Dune: Book Vs film Vs TV

[Proginoskeys]

I have to disagree with some of the reviews of the SyFy series (Never seen the whole Lynch film, but love his stuff...Mullholland drive makes my brain hurt like Gumby)

I really enjoyed the Dune series, but I will agree it was a bit plodding...but that's the price you gotta pay for a more complete adaptation. I liked how many moments were included, really like they were making it for the fans and not for a wider audience...which since I'm a fan I loved! However there were problems. I wasn't amazed by Irulan's bigger role. And what the blankety-blank was with the Harkonnen's looking toward the camera and spouting rhyming couplets? I kept laughing hysterically! Campy, yes, and very in fitting with SyFy milieu...but it seemed so out of place next to the faithful recreation of the mysticism and sprawling epic-ness of the book.

The Children of Dune, though, I felt very blah about. There was lots of great acting in the Dune series, but I didn't think it continued into Children. I was so annoyed every time Alya opened her mouth in CoD! It's been awhile so I can't recall if it was poor acting or if they just gave her a lousy script, probably some of both. Also Leto barely changes when he merges with the worm, he just gets a little sandtrout mottling on his arm. This I would bet has more to do with budget and not wanting to totally obscure the actor, which would be problems with making the skin-that-is-not-his-own more faithful to the book.

These're just my humble open-onions. There stated, I would happily watch whatever other movies/series/anything else they make out of these books!

 

[J-Sun]

Link to referenced PKD thread.

Nothing much to add to my post there, except that it only indicates I didn't care for the movie. To be clear, I really hated the movie. I like some Lynch stuff but, even if he is a genius, he's certainly not the right kind of genius for Dune. (And I think "genius" may be a little too strong.) The casting was terrible (I didn't like Rautha or Harkonnen or anybody else, really). The visuals were beneath both Dune and Lynch. Etc., etc.

The book is probably overrated in the sense that it's regarded as a transcendental classic and it may just be a classic. It's been a long time since I read it but I liked it. I'll never see the movie again but may one day re-read Dune.

I haven't seen the miniseries.

 

[drush9999]

I saw the 80s movie first so have some fondness for it, the production design is sublime. Still enjoy it today for what it is.
Read the book later in life and love the first book at least, don't get on with the sequels so much. I've re-read Dune about five or six times now, and always find it rewarding.
The TV series seemed cheap to me, and should have had more money lavished on it. I didn't like it at all, thought the script could have done with a major rework as well. Never bothered with the Children of Dune after that.

 

[Proginoskeys]

Yeah I couldn't agree more with the oft-stated opinion that not enough money is lavished on the big/small screen adaptions. Here's two reasons why I fear this will probably never happen:

I. The commercial faliure of Lynch's movie. His previous movie, The Elephant Man, was a big success and pretty close to mainstream for such a rigid iconoclast. He had lots of options for his next film. He even had a offer from Lucas to direct Return of the Jedi!
(Imagine...*SHUDDER*)
But he opted for Dune instead for more creative freedom (which he clearly seems to have exercised). The movie cost $42 mil and made only $15 million. While there seems to be plenty of blame for this to go around (Mostly in Lynch's direction, it seems, based on Dune fan's reactions), it's doubtful any major studio wants to risk that kind of red-line over a nearly 70 year old book.

(My source for all this Hollywod info by the way is the great book "The impossible David Lynch" by Todd McGowan; real thick academic film-speak throughout, but what can I say I'm a professor brat)


II. The nature of the book. I say this as someone who loves the book, and its 2 immediate sequels, very much. But Herbert strikes me as an Idea/Philosopher writer, who takes his time with ideas (that for his time must have been quite striking, in ecology and economic-deterministic fields especially) and lets them develop slowly. There is, of course, plenty of action, but so much of what makes the action comprehensible is the internal thoughts of the characters. How is one to show that onscreen? The closest the Dune Miniseries got to that, I think, was when Paul awakes after drinking the super-spicy Water o' Life and gives Jessica some of his vision. And there are so many other moments of those internal thought-spaces that adding them would grind the movies to a halt, and you just KNOW some "genius" film producer who's never read a page of sci-fi in his life will say "Cut it! Cut it! Cut it all!" I hate it when they do that!

