The Dune Miniseries Is a Fascinating Piece of History – WIRED

In December 2000, the Sci-Fi Channel (since renamed Syfy) released Frank Herberts Dune, an ambitious three-part miniseries. Science fiction author Rajan Khanna was a recent college grad when he first watched the show.

I remember it coming out, and I remember honestly the Sci-Fi Channel being a big deal back in the day, Khanna says in Episode 515 of the Geeks Guide to the Galaxy podcast. This was before there was all this geek stuff everywhere. It was sort of like, This is for us, in a way.

With a budget of $20 million, Frank Herberts Dune was an ambitious project for the fledgling network. The series won an Emmy for special effects and was one of the channels highest-rated programs. But TV writer Andrea Kail warns that modern audiences wont exactly be blown away by the shows production values. I have a very distinct memory of one specific shot where Jessica and Paul are running away from the ornithopters, and theyre running in place in front of a bad green screen, she says. It was like watching a play being filmed. It wasnt a movie, it was a play that somebody pointed a camera at.

Geeks Guide to the Galaxy host David Barr Kirtley agrees that the show has its problems, but he enjoyed a subplot involving Princess Irulan, a minor character in the novel who was completely omitted from the recent film. Dune is a combination of space opera court intrigue and hippie Lawrence of Arabia,' he says. Those are the two elements. I like the space opera court intrigue stuff significantly more. [Irulans] storyline continued the space opera court intrigue stuff through the whole story, so I actually really liked that a lot.

Science fiction author Matthew Kressel says the quality of the underlying material shines through regardless of any rough edges. In particular he enjoyed how the series captures the texture of the novel. I love the Villeneuve movie, of course, but its a very frenetic film, he says. I feel like there was something about this series that took its time telling the story, and I respected that.

Listen to the complete interview with Rajan Khanna, Andrea Kail, and Matthew Kressel in Episode 515 of Geeks Guide to the Galaxy (above). And check out some highlights from the discussion below.

Andrea Kail on Frank Herberts Dune vs. Dune (1984):

This [miniseries] makes the Lynch version look like the Denis Villeneuve version, and the Lynch version makes the Villeneuve version look like a movie delivered by the hand of God. Thats how much this propped everything else up The [Lynch version] is a terrible movie, but I will never not watch it if its on. Its a bad movie, but its compellingly bad. I always sit and watch it because its a spectacle. This? I love Dune, but I will not sit and watch this again. Do you see the difference? The [Lynch version] is visually interesting and theres a lot going on. This is not something I would ever watch again willingly, and Im a Dune fanatic.

Matthew Kressel on special effects:

There were some places where they didnt even do a matte painting, they just had a backdrop that they unrolled behind the actors. Thats an odd choice, because maybe they didnt have the money for a matte painting, but they certainly had green screens by this point. So I was very curious about that Were spoiled by the special effects today. Theyre so good, everything looks real. Its flawless. But we kind of forget that that was really, really hard to achieve. Even Star Wars, which had this huge budget, you watch the original onenot the remasterand its like, Yeah, the Death Star is a model. You can just tell on the close-up shots.

David Barr Kirtley on Frank Herberts Dune vs. Dune (2021):

The Villeneuve movie basically doesnt explain anything. Mentats? Dont worry about it. Guild Navigators? Dont worry about it, its not important. It just focuses on telling a compelling, emotional character story. The [miniseries] tries to explain a lot more of the world-building, and thats really bad in a lot of waysdramaticallybut I feel like if you watch this you actually know more about the world and what happens in the book than you would from watching the Villeneuve moviewhich is a million times better, but its made a trade-off of dramatic effectiveness versus world-building explication.

Rajan Khanna on adaptation:

I think this [miniseries] is one of the examples of how being faithful to a book can be a trap, because what you end up with is a box-checking exercise and not a lot of life. All of the great adaptations condense things, smush things together, cut things out. Lord of the Rings is widely regarded as an amazing adaptation, and they cut all kinds of things. Theres always somebody whos like, Tom Bombadil! But Tom Bombadil needed to go You have to make those choices. I think this is an example of being faithful but also being flat and not having a lot of heart or energy. So I would not recommend this for anyone except hardcore Dune historians.

Visit link:

The Dune Miniseries Is a Fascinating Piece of History - WIRED