it here because it had an impact on the way I understand history (I prefer to leave that a bit cryptic).
As a work of fiction I'd call it good but not great. But at the moment I can't think of a work of fiction I'd call great, so I'm probably not the best critic on that point.
Everybody seemed to hate the 1984 film adaptation by David Lynch but I think it's pretty good. The Syfy miniseries got much better reviews but I thought it was only so-so. The film doesn't really spoil the book, which is kinda cool, but may be easier to follow and more fun to watch after having read it. Last but not least, I really enjoyed the recent documentary Jodorowsky's Dune...
The first mini-series was a bit hit-and-miss for me as well. I loved James McAvoy's take on Leto II in the Children of Dune miniseries though. The sci-fi miniseries treated the characters alot better than Lynch's work, but sacrificed the special effects and some of the world building.
That miniseries is terrible. The acting is wooden as all get out, all of the scenes look like they are shot on a hastily dressed community theater stage and it's boring as hell.
The Lynch movie has, like most Lynch works, a strange atmosphere that in this case helps highlight the changes that Paul is going through as his consciousness expands.
That said the children of dune miniseries fares much better, but maybe because there isn't anything to compare it to.
The 2000 miniseries already looked awful and campy when it came out. I should know -- as a Dune fan I bought it instantly, and was deeply disappointed.
Lynch's version, for all its flaws, is still watchable.
I didn't like the 2000 SyFy miniseries at all :( It looked so... cheap and campy. There are plenty of flaws in Lynch's Dune, but it managed to look awesome at times. The meeting between the Emperor and the Navigator is awesome and ominous. Nothing in the SyFy miniseries matches this. And SyFy's Baron Harkonnen manages to look completely non-threatening :(
I really hate the miniseries.
Lynch's Dune does have many problems, but I still enjoy it. The set design and world that the film describes is often quite beautiful and has in many ways set the tone for all depictions of the universe after. The books don't offer much in the way of visual specificity, so even the later Scifi Channel's mini series took on various inspirations from the Lynch film.
I think the real hatred for the movie comes from not just cutting down the original material to fit within a film, but then needlessly adding new material that wasn't at all in keeping with the book, so it loses "trueness" from both ends. There's also some unevenness in the pacing and gravity the movie tries to get across. Dune is by no means an action story, but the movie can be a bit plodding at points that don't call for it, and faster paced parts sometimes don't work or come off poorly or cheesy.
I think also there's an unnecessary attempt at adding mystery to a story that didn't really have or need it. The book explains many of the strange parts of the universe quite well, but the movie has characters uttering odd phrases and strange events happening without comment or description -- reading the book fills in most of this strangeness, but it shouldn't be necessary as the film should stand on its own.
Still, the new cuts of the film are good watches and make for an entry into a nice thoughtful sci-fi weekend that might include movies like Bladerunner.
>But terrible? Wisecracking CGI Superheroes Episode Number Actually I've Lost Count Now is a terrible film.
That's a really low bar. A better comparison would be the three-part Dune miniseries that came out in 2000, one in which Lynch's version doesn't fare very well.
The Sci-Fi Dune miniseries was actually pretty good, I think, but you have to understand it as a filmed theatrical production rather than a "television show". I think this is in the abstract a decent choice since theater language is probably more appropriate to a Dune adaptation on the given budget than a "television show" adaptation, but it does mean you have to go into it with a substantially different mindset than you may have expected. And I don't expect everyone to like it even if they do go in that way because that may not be what they are looking for.
It's how they deal with not having the budget to actually put people in a desert so it's rather visibly a desert backdrop at some points, it's why the lighting is often so strong and monochromatic like a theater's lighting, it's why the acting is with all the characters projecting as if they are speaking to an audience rather than in a TV production. At one point they even use a very theatrical special effect based on backlighting through a thin cloth representing a tent to show Paul's hallucinations/thoughts, rather than even a simple bluescreen or conventional image compositing effect.
The effort is interesting, but I'd have to call it ultimately a failure (even if I personally ultimately enjoyed it) as it almost completely failed to speak to its audience. I also think you can't really follow it if you didn't read the books, which I consider a major flaw of an adaptation.
The "6-hour version of Dune" is probably confusing the Lynch treatment with Jodorowsky's attempt at a Dune film -- which was never filmed (the script wasn't even finished!), but whose production was documented in the 2013 Jodorowsky's Dune:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jodorowsky's_Dune
It may also be confusing Lynch's film with the 2000 Sci-Fi miniseries Frank Herbert's Dune, which totalled roughly 5 hours across three episodes.
I really disliked the that Dune miniseries[1]. There was some really awful acting and very cheap looking sets throughout a lot of it.
I also thought they got the tone of Paul's character completely wrong. To me he came across starting off as an arrogant thug whereas my perception of him from the books was a very thoughtful and reserved young man. (Obviously subjective viewpoint, but it put me off right from the start.)
OTOH, the audiobook produced by Audible I thought was very good. I've probably read the book four or five times, the last time well over a decade ago. I listened to the audiobook recently and really enjoyed it and reminded me how much I liked the first book[2].
[1] Have not seen the Children of Dune miniseries.
[2] I'm in the "first book was good, the rest was crap" camp. I read through 'til about halfway through Heretics of Dune before asking myself why I was still reading and stopped.
One of the YouTube comments on the SciFi version sums it up best for me: "Dune, a miniseries from Roger Corman"
I read the book before the movie, yet I still liked the movie. It's not a pure adaptation by any means but it has style, it's not really good but it's glorious. It's a mess but there's imagination and it took guts to make this movie. And I love the guild navigators!
