Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Media

Dune Miniseries Airs Tonight 197

Posted by Hemos from the good-tv-coming-at-you-maybe dept.
A number of readers wrote in reminding folks that the Science Fiction Channel's Dune miniseries is airing December 3, 4 and 5. CNN also has a write up about the series -- here's to hoping that it won't blaspheme the legacy of Frank.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dune Miniseries Airs Tonight More

Dune Miniseries Airs Tonight

Comments Filter:

  • Canadian Airtime Details (Score:4)

    by mwillis ( 21215 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @06:08AM (#585740) Homepage
    According to the Canadian space channel [spacecast.com], this Miniseries doesn't air in Canada until 2001. [spacecast.com] Unfortunately they do not give a date for the actual showing. From the www page:

    Dune

    Originally aired: brand new series. Will first air on the Sci-Fi network in the USA, December 2000.

    number of episodes: 6
  • The first time I read Dune and its three successors ( there were only four Dune books at the time), which was about 18 years ago when I was a sophmore in high school, it seemed that I was reading some of the most profound science fiction ever written. Frank had written a compelling story that had a lot of profound ideas regarding religion, government, society and politics.

    I re-read Dune four years later when I was a sophmore in college, and I was terribly disappointed. The wonderful story that I had read as a high-schooler was gone and instead what I read was a diatribe on Franks views on religion and government, etc. What made it worse to read is that when Frank had a point that he wanted to make, he repeated the idea over and over and over and over until he was pretty sure that the reader, regardless of how dim-witted, would get the point. Unfortunately, I was a bit more critical of a reader at the time, and I found his repetition hard to endure.

    Don't get me wrong, I still think that the story behind the books is a good story, but Frank is a better story teller than a writer. Hopefully, the miniseries will be done well and not dumbed down to the masses - as Frank's book were.
  • Sure it can, I believe it is as bad if not worse. My feelings, and they are only that, are that this version is a disaster from a continuity standpoint. The timeline and the needed information that should lead us from sequence to sequence are simply missing.
  • Well I watched the first part of Dune last night and I don't think I like it. I have read all the Dune books even the new ones by his son. I have read Dune itself many times. I don't think there doing a good job on this movie. I really don't like the guy playing paul. He wines to much. The baron sucks. I would have to say the first movie was better even though it did miss alot. Forget these stupid movies and read the book. Nothings better then your own imagination.
  • It could be a musical.

    -Todd

  • Does anyone here but me find it funny that SUN had all those ads during the Miniseries?
  • /*
    It was obvious to me from the release of Star Wars (aka Episode 4, "The New Hope") in 1977 that George Lucas really wanted to make a Dune movie. It is ironic that when people now revisit Dune that Star Wars is the reference point they use to speak of it.
    */

    It certainly is. :-)

    You can also draw parallels between the Star Wars series and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series. Star Wars has Coruscant; the Foundation series has Trantor. Star Wars deals with the fall of a galactic government, the Foundation series deals with the fall of a galactic government. It remains to be seen, in the next two movies, if the Skywalker clan's saving the galaxy from itself is part of some spiritual part; I'm not sure how one could draw a parallel between Skywalker and Seldon.
  • Erm,

    Okay, so you're stating that, since in your opinion the show will suck, that this isn't news, and that no-one else that reads Slashdot will care, either.

    I care, so shut up.
  • And from what I can tell, it's a blasphemy alright. The dialogue is idiotic, the actors are dull, and the plot changes are utterly without sense.

    And to top it off, the assholes didn't even look up the word ornithopter [dictionary.com]!!!!!!

    I give it a five billion thumbs down

  • "The visuals are quite good in most places"

    Snippet from a Spitting Image (satirical tv show in the UK) book:

    q: "How did you manage to avoid making the giant worms look like they were made from cardboard and coat hangers?"

    a: "We didnt"
  • Quite frankly, this mini-series is the reason I bought a TiVo. Primed and ready to go. Anybody else doing the same thing? Also, how long do you think it'll be before it shows up on the internet?

    SealBeater

  • "From the approximately five hours of film in the original footage, only about two-fifths emerged from the cutting room. "

    He must have known that no-one was going to watch a five hour long version of Dune? Even his mother would have made her excuses and left by the end!
  • The Samuel L. Jackson and Gwyneth Paltro school of wooden acting prodly present: (a small, hacked, poorly acted portion of) Frank Herbert's DUNE!!! This sucked so bad I won't even waste any more electrons on it - but it just goes to show that $100M in CGI cannot save $.5M in acting
  • I'm watching it.

    It sucks ass.

    The lameness cannot be contained ... It will destroy us all!
  • And then there's also a parallel between the Foundation series and Dune, hence Asimov's "Other series of the Foundation type followed, the most successful being Frank Herbert's Dune series." (Gold, pg. 258). Is there such a parallel? I have no idea and I don't intend to find out. My scientific brain doesn't enjoy literary analysis too much so I'll leave it to all you fun-loving English majors out there.

  • Too late - the legacy of Dune has already been blasphemed by a bunch of books with names like "God Emperor of Dune" and "Chapterhouse Dune."

    Did you actually read through all six books, or what? The books dealing with Paul are simply backstory. They're interesting history that you'll need to understand the meat of the story, which is all about Leto II. Chapterhouse is pretty much a wrapping-up of everything. Oh, and a small nit that needs picking -- the quote was "blashpheme the legacy of Frank". Frank wrote the books you claim blaspheme the legacy of Dune. Two different concepts, there.

    Anyway, if you must bash on a Dune book or two, complain about the new Dune: House * books. While not being bad books in and of themselves, compared to Frank's work, they're crap (oh, and they have some continuity problems, as well.

  • Good lord man, I don't want to read a bloody dissertation. I could just read the book instead.

  • I hope (Score:1)

    by jjr ( 6873 )
    My friend siad she is going to record this after I finish work I will watch this
  • Uhm....perhaps because they're both sci-fi messiah flicks? Star Wars is a reference point for 95% of people....

  • The Ghafla (Score:3)

    by dscowboy ( 224532 ) <drugstore.cowboy@gte.net> on Sunday December 03, 2000 @06:17AM (#585759)
    Crikey! Did John Harrison read any of the books, or just the cliffnotes? Just glancing through the gallery on scifi.com, it appears Princess Irulan is not a blonde bombshell, Stilgar and Otheym are beardless (a beardless Fremen???), and the blue within blue eyes of spice addiction seem to glow in the dark freakishly. Granted these are relatively minor incongruities, but they bode poorly for the rest of the miniseries. And I must say, as much as I hated the David Lynch movie, the new Feyd looks like a goofy frat-boy in comparison to Sting. At least this time around we won't see Maud'Dib teaching his Fremen to bust up rocks with sonic brain power... I hope.

    On the surface, the Dune books are an imaginative tale... but the real meat of the Dune story is in the concepts it presents about everything from religion to government to drugs. Can we really expect anything more than lipservice to these ideas from a condensed, mass market venture like this miniseries? Mmmm... Commercialization...
  • Yes, we Americans are pretty stupid. You would think the sight of nudity would make us melt like the wicked witch of the west or something. If a TV show on a broadcast network or standard cable so much as shows half an ass they need to have a disclaimer. Hopefully one of the canadian channels that we get on cable here in northern Vermont will carry the uncut version. We do get exposed to an occasional boob on CFCF 12. With my luck I will have to watch it in French.

