
The Best Adaptation We're Likely to Get (An Argument)
3 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Other reviews of the "Dune" Sci-Fi Chanel miniseries have abused its actors, story and direction. Those partial to the David Lynch version called "blasphemy" while purists bemoaned the miniseries' changes to the story. Nonetheless, this version of "Dune" is likely the best adaption we're going to get.
With the miniseries format, the filmmakers had more room and time to explore the book's concepts than did the 136-minute David Lynch debacle. Viewers get a true glimpse into the culture of Arakkis, thanks to the filmmakers' immense attention to detail (watch the making-of feature and you'll see what I mean). Meanwhile, the film's talent is all expertly cast, even if the ensemble is comprised of unknown Brits and Czechs, with the exception of William Hurt.
For a made-for-TV miniseries, "Dune"s production value does not betray the film's bargain price tag. On the contrary, many shots of the sandworms are excellently rendered while the desert landscapes prove much more effective as matte paintings than they would have as CGI. Yes, there are some points where the viewer is aware that he or she is watching a made-for-TV production; but these moments are far and few between.
"Dune" is such a vast novel that fans will never get a truly faithful adaptation, unless perhaps if the material is made into a trilogy of studio films for each of the book's three sections. But as this seems unlikely, the "Dune" miniseries is a good balance for both newcomers and purists.
Review ID: 10000000004859185

Thank you for voting. If your vote meets our
guidelines, it will be posted within 24 hours.
You cannot vote on the helpfulness of a review you wrote.
Your request cannot be processed at this time. Please try again later.