-Muad'dib: Clearly Kyle Mac Lachlan, who is a great actor and seems to have fun in everything he is doing even when it is as lame as "desperate housewives". Though I do not loath the guy in the 2000 version as much as others here do, he has the right look, I think, but is stock actor material.
-Duke Leto: I also go for Juergen Prochnow. He seems more fitting to the tragical aspect of the character, and it was one of his few good attempts in Hollywood, acting-wise.
-Lady Jessica: Also, I think, this was one point were the newer version was better. In the 1984 version, the actress seemed a little too young, to be Pauls mother, and also was not charismatic enough.
-Gurney: Patrick Stewart is great in everything what he is doing, but somehow the guy of the 2000 version seems more fitting to be the weathered veteran.
-Chani: no call, because I hardly remember Youngs contribution.
-Stilgar: Also Uwe Ochsenknechts take in the 2000s version. In a bunch of mediocre actors, he was some of the better picks and gave a little more heart in his role, as for example, hurt.
-The Emperor.The 1984 version: I am torn here. Ferrer is the better actor, but Giannini is more apt to the role and shows more that Emperor Shaddam IV. is in fact a weak character and never near as dignified as Ferrer plays hin.
-Princess Irulan: Virginia Madsen, just because she is more eye candy. I do not know why Irulan has some much part in the 2000 version because all that she does is not important to the plot. She seems to be outrunned by the events all the time.
-The Baron Harkonnen: 1984. McNeice was nowhere as creepy as Mac Millan.
-Feyd: I'd go for Sting. He has little screen time but every time he is in he leaves no doubt with his smirks and gestures that he is the biggest douche in the galaxy. The 2000s guy is milktoast compared to it and you never get the impression that he shall be the premium product of Harkonnen breeding.
-The Spacing Guild: 1984 also, the negotiators were cooler, while the actual navigator was just as strange in the newer version.
-Bene Gesserit: also the 84 version, they looked tougher and more adjusted to a power-hungry order.
-Alia: Here, I liked both.
-The story: easily the newer version.
-Costumes: the design was one of the great strengths of the 1984 while in 2000, everything looks cheap.
-Visual Effects: 1984. I think much of the hate and the criticism against the effects came because they fell short against all three Star Wars movies.
reply
share
Monk_Drunk
10 years ago
Paul/Muad'Dib: 1984 - Maclachan is the better actor and brought more personality and depth to the role. Newman wasn't bad but it just felt like he was going through the motions.
Leto: 1984 - Prochnow gave a better performance as a father figure and had an aura of inevitable tragedy and fate about him. Hurt's performance was dry, empty and boring.
Jessica: 2000 - She was much more of a character in the miniseries. To be fair, this may be due to the limited screentime her movie counterpart had.
Gurney: 1984 - The 2000 version is more in line with the book, but I just flat out prefer Stewart's performance better.
Chani: 2000 - I never really liked Young's performance, which felt almost too alien and aloof. The 2000 actress brought mystique to the role as well as a human touch.
Stilgar: 1984 - I'm honestly not that fussed on either characters, though I guess the 1984 version just came across better as a tough desert warrior/elder.
Emperor: 1984 - Ferrer had more of a regal and commanding air about him (his facade) when he needed to while still maintaining an uncurrent of weakness and uncertainty as befitting a character that is pretty much a figurehead against the true powers (Bene Gesserit, Space Guild, major Houses).
Irulan: 1984 - Both are pretty empty characers, but the 1984 version was at least stunning to look at.
Baron: 1984 - This is actually a tough one for me because I'm a big fan of McNeice and I actually think he's much closer to the book version of the baron. However, McMillan's performance is just so amazing and heinously demented that I can't help but love it.
Feyd: 1984 - Sting had an electrifying and malevolent beauty about him that you immediately felt any time he was on the screen. 2000 dude was very forgettable by comparison.
Spacing Guid: 1984 - They're kind of goofy in both, but the navigator and operatives in the 1984 film were memorable at least. I have to say I'm really not a fan of cheap CGI, though, so the show loses big points there. The concept design itself for the navigator is not necessarily bad.
Bene Gesserit: 1984 - The film version was better by far. Phillips brought more of an edge to the role and you really got the impression her order was powerful, ancient and insidious.
Alia: 2000 - The young actress is better and pulls off sinister and creepy without overdoing it
Story: 2000 - For all it's other faults (there are many) the miniseries is a pretty solid adaptation from its source material.
Costumes: 1984 - This one isn't even close. As others mentioned, the costume design, and indeed the overall look of the movie, was the 1984 version's greatest strength. The 2000 version looks very budget, and some of the costumes are incredibly silly: the emperor's outfits and the sardaukar uniforms leap to mind.
Visual effects: 1984 - I'll take dated mid 80's effects over cheap CGI and bad mattes any day.
reply
share
pope_duke
10 years ago
Great post.
My opinions are pretty much in line with what you have mentioned. Most are fairly clear cut, but I also have trouble with the Baron. I liked both portrayals, though the mini was much closer to the book and McNeice did a great job, but yes, I do enjoy McMillan's performance as well.
May we add another?
Piter De Vries: 1984 - Brad Dourif was so much better than the uninspired portrayal by Unger. Even with his very limited screen time, Dourif did a wonderful and memorable job with that role.
reply
share
Ehrgeiz
10 years ago
Good that you add Piter - I think the same.
Some missing characters:
I would also add Liet Kynes. Here I am torn, also. Max von Sydow is just a great actor. But, in my opinion, Karel Dobry is among the few actors in the Mini-Series who stand out. And somehow, though he is just not so physically impressive as Sydow, he has more that air of mysticism that surrounds the character in the book.
- Rabban: strangely enough, this is the one character which is featured in both movie versions more than in the book. Here, I go for Lynchs "Dune". In his few scenes, Paul Smith is just so great as the big useless bully that he provides even a little ounce of humor, which is totally absent in all other Duniverse. Also, I did not like how they tried to give the character more depth by showing his ultimate downfall in the mini-series. Its more fitting to this character when they just take the notion between more important issues that his dumb head lies on a plate now.
- Princess Irulan: Lynchs version. She has not much to do than read the narration, but Virginia Madsen was one of the most beautiful actresses of her time. Otherwise, I did not like how they tried to expand the character with a pretty much pointless plot in the mini-series, which was not even in the books.
- Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam: also Lynchs version. The actress and her look is great for this character who is occupied mainly with a century long super-human breeding program.
reply
share
pope_duke
10 years ago
Very good assessments.
I see what you mean with Kynes. Sydow is a great actor, no doubt, but he never really felt right for the role, to me.
I did not care for the expanded focus on either Rabban or Irulan in the mini series, especially Irulan.
RM Mohiam in the mini was about as much a joke as the BG's costumes.
reply
share