    --
  • No fucking shit? *drools* Ok I'm rushing out and buying myself a -brand new- tv decorder card for yule and i'm making MPGs finally! :) (my vid collection is shot to hell :( )
    --
  • We ruin sci-fi adaptations by focusing on action and technology. Europeans, especially the BBC, take a much more thoughtful, character-driven approach. Dune will demand that approach.

    The BBC has given us some great sci-fi. I would put Cold Lazarus or the BBC production of John Christopher's series The Tripods over most any TV that has come out of the US. The last truly great thing that has come out of the US was the PBS adaptation of Lathe of Heaven. It was so good, it's probably a Canadian production.

    A&E set the bar pretty high for a compelling TV mini-series with Longitude. A testament to the fact that if you take the time needed to tell a story and don't underestimate the intelligence of the audience, great TV is possible.
  • For me, Kyle MacLaclan perfectly represents Paul Atreides, and Patrick Stewart shines in his role as Gurney. Also, Sting is hilarious in his role as Feyd; however, I could do without the steambath scene; I didn't really want to see more than 20% of Sting's uncovered body.

    To watch this series would be blasphemy, and I do not wish to discredit the masterpiece from Dino De Laurentiis and David Lynch.

  • The plot isn't all that interesting or new, the characters aren't all that deep or symbolic and theme isn't particularly wonderful. What's left is just a remake of the same slow tedious story in the first movie just dumbed down a little so that when the bad guy says things like "make them confident, it leads to carelessness" we all know what he means.... The visuals are new and different but that's not enough to carry the whole load. What's with William Hurt anyway? You'd think that he'd be thrilled to be working instead of shuffling through his gig like he's tranq'd out. And the Paul character...sounds like a whining jerk from Dawson's90210Buffy complaining that the world needs to kiss his on both cheeks

    Is Anna Pacquin in this version????????
  • The scene where the Reverend Mother tests Paul was the most unimpressively flat scene I've seen in my life.
    That's the point where I switched off and left the VCR to carry on without me. In the Lynch movie, with (the incredible!) Sian Phillips and (the entirely adequate!) Kyle MacLachlan, that scene conveyed so much meaning. "Are you human?" Is it understanding or mere animal sense that controls your actions? If you are an animal, you die. Brrrr!

    This Newman dweeb conveyed nothing in that scene. He all but shrugged when he pulled his hand out of the box unharmed. I almost expected him to say "Psych!" If the experience meant nothing to him, how is it supposed to mean anything to us? Pfeh!

  • Please keep us informed of any updates/plot-twists.

  • A review and critique (Score:3)

    by ajs ( 35943 ) <{moc.sja} {ta} {sja}> on Monday December 04, 2000 @04:29AM (#585767) Homepage Journal
    Ok, first the bad:
    • Casting: Hurt's too soft, Gurney's too nice and The Barron can't deliver the lines strongly enough.
    • Writing: They just don't get Maud Dib. He's supposed to be riding a river of internal turmoil over the destiny he can sense. He's supposed to be one of the best natural leaders ever born with the training of a Bene Geserit. What do we get? A boy who is a passable dukes son. Oops.
    • Skipping neccessary parts. We need to know who Yueh is before he's revealed as a traitor. One quick flash of a knife and an off-hand mention of his Suk training is not enough. We probably needed a bit more form the Reverend Mother.
    Ok, that's it for the bad. I liked this movie. Here's why:
    • Paul is well played, even if poorly written.
    • The Barron is well written if poorly played.
    • The attention to detail from the book is very good for a movie.
    • The film stands well on it's own if you have not read the book (I think).
    • It's beautiful.
  • karma be damned, i'm responding to a sig-
    incredible quote, incredible movie. good choice.
    ----- --- - - -
  • Observations on "Dune - The Suck Ass Mini Series"

    1. Future Super Beings are VERY whiny

    2. Spice does not cure baldness

    3. Ornithopters are unbalanced enough to fall over on the ground

    4. Guild Navigators look like orange rubber vampires

    5. Spend 80% of budget on special effects - well, some of the special effects - but we don't need no stinking dialect coaches!

    6. Old Bene Geserit Witches are younger than young witches

    7. William Hurt - when saying something profound - be sure to mumble

    8. Stilgar looks like a janitor from the Ford truck plant

    9. Be sure to sleep with the windows open when your life is in constant danger and the ambient humidity is 0.00003%

    10. You would get arrested for exposure for displaying a sand worm in public

    11. Wow! There were books written about this? Kewl! I'll read them later - gotta finish the mini series script now.

    When they originally announced that Dino was going to do the Dune movie, I was just certain it would suck. Considering the limitations of special effects technology at the time - Dino did one hell of a job. The casting was excellent, everybody could act, and he followed the book pretty closely.

    In fairness to the makers of the mini-series, they didn't do *everything* wrong. As far as I could tell, all scenes were well focused. Good camera men.

    "Help! I'm getting dizzy! The spinning!" - Frank Herbert (from the grave)

  • Both Lynch's attempt and Harrison's venture, does show one thing: The filmmaker's own interperation of the book and a attempt to appease all sides.. The book did have some pages that would have, if shown on film, have wound up on the cutting room floor. For instance, the Homosexual tendencies of the Harkonnens, and their brutal gladitorial-style combat, and just for Fey's birthday, he killed a captured Atreides solder, to boot!
    As for Paul's love life, the book delved into it, as any good book would, but if portrayed on the big screen, would have put the audience to sleep, guranteed. Look at the theaterical conversions of The Hunt of The Red October, Flight of The Intruder, as well as Patriot Games. O they do come close to the book, but IF they try to follow word for word, then they would be in deep dip with either the company for budget overruns of with the Moviegoers for putting out a borring show. Pack a pillow folks, if someone tries to.
  • Let's face it, you couldn't do dune correctly in under 12 hours, and you'd need the inner voice commentary to make it work.

    More importantly, you can't rail against the acting. SciFi channel is no money tree. They certainly could not afford name american actors (not even many american actors at all is my guess). So the complaints about accents and such is just blathering.

    Anybody who is complaining about cheesy effects or bad accents or bad acting is at least partly unwilling or unable to embroider the visual performance with their imagination. Anybody ever see Doctor Who? Or is everyone utterly spoiled by the very fun but plot thin Star Wars/Star Trek mentality where everthing is spelled out for you?

    So far, the miniseries seems much more faithful to the book than Lynch's flawed but fun effort. Whole sequences of dialog are lifted directly from the books. Some plot concessions were inevitable, but the largest of these seems reasonable to me: no mention or emphasis of the Butlerian Jihad/role of mentats in society.

    Most of the changes seem to be ones made in the interest of slimming down screen time to fit in 3 2-hour TV blocks.

