ROTTEN TOMATOES: Dune Headed Back to the Big Screen?

Dune Headed Back to the Big Screen?

Unless Toto is doing the soundtrack, we aren't interested.

by Jeff Giles | August 31, 2007

They've captivated the imaginations of untold sci-fi fans for decades, but even as the inhabitants of Frank Herbert's Dune books have expanded their reach to encompass videogames, comics, posthumous prequels and sequels, and TV miniseries, a truly satisfactory film adaptation has remained out of reach. According to CHUD, all that may be about to change.

Dune has made a trip to the big screen before, of course, courtesy of director David Lynch in 1984. Lynch's vision of Dune, however, was given a lukewarm critical and commercial reception; Roger Ebert, for instance, referred to it as "a real mess" and "an incomprehensible, ugly, unstructured, pointless excursion into the murkier realms of one of the most confusing screenplays of all time." In 2000 and 2003, the Sci-Fi Channel broadcast a new Dune and followed it up with Children of Dune, both of which were more warmly received than Lynch's film, but were still found lacking by some fans.

Now, reports CHUD, the admin of the official Dune forums is telling fans that Herbert's stories might be headed back to a theater near you. From the article:

"We're getting VERY close to a deal. Heard that news today," he posted on Friday, following that up with, "Although only rumor, I've heard that 'someone' at the studio wants Dune reallllly bad and has been a fan of the novel for 'years.' They're not saying who this is (and it might just be hype) but I'm holding out hope that whoever this might be is a big enough fan that he/she will do the book justice. Supposedly it's some director."

As rumors go, it's laughably vague -- but there's no denying that the major studios are all hungry for franchises, particularly of the sci-fi/fantasy variety, and Dune fits the bill neatly. With the right budget and "some director" behind the cameras, who knows what could happen?

Source: CHUD

Related Items

Movie:	Dune
	Children of Dune
Celeb:	David Lynch

(1-20 of 43 posts) | Reply

DragonRift writes:
on Aug 31 2007 06:55 AM

Umm... I really have doubts about this. Dune is a very dense novel filled with way too much story to fit into a three hour movie. Lynch at least earned points from me as far as style went, but even he was obviously overwhelmed by the project. Unless they somehow split the original story into two to three volumes (which is insane to begin with), I really don't see how anyone can think they can tell this imaginative story as faithful as they want to.

Dune is one story that deserves better treatment than this. Even Peter Jackson's head would implode.

(Reply to this)

Justy Hakubi writes:
on Aug 31 2007 07:24 AM

Dune deserves a second chance. Lynch had the feel and visuals of the story correct. Unfortunately he changed too many things from the book. I can live with some things being cut from the book. Unless the stroy gets spread over a few movies some things must get cut. However, I hated Lynch's Harkonnens. They were completely wrong. Yes please give another director a shot, but please be faithful to the book.

(Reply to this)

Impavido writes:
on Aug 31 2007 07:32 AM

I absolutely adore Lynch's Dune. So any other Dune project I will judge by that standard, ESPECIALLY on the art design front.

(Reply to this)

DragonRift writes:
on Aug 31 2007 07:34 AM

In reply to this comment (#1087486)
Actually, it would be better off as an 11-13 episode series for HBO or something of the sort. More freedom would be allowed for the filmmakers, as well as plenty of room to establish some of the novel's best characters.

I remember how infuriated I was when Gurney Halleck and Duncan Idaho were shrunk down to mere cameo shots in Lynch's film. And what the hell was up with Baron Harkonnen and his sudden obsession with diseases?! I'll give him credit at least for making the Bene Gesserit mothers look exactly as I had picture them from the book.

It had a second chance, and the Sci-Fi Channel totally fumbled the ball, giving us another weak adaptation. They did well in some areas, but it still felt like a cheap retelling. We need someone who ADORES the book to bring it to life, much like Peter Jackson did with The Lord of the Rings.

(Reply to this)

connsolo writes:
on Aug 31 2007 07:50 AM

In reply to this comment (#1087486)
Stay true to the book? The book is all tedious nerd-gak. Who wants to hear people in costume trading sci-fi b.s. monologues? Lynch did a good job.

