I'm eagerly aniticipating it, but am somewhat disappointed that they didn't use the same cast with some of the characters. At least Chani will be the same
I liked Frank Hubert's more accurate version of Dune 2yrs ago, but the movie lacked the pagentry and emotions of Kubrick's Dune of the mid80's. After reading all 700 pages of House Atraides(sp?), my appreciation of the original translation of Hubert's twisted genious scatter shot over several books into a 2hr picture that rivaled Star Wars went up. I'm pumped about it. Hubert never intended to end Dune the way the orig movie closed. In fact, he left notes and early drafts on old 5.5 floppies in a bank safe deposit box on how he saw his little universe.
      I saw the first miniseries when it first aired, but haven't seen it since (even though I later bought the DVD).       I should watch the DVD before the new miniseries begins, to refresh my memory. -G
      Interesting points. I think that the creator of Babylon 5 did something similar regarding his floppies and a bank (or mail... I can't remember which) safe deposit box.       Just one little nitpick: it was David Lynch, not Stanley Kubrick, that directed the mid-80's theatrical version of Dune. -G
Babylon 5 was pitched to UPN originally a sci-fi that had all of the plotlines predetermined and a set run time of I think 5yrs. i don't recall there ever being a book sereis b4 it came out. did ya ever notice babylon 5 was almost identical to DS9?
My TiVo is getting quite a workout - 8 hours of Dune on SciFi next Sunday. I just hope I can rip thru both miniseries by the following weekend... (No, I didn't catch the first series.) I loved the ambitiousness of the original movie, especially after reading the books. They managed to do a good enough job to get me to pick up the novels, but the story was never going to be made into one good movie - it should've gotten the LOTR treatment.
      I do recall the controversy about the Babylon 5/Star Trek: Deep Space Nine situation. Which of the two series' did you think ended up better, though (just curious)?       And although Babylon 5 was never based on a book, the series' creator had all of the scripts for the entire series' run (five years worth) already on disks and saved in a deposit box, with only him and another producer of the show having keys to the box. The scripts may have been altered slightly over those five years, but he did have the entire run of the series pretty much planned out ahead of time. -G
      And there will also be a half-hour special on the SciFi Channel tonight called Women of Dune.       By the way, which version of Dune was better: the theatrical movie or the TV miniseries (I've never seen the theatrical movie)? -G
I liked both but since I'm an undercover treker (no meetings, chat sites or conventions) it's got to be DS9. BTW that's my favorite psi-fi series, period. i thought Babylon coulda gone further w/ the whole narn occupation & psycore conspiracy. the old alien civilizations coulda been explained better. They kept the Vorlon mystique to obtuse, so it wasn't until the end that we could understand them better. DS9 told you everything about the different race cultures and even gave diff pts of view about the federation. 8hrs? son-of-a... i gotta ditch the girlie that day then & plant myslef on a serious marathon spree
The series was better but only because the theatrical release, by David Lynch, was one of the most relentlessly silly movies ever made.
They are both unfortunatley very flawed, though oddly for different reasons. And they both also got a few things right--I really think a fine movie/series could be made by blending the strengths of both. Lynch's production was by far the more extravagant and visually compelling; the miniseries, on the other hand, at times looked like a community theatre production. Seriously some of the costumes looked like the actors mothers had just glued them together before filming that day. I also vaguely remember Lynch trying to deal more honestly with the psychological complexity of the novel: he used lots of voice-overs for the inner thought sequences, whereas the mini-series pretty much ignored a lot of that stuff and stuck more to the basic plot elements. And finally, on the Lynch side of things, I think he had a better cast. Or at least McLaughlin was a better Paul than the stiff in the mini-series. I can't remember much about the other performances in Lynch's version. That said, the problem with Lynch's movie is that its came off as unintelligible to those who had not read the novel, and even to those who had, Lynch chopped it so much that the film confused even Herbert fans. The miniseries was much more true to the text, as far as plot elements go, an so at least scored on that point. Thus it got closer to the "epic" scope that such a story demands.
Watched it last night on the TiVo. Not bad - the intro voiceover was (honestly, no joke) the first time I had seen the now-obvious parallel between the spice and oil. Heh. I'll tell you after I watch the miniseries (maybe by Tuesday?). I can tell you the movie has some severe flaws, and can be very confusing.
it's not just spice=oil. spice is the life blood for the empire. it allows mentats to serve as computers since AI destroyed the old empire and is illegal. It allows the benegeserit witches to comunicate w/ ea other, even after death by telepathy, to create their superbeing. it allows the navigators to warp space and move ships by though over the vastness of space. And it is addictive. People of influence drink spice beer, snort spice blow & consume the intoxicating drug which can add abnormal longevity to their lives. The fremen are arabs. The wierding way is a ritualized style of fighting like shaolin. Arakis is the middle east. The harkonans are russians, caladan is spain & house corona is rome. House richess and the other techno house represent japanese technical prowess. Paul's powers represent the assention to nirvana and Mohamed's assention to the heaven's w/ Allah. Hubert's books are layered plots and themes like a tapestry of fine silks. Individually ea is pleasing, but the mural created shows stories that make a complete epic. That's what the guild navigator means in Lynch's movie when he says, "I see plots w/ in plots."
This is good news. As for the two movies, I am not as versed for what has been said before me, but I liked that mini-series better as it gave a more complete story. I did miss the idea of the psychological aspects that were all over the book, but kind of smoothed over in the mini-series. For the movie, it was good. Had a very good cast. But cut waaaaay to much of Baron Haarkonen and nephew out to really understand their motivations (though they did a great job of making him one ugly bastard). Also, I like the narative. Not often that a narative is useful to a movie, but in this one, it was absolutely necessary. Hmmmm, March 16th. I guess I will be reserving some TV time.