    No rendition of such a rich book is going to be even remotely a interesting. But SciFi seems to have made a decent effort given budget/resource constraints. It is certainly more interesting than a million other bad scifi movies I can think of (starting with Highlander 2 which I was forced to watch for 20 minutes last week).
  • I've read this book many many times over, and I have to say that a lot of the dialogue is straight from the book. I can see that they've made a lot of changes, but it's not like they're changes that could've been helped (of course, Paul meeting the Princess at dinner was ridiculous). It's a FAR better attempt at Dune than the movie with Jurgen Prochnow was in. Although it may not be as great as reading the novel, you have to remember that translating a novel onto the television's going to lose /something/ along the way. I think most notable in the book is the thought processes of the characters, and the level of complexity of plot and intrigue. Of course, some of these things had to be cut out because they would make 1.) thoroughly boring TV, 2.) would take up too much time, and 3.) would be barely feasible. (Would you /really/ like to hear Paul thinking for minutes on end or Jessica muse back to her time as an apprentice at the Bene Gesserit school? No? I didn't think so. These things don't see on TV.)
    So yes, some of the liberties they've taken may be little off-the-wall, and nothing will ever compare with the book itself, but they're doing a damn fine job of making it interesting to the TV crowd.
    And they actually /did/ have ornithopters - the Harkonnens were piloting them, though :P
  • Yes, I read all six. What I mostly remember from them is thinking "why did I bother reading that?"

    Yes, I quietly changed 'legacy of Frank' to 'legacy of Dune' so I could make my point.

    You are, of course, entitled to like the later Dune books. After all, nobody except me has good taste all the time.

    I haven't read the new Dune books. A friend recommended one, however.

  • I can't agree enough about Blade Runner and PKDick's original story.

    Just an annoying 'me too' post, with nothing of any real merit to add. Oh well!

  • For those of you comparing this and that, nit picking everything... you are all a bunch of moronic dolts. Look at it as though you have never seen or read anything Dune. Clear your prejudices and just enjoy a movie for once.
  • Well, the first viewing is over. I enjoyed it. Some details have changed, granted, but I don't think they affected the story or the atmosphere much. I felt that Dr. Yueh wasn't mentioned enough before The Betrayal, but that would probably only matter to those who haven't read the book or seen the Lynch movie. Also, I think the early introduction of the Princess Irulan and Stilgar were interesting ways to make those aspects more transparent, albeit non-canonical. Also, there were a couple ripoffs from the first film that weren't necessarily taken from the novel.

    All in all, I know I could have done no better, and appreciate a look at the story from a slightly different perspective. I wish all the loudmouth whiners who have been posting before viewing the movie enjoyed the movie for what it is, and not expect it to include every single detail that the 500 page novel did.

    What are other's views on the deviations from the original, and how the story was handled???

  • I am hoping that this series won't be a mockery of the novels, and does better than the David Lynch movie. I am slightly worried though about all the press/marketing (hype?) around this version of Dune. For instance, the CNN article compares the portrayal of Paul to "Luke Skywalker with a mind," which kind of bothers me; why is it necessary to compare Dune with Star Wars?

    Does anyone have any thoughts about the "amazingly big event" style in which this version is being presented? (Look at all the stuff on the Sci-Fi site, Dune sweepstakes?) Is all this marketing beneficial and in good taste?

  • I've watched the first 15 minutes and so far all of the changes have been really annoying, but I'm going to stick it out for the first "installment" at least.
  • Ooh damn... can always count on SciFi chan to carry great Miniseries... if only they'd carry better full-lengths like Red Dwarf, I'd be a happy little coder.
    --
  • I don't know if it is because I am used to the original movie or what. I have skimmed the Novel (Dune, not the offshoots or continuances.) But I sat here tonight either going 'Oh' or 'Whaa?'. I don't think the series (Maybe I should wait till I've seen all three parts.) should have gotten all the hype it has recieved.

    So maybe w/ the Hype, The skimming of the original book, and the love of the original movie, maybe this is why I think part one of this remake just sucked big time. I felt like I was watching a futuristic Gone with the Wind (Which also bores the hell outta me.)

    Nice effects, Nice casting of Duke Lito, but everything else (From the new plot changes and deviants from the original.) to the Boring cast (including Paul.) just leaves me wondering if I should even bother trying to catch part 2.
  • It's cold outside there's no kind of atmosphere i'm all alone more or less let me fly far away from here fun fun fun in the sun sun sun
    i want to lie shipwrecked and comatose drinking fresh mango juice goldfish shoals nibbling at my toes fun fun fun in the sun sun sun fun fun fun in the sun sun sun
    --
  • why is it necessary to compare Dune with Star Wars?

    What else to the media out there know to compare it with? Because of the success of Star Wars, everything science fiction is/will be compared to it. It is sad, but that is the way it is. You should read articles about the filming of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. It's almost as if they (media) want to make a competition out of SW vs. LotR.

  • for(1..6) 30*6
    for(7..7) 30*8
    24 hours so far, not counting smeg outs, smeg offs, and so forth. I've done 32 hours of RD straight before. Yes I know I'm insane.
    I meant showing the full series, i.e. one every tuesday and thursday for a while.
    --
  • They rerun the series after the first run, so you don't have to miss X-files. Or you can get a TIVO.
  • Yes you're right... get those two confused. Hurt dissapointed me in several movies, Lost in Space being the most painful.

    Daniels has sucked ever since Dumb and Dumber and 101 Dalmations.

  • I'm not sure, no, but my memory says that Bladerunner was the book full of missing manuscript bits--but _The Unteleported Man_ comes to mind, too. I'm dead certain that it was a heavily dystopian work, as suicided didn't seem surprising at all from one with scuch a dark view of the future . . .
  • You owe it to yourself to see a well acted, intelligent movie that takes the book and intellectual heritage of the original seriously.

    I saw the David Lynch movie and was embarrassed by how half-assed it appeared. The less obvious portions of the Dune story were played up, and the actors were allowed to go to ridiculous extremes of characterization (Sting in the bathtub as the most stunning example).

    The SCIFI Channel production is high quality, well acted, and skillfully directed. I only hope that the next two segments are as good as the first.

  • Whew!
    The suckibility level is rictering off the scale. SciFi.com is offline at the moment. I have a feeling they're hearing the sound of toilets flushing everywhere.
    They certainly had nerve calling this "Frank Herbert's" Dune.
  • Maybe you should have written your response AFTER you saw the movie last night.

    Quicktime trailer-based reviews. A new low in critic over-estimation of their own importance.

    Dimwit.

  • This is the single worst adaptation I think I have ever seen. Did they even READ the damn book? Jesus, the Tommyknockers was better than this. I won't be recording the next 2 episodes.
  • Another lame commment from the uninformed masses.

    As far as picture quality, maybe you need a new tv. I watched it on scifi via my new dishnetworks satellite system and it was near-DVD quality.

    And as far as your KPT Bryce skills, well, I guess you can just go ahead and make demo CGIs of "your best effort" for the slashdot audience.

    I for one look forward to that.

    Lame-O
  • I hate to say it ... this is a cheap shot ... but ...

    the special effects in the SUN ads were better than the special effects in the mini-series!

  • I was really looking forward to this based on what I'd read and seen of it, and unfortunately I was a bit disappointed in the first part, but who knows, maybe the second and third parts will be better.

    The lighting, sets, and costuming were all very well done (although I didn't care for the ultra-futurism look, it seemed inappropriate, especially in light of the Butlerian Jihad, blah blah blah).

