So…they’re making a third Dune film.

Note, this is not a film adaptation based on the third book in the series, Chidren of Dune. Nor is this adaptation based on any of the other books in the series, prequels and post-Herbert sequels included. This is an re-adaptation of the first book. You know, the book that has had two film adaptations of it already.

…Really? Are we really getting another Dune adaptation?

Now, I’ll be the first to admit that, of the two adaptations that we’ve seen of the legendary science fiction story about the rise of Paul Atredies, heir to the Ducal throne of the planet Calidan, and his rise to greatness. The first film, directed by David Lynch, better illustrated the mood of the Dune universe – it was dark, and had a bit of a heartless edge to it. It also handled the mostly internal dialogue of the Dune novels admirably. However, someone watching the film with no familiarity with the books would find the film a confusing morass of dialgoue, plot and “ugly” visuals. Those who had read the book were split – some loved the adaptation of a film, while others found the creative liberties taken with Herbert’s story completely unforgivable. That, and the story’s heroic Freman warriors, known for their stealth, wore black uniforms in the middle of a tan desert. Honestly.
Those unforgivable elements could have been repaired by John Harrison in SyFy’s adaptation of the book, which they released as a miniseries in late 2000. And a lot of those problems were fixed. With a full miniseries length to work with, the limitations of a feature film melted away, allowing a more full and complete story to be told. The visuals were perfect – the Dune most people imagined was finally at hand. And that uniform problem was all fixed – tan on tan, baby. However, Harrison took some liberties that fans didn’t appreciate, changing the role of several of the characters. Further, the miniseries was shallow – the depth and the darkness of Lynch’s film better reflected the image portrayed by Frank Herbert than the miniseries. However, both managed to be striking and important (if not beloved) portrayals of the Dune universe.

It would seem, however, that all of the imperfections of the other two adaptations has spurred a third. This time, the project is being helmed by director Peter Berg (better known from his acting days as Dr. Billy Kronk from Chicago Hope, as well as the creative force behind Friday Night Lights and Hancock), and will be “…more dynamic…” and “…an epic adventure…”

I don’t know quite how to feel about all of this. Certainly, it is a pleasure to see such a legendary piece of fiction, and especially one that I love, be the inspiration for the imagination of so many creative people. However, I can’t but feel as if Dune never belonged as a film. Dune is extremely cerebral, with a large amount of its character discourse portrayed as internal monologue. This sort of adaptation requires a vast amount of time, and extreme care, to create an experience that even begins to touch upon the complexity of Frank Herbert’s story. I don’t know if you can condense that into two hours. Or even into six-to-eight. I can’t help but feel that these adaptations are just fan films, trying to capture the feeling of Dune, but never really being Dune.

So, what do you all think? Is this third Dune film going to be the pinnacle of the story, or will it just be another failed attempt at adapting a book too big for adaptation?

Slideshow Image Provided by Dimfuture.net