As I sit writing this blog entry, I hold in front of me two different film adaptations of Frank Herbert’s 1965 classic sci fi novel, Dune. One, as you may recall, was directed by David Lynch, and released in 1984. This other one was a Sci Fi Channel production from 2000.

So let’s break ‘em open and compare and contrast.

Musical Score –
Hands down this goes to Dune 1984 on the strength alone of Brian Eno and Toto’s prophecy theme, which epically embodies the awe and wonder of the entire Dune universe the way the Imperial March perfectly captured the evil Empire in Starwars.

A gamely effort by Graeme Revell for Dune 2000, immersing Arrakis in Middle Eastern quarter tones (in keeping with Frank Herbert’s envisioning of the Fremen as akin to tribal Arabs), but not sweeping and transporting like the repeating four-note theme from Dune 1984. That one never gets old. Ever.

Comprehensibility –
Dune is no easy trick to adapt for film. Because its a brilliant sci fi epic with loads of intriguing and original stuff, Dune deceptively feels like a sure bet to be Starwars all over again. But it’s not. Though Starwars borrowed a number of motifs from Dune, they aren’t the same animal at all. Frank Herbert’s plot is more Shakespeare than Spaghetti Western.

Thus, the unenviable job of synthesizing the size and scope of the Dune universe into a compelling and coherent film narrative falls squarely onto the shoulders of the chief visionary. The director. Alas, David Lynch (or Alan Smithee) fails to accomplish the goal in Dune 1984.

Conversely, John Harrison’s Dune 2000 made Herbert’s universe much more, much more approachable, accessible, and enjoyable. Dune 2000 doesn’t suffer intolerable claustrophobia like Dune 1984. Arrakis feels like a vast open world you want to explore, and not escape. From the sprawling palace, to the dirt and sand markets of Arrakeen, Harrison does the nearly impossible in getting CG set pieces to emote realism.

The biggest real difference was the pace, though. It’s too easy to simply say John Harrison had a running time of 265 minutes for his miniseries, while David Lynch had only half that time for his movie. Harrison clearly had a steadier hand at the helm. Dune 2000 had a direction and a purpose, while staying poised within itself (and never at the expense of becoming boring).

Acting –
This one’s a tie.

Dune 1984 boasted some heavy hitters in its cast that produced well in supporting roles. But its tone was so leaden and heavy handed that it actually seemed to weigh on all the actors’ performances. Brad Dourif’s Piter De Vries managed to be the only one capable of bringing any bit of levity to Dune 1984.

“It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of Sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.”

While Dune 2000 can only tout William Hurt from the “A-listers” club, along with recognizable faces Ian McNeice and Giancarlo Giannini, the entire cast comes across as genuine and spirited.

If there has to be a tie breaker on this one, then it has to come down to the lead role of Paul Atreides, and the two actors that played the young ducal heir, Kyle MacLachlan, and Alec Newman, respectively.

Alec Newman.

One, he looks a little tougher (back away from the “weirding” hairdryer, Kyle). Two, Newman actually registers well as both spoiled ducal brat (in the beginning), and transformed messianic warrior (at the end).

“Where are my feelings?” ponders Kyle MacLachlan while staring up blankly at the second moon. My thoughts exactly, Kyle. My thoughts exactly.

So there you have it. Dune 2000 is just an overall better movie interpretation of Frank Herbert’s master work. (Now if they just could have borrowed that score from Dune 1984).