    Some things that irked me:

    - Dr. Yueh is pretty much cut from the film. Also, they took away his death monologue - pretty integral to the character, but I guess if you've dropped him from the film already... Actually, this is just one example of tons of those little cuts/changes in the original dialogue that really end up making this version flat and uninspired

    - I'm not really a big fan of Lynch's Dune, but a lot of it was just better directed. I found the pacing of the first part to be flaccid, and scenes that should have been exciting or tense simply weren't

    - We have the Gurney/Paul training scene, and Gurney killing the Sardukar, but everyone else uses guns, which is pretty undramatic and silly. The Atriedes soldiers (or the Sardukar) are never shown to be any more skilled than Stormtroopers, and Duncan gets killed by a bomb!?! I really would have enjoyed it if they probably would have spent a bit more on gettting some bladed cqb going on. This of course would have fit the scenery better if the sets were less "hi-techy".

    Oh well, I'll be watching tomorrow anyway.
  • Those immortal words of MST3K about sum it up...Speakin of which I think I'd rather have watched it on MST3K.

    This just reenforces my belief that almost all TV and movies are going down hill. The idea of character development was a total loss to those who made this movie. Thufer, a mentat, with red stained libs, don't need them, we'll just ignore that. In fact we'll ignore the whole mentat subplot and make Paul a laxed spoiled child. Not the born leader that Mr. Herbert gave us... Political jousting? Nan... we can do with out it, it just makes things complicated. We'll make it simple and brainless. Lets see should we even introduce the traitor before we use him...no... whats the point of forshadowing anything.

    We'll use some small parts of the book but barely give them any context. That way no one can say we did not read the book. Other major things like the doctors imperial training we can leave out.

    The best way I can sum up this movie is that its what would happen if you left the people who made Starship Troopers a copy of the book and a kindergarden class to read it to them!

    My recommendation is to read the book, or go to www.booksontape.com [booksontape.com] and get the unabridged audio book. You'll enjoy it far more.

  • Philip K. Dick's "Do Robots Dream of Electric Sheep" was a so-so book -- too disjointed to be truly entertaining and captivating. "Blade Runner," the movie Ridley Scott made out of that book was a cinematic masterpiece.

    More movies that were better than the original book:

    • Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
    • Die Hard

    Are you moderating this down because you disagree with it,
  • 7..8
    --
  • Thanks for letting us know!
  • Unfortunately most people have been brainwashed into thinking that Star Wars is not only Sci-Fi, but the epitomy of science fiction. It's not really either. Star Wars is closer to fantasy in outer space and it isn't a particularily good example of it either. I'm not saying it wasn't fun, it was.

    Due to the quantity of hype that surrounded Star Wars every science fiction movie will be compared to it.

  • Lynch Movie was Great! (Score:5)

    by burris ( 122191 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @07:12AM (#585799)
    Everyone rips on the Lynch movie but I think it was great. It did not butcher the book at all. About all they butchered was turning the "weirding" fighting technique into a Hollywood-esque sound blaster thingy. Oh, and Paul/Chani's relationship is reduced to the line "Chani & Paul's Love Grew"

    Otherwise it's a great movie. I saw it not that long ago with my girlfriend and I was stopping it every few minutes to explain what the hell was going on. However, I noticed that every time I did that, the very next line after I restarted the player explained what had I had stopped the movie to talk about.

    You see, they got everything into this movie, but it's a lot of stuff. EVERY SINGLE LINE is important in the movie. If you miss a single line, you're lost. Coupled with the fact that there is a lot of "whispering" to indicate private thoughts, it's easy to miss a line. I think that's why people don't like it. Otherwise I think the movie is a masterpiece and is relatively faithful to the book.

    BTW, I love to play the out of print Avalon Hill DUNE board game. IMHO it's the best board game ever created. It's best to play with six players, each player gets to play one of the main factions from the book: Atreidies, Harkonen, Fremen, Emperor, Bene Gesserit, and Guild. Each character is played slightly differently according to the actual character in the book: The Guild tries to prevent other players from gaining control of Dune, if nobody controls Dune by the end of the game then the Guild wins. The Atreidies have limited prescience but find out that sometimes that just means you know you are going to get fsck'd and you can't do a damned thing about it. The Bene Gesserit have the voice and can force you to do or not do certain things in battle and they also must predict the winner of the game (and in what turn they win) before the game starts. If they are successful in manipulating the game so their prediction comes true then the Bene win and everyone else looses! The Emperor is rich and kicks ass, the Harks are treacherous and unpredictable. It's a great game and copies are always available on eBay [ebay.com] of course.

    Burris

  • <hand wave>
    There's nothing to see here.

    Move along.
    </hand wave>
  • No Fremen booty? Awww... There's nothing quite like the American fear of language and sexuality..."My Baby saw a Booby and started killin' folk! You'd think all those years of emotional isolation, corporal punishment, and unmoderated access to firearms would have kept him from such actions." Truth is, Sci-Fi is notorious for butchering films. Even when the content would have been considered acceptable by 1970s standards. I've been unfortunate enough to catch their "version" of Evil Dead 2...They actually cut a few instances where people say the main character's name...thinking Ash was something else. If you want to see that in action, just watch the part of the film where good Ash and Evil Ash first face off. Thankfully they're not attempting to represent that creepy priestess sex we got in Chapterhouse. "You mother father!"

  • Re:Rad! (Score:2)

    by Alan ( 347 )
    Yea, we did 1-8 + smeg offs. Started ~9am saturday, ended sometime late sunday night. We had contests to see who would be the first to fall asleep. I'm ashamed to admit that I bailed sunday sometime, seeing as I couldn't see straight much less stay awake :)
  • Mod this up! Important news for the .ca people out there!

    Like me, who is happy that it will be showing eventually on the space channel.... I was afraid I'd have to buy it on dvd or drive down to the states and steal someone's house for the miniseries :)

  • DVD? (Score:1)

    by Wag ( 102501 )
    Is this thing coming out on DVD? I love Dune, but my cable reception looks like shit, and I don't intend on suffering through 6 hours of trying to figure out what the hell is going on...
  • To paraphrase another responder to your message.

    Dude. It is a six hour mini-series broken into three episodes. The first one was yesterday. There is a show tonight, and one tomorrow.

    The chances of Sci-Fi cancelling the show TODAY are fairly low.

    Idiot.
  • Other benefits to waiting for the DVD include:

    1. Indirect support of the RIAA and MPAA in suits against Linux advocates.
    2. Propagation of the (illegal) "Region Coding" scheme.

    Cheers,
    Slak
  • I saw 'A Boy and His Dog' when it came out, when I was a kid. I found it to be creepy and depressing for all the wrong reasons. I'll have to give it another go, but I don't think it's gotten any better with time.

    I'm a fan of Ellison, but mainly of his rants, essays and criticism. I have yet to read a piece of fiction of his that I would recommend to anyone. His short-story compilations all consist of work he did 30-40 years ago. What little writing he does now seems to be childish invective against childish detractors and re-hashes of his great battles of yore. I kept waiting for him to really write something good, funny or important, but if he has, I missed it.