By contrast the Scyfy mini-serie is closer to the book but is boring in that it doesn't bring anything compared to the book.
Granted last time I saw the Lynch movie was 20 years ago about but I'll watch it again this month :-)
Another completely different take on Dune that used scenes from the movie and was really great even though it was very loosely based on the book was the game from Cryo. If you have a chance to play it, do it. It's a very weird and interesting mix of adventure and strategy.
It's actually kind of amazing how much inspiration this book gave to multiple innovative projects from the Lynch movie, the Jodorowsky movie (I wish I could go to a parallel universe where this movie got made...), the first real RTS Dune 2, the weird and imaginative Dune game from Cryo...
Lynch's Dune is one of my all time favourite movies. I watched it a lot growing up and it didn't make a lick of sense to me, but I still loved the world it created. Later on I saw the extended edition (on laser disk baby!) and it became a lot more clear. And then finally I read the book and it all made sense to me.
Yes the SyFy Mini-Series is more true to the book, but their pronunciations make it unbearable to watch for me. "Hark-e-nin" vs "Har-ko-nin" drives me up the wall.
Another thing I love about it is how surreal Lynch creates the future. To me it's one of the most immersive sci-fi movies that really takes you out of this reality and into it's own and it does it with minimal flash and special effects.
The Guild navigators are gross and amazing. The Lynch Baron Harkonin is possibly my favourite Sci-fi villain of all time.
The Sci-Fi channel (when it was still Sci-Fi...) did do a miniseries version of Dune[1]. Some people apparently don't like it, and they did make it on a relatively low budget, but I like it, and it feels more like what I imagined reading the books than the David Lynch freakshow.
Seriously, "weirding modules"...?
[1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0142032/
I took it as "filmed theater" rather than a movie. Aside from William Hurt, all actors are playing their roles, not "acting". So if you see it that way it's enjoyable. Everything is theatric, from the costumes to the dialogs, it doesn't really feel like a movie at all.
I prefer this to Lynch's film which has great costumes and design but you can't tell Dune in less than 2 hours, like one cannot tell lord of the rings in one movie.
However,there is certainly room for a real trilogy movie. I'm sure it will happen in the next 10 years.
I thought it odd that the article did not mention the SciFi mini-series Dune and Children of Dune that came out a while back [1][2]. These were actually quite good, much better than the David Lynch version.
[1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0142032/ [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0287839/?ref_=tt_rec_tt
I really disliked the that Dune miniseries[1]. There was some really awful acting and very cheap looking sets through a lot of it.
I also thought they got the tone of Paul's character completely wrong. To me he came across starting off as an arrogant thug whereas my perception of him from the books was a very thoughtful if not perhaps demonstratively emotive young man. (Obviously subjective viewpoint, but it put me off right from the start.)
OTOH, the audiobook produced by Audible I thought was very good. I've probably read the book four or five times, the last time well over a decade ago. I listened to the audiobook recently and really enjoyed it and reminded me how much I liked the first book[2].
[1] Have not seen the Children of Dune miniseries.
[2] I'm in the "first book was good, the rest was crap" camp. I read through 'til about halfway through Heretics of Dune before asking myself why I was still reading and stopped.
Another TV adaptation worth mentioning is SyFy's miniseries "Frank Herbert's Dune" and "Frank Herbert's Children of Dune". They are much more faithful to books than Lynch's movie and better show the epic universe that Herbert imagined.
#1. A 10 part mini-series of Frank Herbert's "Dune" (finally done right by HBO). And after that, the rest of Herbert's Dune saga.
#2. Frank Herbert's "The Eyes of Heisenberg".
#3. Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination".
#4. "A Canticle for Leibowitz" by Walter Miller.
#5. Arthur C. Clarke's "The City and the Stars".
My stock recommendation is: The first book is a classic for a reason. However, if you don't like it, stop here. The subsequent books will not change your opinion. In fact Herbert may really not be your thing. (He has a certain unique feel to his writing, I think.)
The rest of the first trilogy is definitely more hurried and rather than "justifiably classic" are merely pretty OK if you like that sort of thing. A lot of people jam up here.
God Emperor of Dune is one of those books that is more fun to read the second time than the first, because the first time you really want the primary plot line to finish up and it feels like it is dragging. It really isn't, the rest of the content is quite worthy and the book would be made worse for removing it, but the first time through it doesn't feel that way. I like it better on re-reads, but this is a lot to ask of a reader. (Another one I feel this way is A Deepness in the Sky by Vinge. It's packed with goodness and I love it, but in the first read the middle half of the book can really drag since the goodness isn't in the "A plot".)
Finally, if you make it this far, Chapterhouse and Heretics are once again quite fun reads and re-reads. But it can be hard to get this far in the first place.
My suspicion is that a lot of people who blanket bemoan all the sequels never made it as far as Chapterhouse Dune. But then, it's perfectly understandable.
Oh, and I'll edit this to include my video recommendations: The classic Dune movie should be considered only loosely related, IMHO. The Sci-Fi (before it was "SyFy") miniseries of the book is good if you've already read the book and you view it as a filmed theatrical production rather than a "movie". Which, IMHO, actually works, as theatrical tropes are a better medium for Dune than conventional movie tropes in a lot of ways, but if you don't know what you're getting in to can be a shock. The miniseries of the second two books is better produced, but IIRC still requires you to have read the story first to really understand it. I definitely don't recommend them as your intro to the series.
Have to agree, Dune is an amazing book and stands well on it's own. One of my favourite ever. Even the film/TV interpretations are pretty good :)