(Reply to this)

mbrocchi writes:
on Aug 31 2007 07:58 AM

Lynch's Dune is still one of my all time favorite movies..

(Reply to this)

Shatter writes:
on Aug 31 2007 08:20 AM

A Dune trilogy to encompass the original novel?

Swoon.

(Reply to this)

SS109 writes:
on Aug 31 2007 08:34 AM

I have to agree with Dragonrift. Dune would be best as a mini-series. You could spend a 3-hour movie on just the time before the Sardukar attack on the Atreides.

If HBO did it, then they could do the other Dune books the years after.

(Reply to this)

Sir Surreal writes:
on Aug 31 2007 09:19 AM

Trilogy. Peter Jackson.

(Reply to this)

Vitamin M writes:
on Aug 31 2007 10:00 AM

wait Dune was also a video game? maybe the director is non other than Uwe Boll!

(Reply to this)

lurker69 writes:
on Aug 31 2007 10:06 AM

Peter Jackson directing Dune would be the best thing ever!!!!!!!! But who ever does it, I hope they do it well enough so that they can actually get a chance to make the fourth book...GOD EMPEROR OF DUNE. That was the best of the series.

(Reply to this)

Novastar. writes:
on Aug 31 2007 10:42 AM

The best choice is Ridley Scott,let him revive the sci-fi genre!

(Reply to this)

Starseeder writes:
on Aug 31 2007 10:43 AM

It has to be a trilogy. Anything under that will be a waste of time and money.

(Reply to this)

Starseeder writes:
on Aug 31 2007 10:44 AM

It has to be a trilogy. Anything under that will be a waste of time and money.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Aug 31 2007 10:45 AM

The important question is whether or not Sting will make an appearance in this version!

(Reply to this)

Racer Z writes:
on Aug 31 2007 11:16 AM

The original Dune could work well as a trilogy of films. The novel itself is divided into three "books" so it seems only natural. There are aspects of Lynch's film and the Sci-Fi mini that I really like, but I'd still like to see a definitive version.

Lynch's film had those horrible "weirding modules" that weren't even in the book and diminished the power of the "weirding way." On the other hand, the Sci-Fi Channel version lost some of the political conspiring and mysticism that I was so fond of in the novel.

Here's to hoping someone who truly loves the material will adapt and direct this new version.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on Aug 31 2007 11:27 AM

I don't know, I think this may be one of those "unfilmable" books. Lynch's version was a muddled mess (although the art direction was top notch) and the Sci-Fi version was just deadly dull to watch. It would take a perfect storm of the right director, top notch cast, and a stellar screenplay to make it work. I tend to agree it would be much better as an HBO mini-series. Especially after the excellent job they did with Rome, this would be perfect, since it's kind of a Sci-Fi version of the Roman Empire.

(Reply to this)

apostate writes:
on Aug 31 2007 11:36 AM

The thing with Dune is it isn't pulpy scifi stuff like Star Wars or Star Trek. At times it's very complex and deals with a lot of weighty concepts. While I liked Lynch's version, it only touched upon the larger concepts in the book. I understand why it has been so hard to make a "faithful" version of it. There isn't lots of wiz bang action in it. Most of the book is a combination of history lesson and political maneuvering. Not an easy thing to get across in a couple hours without some significant changes.

(Reply to this)

Bruce Campbell writes:
on Aug 31 2007 11:53 AM

Get Lynch to make any more Dunes. Period.

(Reply to this)

mouse_clicker writes:
on Aug 31 2007 12:16 PM

I don't think a mini-series is necessarily a good idea. It allows more time to work in the dense plot, yes, but mini-series have a very difficult time acting as a single unit; they play more as their namesake, a miniature television series. The book is not written as a series of individual, self-contained "episodes," it's one unit. I think a movie is still the best option. Now, that movie can be very long- Lord of the Rings is mini-series length, but has the cohesion of a movie, because it IS a movie. But I still think a movie is the better option.

(Reply to this)