  • I can understand why many people hated the Lynch film. Yes, Lynch is a weird director, and I can see how sequences of Kyle M. ranting on and on melodramatically about "dune...arakis, desert planet..." would annoy some people to no end. But let's look at where Lynch was at least moderately correct.
    Let's start with Barron Harkonen. In the movie (and yes, I saw the movie before I was 10 years old, give or take a couple years) the Barron scared the living hell out of me. Lynch made the Barron and his nephews creepy and at the very least, *dangerous*. I honestly found it funny when the new "retro-feyd" with the affeminate triangle behind his head fought and killed the slave in front of Barron. Give me a break! The guy looks more concerned with his manicure than he does with taking over Arakis! Same with the Barron. What kind of a House Harkonen was the sci-fi channel going for? Some sort of militant gay rights organization?? These guys aren't frightful, they're laughable.
    Now, on to the fremen. Oh god, don't get me started. Way too tame. As a matter of fact, I'm just going to get down to it; the whole mini-series has been lacking in something Lynch knows perfectly well how to utilize (granted, sometimes too much): intensity. This interpretation of the Herbert's Dune makes you feel like you're actually *reading* it at some points it's so slow. Alright, I've ranted enough. Oh yeah, did anyone else find the Emperor's Daughter's personal guard at the party funny-looking? (I couldn't help making swedish chef noises the whole time)
  • You're only saying that because the SciFi version doesn't portray the worms as big di... whoa, caught myself there.

    Anyway, I like the De Laurentiis/Lynch version(s) because their mantra was "It's the storyline, stupid!" Sure, the 2-hour version left out some details of the original, but that's why I first watched it with my mother, because she read the book. When I first watched the 4-hour version in its entirety, I was disappointed; it had revealed too much. I own the 2-hour version on DVD, and I'm looking forward to viewing it on my SBLive card with 4-point surround enabled.

    As for your complaint of the De Laurentiis/Lynch production being "half-assed", keep in mind that the first portrayals of William Shakespeare's plays were just as improvised (probably "one-eighth-assed" using your stringent standards). I don't look for stunning effects in movies, as I said before, it's the storyline, stupid!

  • It took 16 years to clear Lynch's name.

  • As with the vast majority of the SciFi-produced shows I've seen, I am sorely disappointed with this interpretation of Dune. As someone who's read the books multiple times, I'm intimately familiar with the plot. I'm also familiar with what does and does not work onstage and onscreen; I'm an actor. I think Herbert's original literary decisions make outstanding screen decisions too.

    Unfortunately SciFi felt the need to produce a lukewarm rendition of what is one of the most complex and emotionally charged science fiction series ever written. They concentrated so fiercely on the razzle-dazzle effects they completely missed the point. Dune is in very select company among science fiction series. It's not just about what the future may hold, it's not just about technological advancement, it's about the human condition. Dune speaks to mankind's ultimate questions. While the Lynch movie receives a lot of criticism from my fellow Dune fanatics, it at least succeeds in capturing the mysticism that is so central to Herbert's world. I get no sense of religious or emotional depth out of this miniseries. The scene where the Reverend Mother tests Paul was the most unimpressively flat scene I've seen in my life. Where did the mysticism go? And most importantly where are the feints within feints within feints?

    I was also entirely disgusted with the butchering of decades of accepted pronunciation. Did they consult noone? Who is Duke "Lay-dow"? I only know of a Duke "Lee-tow" in that story. And the "Hark-a-nins"? I only remember "Har-kon-ins". And the Fremen have the most ridiculously inaccurate accent I've ever heard. They're desert people, they don't speak English with a British accent. If they speak it at all it's with a middle eastern accent. They should have listened to an Israeli Jew speak English.

    If you'll excuse me I have to go read the books again to cleanse myself.


    --
  • Then again I also liked the Lynch version back in '84. Of course the Lynch movie only made sense if you read the book first and was a collossal failure as a result.

    Most movies have differences from the books, and one must accept that. I felt this mini-series is doing a good job telling the story that is Dune, whereas Lynch tried to relay all the information of the book onto the screen.

    What I mean by that. In the book you hear the unsaid thoughts of the various characters, and lynch tried to portray those. As an example, when Profession Kynes observes Paul whering a stillsuit in the Lynch movie, as in the book he observes "He shall know your ways as if born to them."

    That interpretation wasn't evident in the mini-series version of the book. Which is actually better in some ways, at least as far as making a movie is concerned. The Lynch movie confused a lot of the audience with these inner voice comments.

    So far I prefer the costumes and casting of the mini-series. It's not nearly as comical as the original film, especially the Baron and Emperor.

    Anyway, I enjoyed it and look forward to the remainder of the story to unfold.

  • In Defense ... (Score:5)

    by Enonu ( 129798 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @07:31AM (#585825)
    I'd like to comment on some of the loaded statements put forth in the posts here. Could everybody please be a bit more objective on the movie. As one who has read all the books except the second prequel and watched the movie numerous times including the long version, I think that Lynch did an adequate job. A book as complex as Dune is *expected* to be warped to a great extent.

    Look what Hollywood has to do to satisfy Joe Smith:

    * Make the concept simple
    * The ending must have closure!
    * 8 to 81, appease all ages
    * Reduce any complex problems to individual drama
    * etc.

    As you can see, the above can only hurt Dune. So ask yourselves the questions when watching the film,

    Has the director captured the essence of the book?
    Has the director transfered the plot well?
    Has the director transfered the characters well?

    Your answers might be different than might, but I'd have to say adequately for all three. For example, when the Baron exclaims, "The Duke will die before these eyes, and he'll know, HE'LL KNOW! That is *I*, Baron Vladimir Harkonnen, who encompasses his doom, blahahaha," I got the same impression of raw, crazy emotion that I did from the book.

    I know I'm being a bit didactic here, but I'm simply trying to give some perspective to all you film critics.

    More on topic, the previews for the series look interesting, if not pure eye-candy. I do not expect any of the actors, nor the director, to give a rats ass about the book. I'm also willing to bet that the "Dune Purists" will be even more offended from the mini-series. However, instead of watching the series, picking out every little "inaccuracy" I'm going to get a Coke and some popcorn, put my fat ass on the couch, and enjoy myself. I'm just grateful to be entertained once again by Herbert's masterpiece.

    NAS

  • Re:Removed 30mins of footage for U.S. audience (Score:3)

    by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @07:54AM (#585833)
    For those who want to see the uncut version do wait for the DVD. It is scheduled for release in March. Other benefits to the DVD release are:

    1) 16:9 picture, no pan & scan (although having been shot for television, the director probably did a decent job framing for 4:3)
    2) Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack, the best you are going to get from the network is Dolby Surround
    3) No commercials!
    4) No waiting for the next night's episode.

    Myself, I am going to skip the airing. If the reviews are good, I'll get the DVD instead.
  • Well, I guess you're just too cool for us...

    You ever notice that when there's a story about a science fiction event (movie, website, game, whatever) there's always some snooty sci-fi "afficionado" around to tell everyone how misguided their devotion to said author/director/program?

    Well, swordgeek, you rock and you're just a little more sophisticated than everyone else here.

    And everybody knows that Harlan Ellison would be nothing if it weren't for the genius Gene Roddenberry mentoring him while he co-wrote (with Gene) the legendary script to "The City on the Edge of Forever".
  • The look of almost everything in the film so far has been lifted from Lynch, with the exception of the stillsuits, which looked better in the movie.

