Steve, my man, you are missing out on one of science fiction's crown jewels here! Lots of very serious allegories of modern society at work here. I was watching the miniseries on DVD this past weekend to get ready for "Children of Dune" last night, and it has very many interesting layers to it. When it got to the third part with the Fremen attack on the Harkonnen forces and Paul Muad'dib's confrontation with the Emperor, it really did suggest themes of what is happening in our time right now with fanatical forces such as the Iraqis, the al Qaida, and other forces. Also at work is prophecy fulfillment and a people's will to either embrace the prophecy or rebel against it, which is what humanity did when the Israelites' prophecy of Jesus Christ occurred in the Biblical days. And in this new miniseries, based on "Dune Messiah" and "Children of Dune", we have themes of cloning rights and a son's desire to assume his destiny from his father, themes that would later surface in the "Star Wars" film series.

This, then, is the essence of solid science fiction, what Gene Roddenberry attempted to accomplish with the original "Star Trek" and the beginning years of "The Next Generation": serious science fiction that tell us about ourselves in interesting allegories. No wonder B&B have lost their way with their efforts on "Enterprise" and "Voyager" - some of those episodes just smacked viewers upside the head with blatant themes. Science fiction at its best is best when it's subtle - "Dune", "The Lord of the Rings", the "Foundation" trilogy, among others, are both literary classics to be read and serious science fiction at its best.

David Lynch's version of "Dune" had some good points at times, while at times hinting at his own personal views of viewing things. The problem was that it was too short, poorly edited, and tried to cram everything into 2 hours and 15 minutes. Even the extended version tried to flesh some of the story out.

John Harrison's straightforward attempt at presenting the "Dune" series is more of a theatrical stageplay attempt at times, yet more of the layers really come to the forefront. Does it have its flaws? Of course. Having seen the original film, there are aspects of Lynch's version that are a little more believable, so comparisons are always going to be there. How many film versions of "Hamlet" are there? At least five. There's always going to be strengths and weaknesses among different versions. Same with "Dune". To do "Dune" accurately would also be extremely cost-prohibitive. As long as the essence of the original source novels remains intact, then we'll see "Dune" in theaters or on TV in one form or another.

But it's definitely like the spice itself in the story: a treasure. :)

[ Reply to This | Parent Comment ]

Well, I haven't seen Children of Dune, but I have read the first 5 books in the Dune series and I've seen the David Lynch film with Patrick Stewart as well as the mini-series from a few years ago.
First, let me say that no film has captured the scope and wonder of the first book thus far. Both the Lynch film and the mini-series have strengths and weaknesses. Forunately, they don't seem to overlap in those strengths.
The acting in the first film is better. The inner monologues are done well. The biggest problem with it is the length. It leaves too much out to make much sense. I found it to be a good primer for the book, though. There are so many made-up words in the book that I found it difficult to hold my attention. Once I had a frame of reference from having watched the movie, it was easy to get through the book.
The mini-series is much more coherent, but the acting isn't all that great.

[ Reply to This | Parent Comment ]

Ok, I just wrote this story but I must admit to ignorance when it comes to this genre franchise. What is DUNE, what is CHILDREN OF DUNE, and is it worth watching instead of THE DEAD ZONE? :-)

---

-Steve Krutzler
==V/-/== Rocks

[ Reply to This | Parent Comment ]