Thanks for listening

 

[rubi]

I think they are totally incomparable. Movies are well done but they couldn't make me feel even closely to the way i felt while i was reading the books. It is just different emotion.

 

[Abd-L-zeez]

i think they did a good job capturing some of the dramatic moments from the book .. in 2000 dune and children of dun .. and the did great job ignoring some of the key events .. the book is better then the mine sires and the mine sires is better then the movie .

 

[Glen]

It was the layering of detail, themes, history and character that made the books great for me. There is also a good deal of internal thought.
The movies always strip some of that back, and so in my mind don't have the same depth of quality.

 

[MemoryTale]

I've not seen the TV series, but my chief thought while watching the film was "It's a good thing I've read the book or I'd be totally lost right about now"

 

[clovis-man]

I saw the 80s movie first so have some fondness for it, the production design is sublime. Still enjoy it today for what it is.
Read the book later in life and love the first book at least, don't get on with the sequels so much. I've re-read Dune about five or six times now, and always find it rewarding.

I have to concede that the order in which one experiences the different versions may have a profound effect on opinions about them.

I read the original Analog version that was serialized in a number of issues. Analog changed the size of their magazine format right in the middle of the serial and I almost went nuts trying to find the next installment. Be that as it may, I was totally mesmerized.

I've already given my opinion of the Lynch film earlier in the thread. I'm resistant to the idea that seeing the film first would have given me a different perspective, but I can see how it could happen.

 

[SpanishMill]

**ancient thread disclaimer **

Books > Films

 

[Rodders]

I picked something up today at Tescos called Dune Apocalypse. it's got Susan Sarandon and James McAvoy in it, so I hope i turns out ok.

 

[Foxbat]

I picked something up today at Tescos called Dune Apocalypse. it's got Susan Sarandon and James McAvoy in it, so I hope i turns out ok.

It's a repackaged version of Children Of Dune from the Sci-Fi Channel.

 

[Rodders]

Damn, I have Children of Dune already.

I must confess that I really enjoyed the two mini series. Are there any plans to continue?

 

[clovis-man]

Damn, I have Children of Dune already.

I must confess that I really enjoyed the two mini series. Are there any plans to continue?

It's been ten years since this was produced. I sort of doubt it at this point.

 

[zlogdan]

I really loved Dune, the film, when I watched in the 80s. At that time it was one of my favorite films ever made. But back in 1993 I read the book and I was really amazed by the book and since then I find it hard to compare anything to the Dune book. Still, the film is entertaining at least. I did not like the TV mini series much. At least the film could recreate the atmosphere of the book.

I read books 1 to 4 of the Saga, then I stopped because I was not quite fond of books 3 and 4, but I keep telling my self I should read the rest one these days, as Dune is a groundbreaking book IMO.

 

[tangaloomababe]

I've not read the book, however I have seen the movie and also,the TV series. I enjoyed the series because it allowed more time to tell the story, the movie to me was disjointed and was to short to do credit to the story.

 

[Barracooda]

I saw the Lynch version of Dune when I was a kid and totally loved it, it's a great film. However, in my 20s I got in to the books and there is no comparison. All the Frank Herbert books (purposefully ignoring his son's attempt to finalise the story) are grand works. The TV series and the film never really captured the spirit.

All that stupid stuff with the voice-activated guns. Why? It seems like a poor attempt to wrap all the cool wierding stuff up into a nice, easy morsel for the cinema-goers.

The Lynch film managed to get the mysticism and the strangeness right, and the TV series followed slightly closer to the book but in the end it was just a bunch of Americans teenagers in space. The characters were nowhere near as intense as they should have been. They're supposed to be a bit like they're from the Middle Ages or something.

I also didn't think the Arabic influences came across too well. I mean, the story is about a precious resource in the desert, it's pretty obvious.

 

[Clansman]

I'd much rather see a film based on Herbert's White Plague than another attempt to put Dune into film. That would be a good movie, done properly.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I'm glad people here are liking the David Lynch version of the film. I think it gets too much flak. Still love the images of that film.

 

[Gramm838]

I also enjoyed the Dune movie - although filming any movie with so much 'internal dialogue' (i.e. people thinking to themselves) is always difficult, because it starts to sound like a voiceover.

It would be good to see a new version with modern SFX - maybe David Lynch to do it again, so we get his 'weirdness'?