    Most of the acting is really quite bad. Even William Hurt seems to be just spitting out his lines to get them over with. Gurney's character is made out to be a bit of a doofus - nothing like the tough-as-nail Patrick Stewart rendition. The actors playing Paul, the Rev. Mother, and the Baron are equally lame.

    I had high hopes for this. Too bad. It really doesn't seem worth tuning in for the next two nights.

  • There's at least four choices that I'm aware of:

    1) The original "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep", which i believe has asterisks in a few places to show missing portions of the manuscript (due to the author's suicide--I might be thinking of _The Unteleported Man_, but I don't think so).
    2) The movie "Bladerunner" as it first appeared in theaters, with the voiceover and happy ending
    3) An edited, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep."
    4) The director's cut of _Bladerunner_, without the voiceover and with the dystopian ending.

    Actually, I think the voiceover worked better in the film, but that's life :)

    hawk, who's still trying to convince his wife that "They Live" and "Terminator" are dystopian science fiction, not "Rambo Movies" . . .
  • The nice thing about a profound piece of literature is that it is open to creative new interpretations now and then. Look at the endless round of Shakespeare, Austin and Christmas fable movies. I look forward to the "millennial Dune".

  • Alright, what's good about the movie: Like the book, the movie is absolutely different from any other science fiction out there. It's a totally different reality, it's not just yet another Star Wars rip off.

    What's bad about it: First of all, the sound guns really ARE a big deal. As it stands, you may as well just use missiles, since there were only two shields in the entire movie. So why bother with those stupid sound guns when conventional weapons would be far more powerful? Besides, it was explained in the movie that the the sound guns are an Atredies thing, which makes the Fremen look like worthless savages without Paul. The Guild presence went from mysterious in the book to kick you in the crotch obvious. The whispering was hard to hear. Most of Paul's future predicting abilities were not explained, despite the fact that that's really the whole point of the book. Without Paul's abilities Dune is nothing more than a Tom Clancy-esque war novel.

    I could go on, but suffice to say that I regard the Dune movie as an example of why Dune could have been a good movie, but in and of itself it was not. There's a reason it was directed by Alan Smithee... (for those who don't know, Alan Smithee is the name directors put on movies they no longer wish to be associated with)

  • The parallels run a lot deeper than you might think.

    In Episode 1 of Star Wars, Anakin Skywalker is bandied about as being "the one who will bring balance to The Force." Paul Atreides is the object of much speculation amongst the Bene Gesserit of being the "Kwisatz Haderach"...the Shortening of the Way, the only male capable of being a Bene Gesserit.

    Luke's sister is Leia. Paul's sister is Alia. Not too different...almost anagrammatic of one another.

    Both the Bene Gesserit and the Jedi Knights have a distinct martial arts style that uses not only speed, strength and agility but psionic power.

    The crucial events of Episodes 1 and 4 take place on Tatooine, a desert planet. The flashpoint of the Dune novels is Arrakis, a desert planet.

    It was obvious to me from the release of Star Wars (aka Episode 4, "The New Hope") in 1977 that George Lucas really wanted to make a Dune movie. It is ironic that when people now revisit Dune that Star Wars is the reference point they use to speak of it. It was that way in '84 with the David Lynch movie, it's that way now.


    ---- Hey Grrl Geeks! Your very own geek news site has arrived!

  • What people don't seem to understand is that ANY movie made from a book will not be as good as that book. Compromises will ALWAYS be made.

    This is not accurate. The Firm, for example, took a so-so book and made it into an excellent movie. The Godfather movies are among the masterpieces of American cinema. Not often, but sometimes you do get a movie that is even better than the book. Admittedly, Dune is not likely to be one of those, as it is too long, and its plot does not exactly lend itself to movie form, but your broad statement does not really hold up.

  • Re:I have a bad feeling about this (Score:4)

    by llin ( 54970 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @11:17AM (#585868) Homepage Journal
    Introduction to Eye

    By Frank Herbert

    It was a happy time, an educational time and I was utterly fascinated with making a film of my novel, Dune.

    Early in the experience, I reverted to my background as an investigative reporter. What you read here is editorial comment (subjective) and reportage (as objective as I can make it).

    When Sterling Lanier bought Dune for Chilton in 1963 we had no ideas about a movie. It was enough that the novel would be published and I could make jokes about Chilton, publisher of many how-to manuals, saying: "They'll want to retitle it How to Repair Your Ornithopter."

    My first visit to Churubusco Studios in Mexico City put a different stamp on what it means to adapt a novel to the screen.

    The snaking lines of electrical cables, the big yellow buses with "Dune" on the front, the mobs of people in and around the sound stages, the shops turning out props, costumes and special effects, the pulsing sounds of machinery, the glaring lights, the shouted orders -- all said "industry."

    It was poetic justice that we should be in Mexico, which had given me an inexpensive place to live when I began writing, and now Dune was providing well-paid employment for more than a thousand Mexicans.

    I was glad to be back in Mexico and worried about it -- a worry borne out by the troubles that plagued shooting the film there: the necessity to bribe Mexican officials before you could work or ship your film; shoddy equipment; some of the worst air in the world; and something apparently no one considered when deciding on a location -- in at least some of the major cities, Mexican police are the criminal syndicate and corruption goes very high in the government.

    The problems created by that corruption were no surprise, but the film industry itself? That was full of surprises.

    I had heard many warnings about Dino De Laurentiis, yet I found him honorable and trustworthy. He was a creative force, able to hold back and allow others room to work. Daughter Raffaella was a hard-headed business woman and an organizational powerhouse as concerned as a mother would be about those who depended on her.

    Director David Lynch and I hit it off because I understood film to be a language different from English. He spoke it and I was a rank beginner.

    To make a film, you translate, as though from English to German. Each of the world's languages contains linguistic experiences unique to its own history. You can say things in one language you cannot say in another. I was continually brought up short by the process of taking pages from Dune and shifting them to quick visual effects.

    Example: Dune recreates a feudal society. To impress that on you, the film decor echoes Renaissance (and feudal) Italy -- a stroke of genius and visually exciting.

    Filming Dune did something else. I have David to thank for teaching me to write screenplays. During that education, I was able to influence some decisions about the film, but I was unable to influence the ending or how much would be cut for the theater. From the approximately five hours of film in the original footage, only about two-fifths emerged from the cutting room.

    What was cut?

    Here's a partial list for the aficionados:

    • The confrontation between Stilgar (Everett McGill) and Duke Leto (Jurgen Prochnow) where Stilgar spits on the table -- the gift of his water.

    • Development of the relationship between Shadout Mapes (Linda Hunt) and Jessica (Francesca Annis).

    • Most of the love story between Paul Maud'dib (Kyle MacLachlan) and Chani (Sean Young).

    • The fight where Paul kills a Fremen and cries (giving water to the dead).

    • Development of Kynes (Max Von Sydow) as the Imperial Planetologist and (most vital) the place of melange in a space-faring society.

    • The relationship between Paul and his mentors: Duncan Idaho (Richard Jordan); Thufir Hawat (Freddie Jones); Gurney Halleck (Patrick Stewart), and Dr. Yueh (Dean Stockwell).

    • The death of Thufir Hawat.

    • The relationship between Paul and the Fremen widow, Harah (Molly Wryn).

    • Scenes with Jessica and The Reverend Mother Mohiam (Sian Phillips) that would have made the Bene Gesserit sisterhood more understandable.

    That's only a partial list.

    Dino and Raffaella have talked about restoring the out-takes and making a miniseries (à la The Godfather). This may happen because Dino wanted a longer film all along.

    The film of Dune is the result of a paradox -- product of an industry that pretends to creativity and shies away from risks. Creation takes risks and that's the movie industry's dilemma. It's why so much control over creativity is in the hands of noncreative people. The reasoning behind their decisions is enlightening.

    So many films are aimed primarily at early-to-late teens because this age group is more easily seduced by hype. These also are viewers with time and money and the inclination to join a date at the local cineplex -- powerful forces in the entertainment business.

    Why a film of only about two hours?

    Because that length can be shown more frequently on a day-to-day basis, returning the investment quickly.

    Don't condemn this out of hand. If investors had not been found to put up about forty million dollars, Dune would never have been filmed. And all of the essentials in the book are on film, even though all of it did not get to your screen.

    Never forget it's an industry.

    There is more here than meets the eye. One of the most important things is corporate politics. Big corporations are bureaucracies that often promote people who are best at covering their asses. Such people run scared, fearful of any suggestion they can make mistakes. And they surround themselves with others who run the same way.

    Don't take risks.

    Find out what succeeds and copy it.

    Some of the most successful practitioners plagiarize and steal without a qualm, knowing they can stall their victims for years with expensive legal maneuvers. Creativity often has little to do with movie-making except when writing promotional copy.

    So what happened with the movie of Dune, the sixth biggest money-earner of 1984? What happened to the film that, at this writing, is still number two at the box office in Germany, Japan and France? I can only tell you what I saw.

    There was scrambling and many false starts around the film's release, a clear signal of nervousness to audiences, including critics.

    Critics who were inclined to be sympathetic were not permitted to see advance screenings.

    The hype machine grinded into action, telling people to expect the complete Dune. My efforts were enlisted. I joined in wholeheartedly because I enjoyed the film even as cut and I told it as I saw it: What reached the screen is a visual feast that begins as Dune begins and you hear my dialogue all through it.

    Overseas there were none of these negative signals and Dune set box office records. It was up 29 percent the third week in Great Britain. There were some 40,000 viewers each day the first three days in Paris alone, and to quote a French commentator: "Visually magnificent, rich enough for many repeat viewings."

    In Europe you did not find critics bragging (as did one closet aristocrat on CBS): "I don't like movies that make me think." (He wants to feed you "bread and circuses" and keep you docile.)

    Was it a success or a failure as a movie? I'm the wrong person to ask. Like me, Dune movie audiences, fans and newcomers, wanted more. They would have returned many times to see that "more." What they saw was true to my book, even though most of it stayed on the cutting room floor. Dune fans could supply the missing scenes in imagination but they still longed for those scenes.

    Investors will get back their investment. There will not be large immediate profits as there might have been had they risked a longer film and satisfied the expectations they raised.

    Catering to the lowest common denominator is the way you play the no-risk movie game, and David, with agreement from Dino and Raffaella, went against that directive.

    I have my quibbles about the film, of course.

    Paul was a man playing god, not a god who could make it rain.

    Dune was aimed at this whole idea of the infallible leader because my view of history says mistakes made by a leader (or made in a leader's name) are amplified by the numbers who follow without question.

    That's how 900 people wound up in Guyana drinking poison Kool-Aid.

    That's how the U.S. said "Yes, sir, Mister Charismatic John Kennedy!" and found itself embroiled in Vietnam.

    That's how Germany said "Sieg Heil!" and murdered more than six million of our fellow human beings.

    Leadership and our dependence on it (how and why we choose particular leaders) is a much misunderstood historical phenomenon.

    You see, we often get noncreative leaders, people most interested in preserving their own positions. They flock around centers of power. Such centers attract people who can be corrupted. That is a more descriptive observation than to say simply that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    If you are corruptible and your imagination is confined to worries about loss of power, you exist in a self-destructive system. Eventually, as all life does, you must encounter some thing you did not anticipate, and if you have not strengthened your creative resources, you will have no new ways for adapting to change. Adapt or die, that's the first rule of survival.

    The limited vision of noncreative people is not difficult to understand. Creativity frightens the unimaginative. They don't know what's happening. Things new and unexpected arise from creativity. This threatens "things as they are." And (terrible thought) it underlines illusions of omnipotence.

    Besides, at least in the movie industry, they "know" an audience can be enticed into the theater by the right promotion. It's all a matter of "hype." You buy an audience.

    The next time you watch a political campaign, ask yourself if that sounds familiar.

    There is more.

    David had trouble with the fact that Star Wars used up so much of Dune. We found sixteen points of identity between my novel and Star Wars. That is not to say this was other than coincidence, even though we figured the odds against coincidence and produced a number larger than the number of stars in the universe.

    The fact that David was able to translate the written words into screen language speaks of his visual genius. If you were disappointed or wanted more, chalk it up to "That's show biz" and pray for the miniseries.

    So much for the wonderful world of film and corporate decisions. I recommend you read Ed Naha's "The Making of Dune" and Harlan Ellison's two-part essay in the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction. Screen them through my comments.

    Don't get the idea from any of this that I'm ungrateful. Making that film was a superb education. And don't take this as a swan song. I'm alive and well and intend to stay that way while I continue writing as long as possible.

    It's my opinion that David's film of Dune will also be alive and well long after people have forgotten the potboilers that come out of corporate boardrooms. This is based partly on the reactions of everyone who worked on the film: They were sad to be parting when it was over and glad they had done it. The wrap party was a rare scene of happy nostalgia.

    Francesca labeled it: "Hard work but great work."

    Dune is a film addressed to your audio-visual senses in a unique way, forcing you to participate and not just sit there while it is "done to you." A miniseries restoring the out-takes would make this even more apparent.

    That's how I wrote the novel, wanting you to participate with the best of your own imagination. I did not aim for the lowest common denominator and 'write down" to anyone. You and I have a compact and my responsibility is to entertain you as richly as possible, always giving you as much extra as I can. I assume you are intelligent and will enlist your own imagination. You'll see that when you read the Dune excerpt and the other stories in this collection.

    Don't ask yourself if I succeeded or if the film succeeded.

    The only valid critic is time. Does it endure? We can only guess and give our opinions. No one living today really knows, but people in the next century certainly will.

    Copyright © 1985 by Frank Herbert
    All rights reserved. Reprinted without permission. Originally published in Eye, copyright © 1985 by Byron Preiss Visual Publications, Inc.
  • Here's hoping that bill brings the kind of energy to Atreides that he brought to the role of George Washington on A&E's thing about the crossing of the Deleware.

    (ducks)
  • This sounds like a competent job, at the least. Am I the only one feeling faintly dizzy at the idea of people taking the source material of science fiction movies somewhat seriously?

    I'd be happy to see an end to the days where fantasy and science fiction books were pillaged for a few cool gimmmicks, while having their plots and characters completely eviscerated. Witness the Lynch Dune (I guess I'm one of those "few" who hold some real animosity towards it - see the CNN sidebar) and Bladerunner.

    [ Before I get flamed to a crisp, I must point out that I enjoyed Bladerunner, but the "androids are people too" sentimentalism of the plot was pretty much a Scott creation]

    It will be interesting to see if non-Herbert readers can make any sense of the mini-series, though. It's a astonishingly complicated book, even for a six-hour mini-series. I guess I'll have to wait for it to make it to Australia...

  • At least one really good review (Score:3)

    by David Leppik ( 158017 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @05:00AM (#585873) Homepage
    The Minneapolis & St. Paul Star Tribune gave it 4 out of 4 stars. [startribune.com] The longer format, better visual effects, and great director of photography (Vittorio Storaro, from The Last Emperor), give it a leg up on the movie.

    Mind you, 3 4-hour segments isn't much longer than the 4-hour "director's other cut" version of the movie, but this one was intended to be long. The problem with the movie was cramming such a huge, complex story in such a short time.

    I just hope they don't sanitize the ending, but they probably will. Yay war for the sake of genetic diversity!

  • I wouldn't want to see a Red Dwarf Film anymore because of the new CG work they use! It's a sad state of affairs I know but..... the only good thing they got out of the new computer revolution was a great scene of a minaturised Starbug flying around a corrider with it's head stuck up a rat's ass.

    What offends me about the CG work they are using is not it's existance or the fact that you can tell a mile away that it is CG (and therefore any suspension of disbelief is destroyed) but with the fact that they did a George Lucas and decide to go back and re-cut 15 year old TV with new effects just because someone thought it looked better now (and maybe they could sell a few more boxes). You get cheesy live action scenes cut in with crystal precise space shots.....all the charector is detroyed. Using the CG in the new episodes is ok I guess, but lets face it, very little film CG is worthwhile and does not destroy all suspension of disbelief.

    The final ignomy is best served by watching the outtakes videos when you see the most amazin shots of Spacecraft pulling 360 loops as they exit the docking bay taking half the bay with them.

    What's a full length Red Dwarf anyway ??? the closest I can image is a series at a time (3 hours each for the first six and I think 4 hours the rest). My own favourite full length red dwarf though is the 18 hour series 1-6 marathon....well worth a go when you've a spare day.

    So long SmegHeads

  • Re:I have a bad feeling about this (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Look chump, the David Lynch movie was cool. The visuals are quite good in most places. Its not pure Herbert, but even he wrote that he liked it.

    If you want such pure Dune you'll have to put it on with Shakesperian actors on a small stage. Any larger budget just brings in entertainment industry vermin like flies to honey. In a world were many people don't grasp simple science, why are you expecting inteligent Science Fiction to go over on a grand scale.

    Maybe Dune in anime form could succeed.

    This new production looks to be an affront to the eyes compared to David Lynches' adaptation.
  • Or Dish Network [dishnetwork.com](unlike cable, you actually get a choice in provider!)

    My DirecTV [directv.com] setup is about $20 a month less than what I used to pay for Digital Cable.

  • Theatre movies generally have an order of magnitude more financial resources than TV movies. I hope the TV series isn't too compromised.

    There again most theatre remakes of TV series have been dogs.

  • Are we all talking about the same Dune here? The incredibly long, rambling, dreary bit of SF that Frank Herbert wrote and won too many awards for?

    To be fair, it wasn't an awful book or anything, it just wasn't truly great. Much better SF has been written, and at least one of those stories was turned into a really good movie. (A Boy and his Dog - Harlan Ellison)

    *shrug* I just don't see what the fuss is about.

  • I could go on, but suffice to say that I regard the Dune movie as an example of why Dune could have been a good movie, but in and of itself it was not. There's a reason it was directed by Alan Smithee... (for those who don't know, Alan Smithee is the name directors put on movies they no longer wish to be associated with)
    I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. The movie was directed by David Lynch, but the remade TV adaptation was Alan Smithee.

    Burris

  • Is anyone intending on making a MPG or DIVX of the series? I would like to dload it and view - I dont have a television. Can you post a link in this forum please.
  • Well, looking at the TV guide listing for Dune, i see that they repeat each episode 3 times (8-10, 10-12, 12-2) on each night of airing. I could understand it if they wanted to hit many different audiences by showing it at several different times... but right next to each other? Anybody who can will probably see it live, anybody who can't will tape (or TiVo) it and watch it later. Am i missing something or does the Sci-Fi channel just have the programming time to spare?
    ~Kooshman
  • Tonight at 9pm? Were they trying to compete with X-Files? Now I have to go figure out how to program my VCR to record Dune while I'm watching X-Files.

    Damnit can at least one weekend go by where I do not have to program? ;^)


    --

  • Removed 30mins of footage for U.S. audience (Score:5)

    by delfstrom ( 205488 ) on Sunday December 03, 2000 @05:48AM (#585913)
    It looks like they're cutting out the naughty bits for the U.S. audience:
    What viewers will see in the United States on the Sci Fi Channel is some 30 minutes shorter than a European version that screens some nudity as the Fremen get into and out of their stillsuits. Harrison says he trimmed about 10 minutes off each night's installment both for reasons of that nudity and for the time restrictions of U.S. commercial television.
    There's no comment from Harrison about his particular choice of the 'trims', other than the nudity. Do you think this is a stab at the Americans?
  • >> why is it necessary to compare Dune with Star Wars?

    Probably because a lot more people have heard of Star Wars than Dune. It gives them a frame of reference.
  • What's bad about it: First of all, the sound guns really ARE a big deal. As it stands, you may as well just use missiles, since there were only two shields in the entire movie.
    That bit is actually faithful to the first edition of the novel, but the "weirding modules" were cut for space. Apparently. I haven't read it, but I have it on good authority.
  • The Alan Smithee Tribute Page [ioc.net]

    Dedicated to the greatest film director who never lived.

    Take, for instance, the science fiction epic Dune (1984). Under the protest of original writer-director David Lynch, the film was recut for television broadcast, bloated to 190 minutes with previously unseen footage and new narration. Lynch immediately disowned this version (he also exchanged his screenplay credit for the traitorous pseudonym "Judas Booth"), and the notorious Smithee was given credit as the ill-fated epic's director. Under Director's Guild guidelines, the assignment of the name "Allen (aka Alan) Smithee" is an official procedure of credit arbitration. Although the "last-resort" usage of the name has grown somewhat rare, new works by "Smithee" will continue to appear as long as filmmakers find a need to distance themselves from a project that has gone creatively sour.



  • Having read the original novel by Philip K Dick and seen the director's cut of Bladerunner I have to say that Scott's vision surpasses the original novel. This isn't to say that the novel wasn't good. It was good but different. But I would have to say that the movie not only displayed a great sense of visual beauty and a fabulous sound track but the plot formed a fine tapestry that explored what it is to be human.

    The book Future Noir: The Making of Blade Runner talks about how Philip K Dick was totally taken with Scott's and the screen writers interpretation of the novel. Also I recall that William Gibson was also totally blown away by the movie and he was also impressed that this movie had better visuals than what he was dreaming up for his novel Neuromancer (which hadn't been published yet).

Slashdot Top Deals

Never let someone who says it cannot be done interrupt the person who is doing it.

Close