Dune (1984)

When I see an ad for a movie, I usually know more or less what to expect when I see the actual film. That was the case when I went to see Star Wars, Porky's, Friday the 13th, Amityville II: The Possession, StarCrash and Assault of the Killer Bimbos. It was all out there on the line and I wasn't disappointed by what their trailers promised.

Granted, I wasn't expecting much from some of these choices, so I wasn't really disappointed by them.

Now, when I saw the ad for Dune, based as it was on the Frank Herbert novel and directed by no less a visionary artist than David Lynch, I realized I hadn't seen any images like these before. And it was for darned certain that the images I did see were from an altogether different train of thought than your average run-of-the-mill science fiction epic.

What this promised to be, according to the trailer and the book it came from, was thinking man's sci-fi; something far removed from the robots and green-skinned aliens and dogfights in space we were all so used to.

Frank Herbert's "Dune" series is the work of a genius. In it he had not only created a world but a whole universe of individuals, races and planets that were enthralling, plots both labyrinth and beguilingly simple, and political intrigue that would make Watergate almost seem an insignificant tantrum. I loved the books.

And naturally, since I enjoyed the books so much, I had a set of expectations for anyone who would dare to bring them to life. I had envisioned who would be Paul Atredies and Baron Harkonnen and what the Fremen would look like and how the Sandworms of Arrakis would appear and move. Our own dreams and imaginations have limitless budgets and we can only hope that those who try to bring these images to life have at least as generous a bankroll at their disposal.

Like I said, I first approached David Lynch's Dune with high expectations. Sure, he made off-balance film-making seem easy with Eraserhead and I still think The Elephant Man was an elegant and prestigious piece of work even after all these years. It wasn't like he just stepped into this cold.

Well, almost. This was one of those Development Hell projects that took decades to bring about and went through the hands and minds of such directors as David Lean and Alexandro Jodorowsky, tried to bring aboard Dan O'Bannon as a writer and no less a man to play the Emperor Shaddam IV than Salvador Dali.

Names were brought up and dropped, workers were brought on then dropped, funding came and went, studios had no idea what to make of it, Jodorowsky was afraid of the whole thing turning too "Hollywood" and decided to let it go.

Then in the early Eighties, Lynch was brought on as director and writer, in order to bring Herbert's words to a life that only Lynch himself would be able to fully understand. And as far as casting goes, Lynch already knew how to find faces that were indelibly expressive. He proved that as far back as Eraserhead and his short subjects up to that point. And Universal Pictures and Dino De Laurentiis gave him a nice $40 million budget to play with and an extensive crew of special effects workers to bring universes and worlds and entire civilizations to life.

It could work, I thought.

Oops; I almost took for granted you knew what the plot of this was. My apologies:

The year is 10191. Arrakis is a desert planet in a distant galaxy and the only source of a spice known as Melange, which is a vital drug used by an association known as the Guild Navigators for space travel from star system to star system. Two rival royal families, the Atreides on Planet Caladan and the Harkonnens on Planet Giedi Prime, fight for control of the mining operations on Arrakis.

The Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV (Jose Ferrer) has allowed Duke Leto Atredies (Jürgen Prochnow) to arrive on Arrakis with his son, Paul Atredies (Kyle MacLachlan) and Paul's mother Lady Jessica (Francesca Annis), forcing the hand of the Harkonnens and permitting a war to escalate between Duke Leto and the Harkonnen's leader Baron Vladmir Harkonnen.(Kenneth McMillan). This leads to lies, betrayal, murder, battles and escalating bloodshed on both sides until Paul, taken in by the desert-dwelling Fremen of Arrakis, realizes his place as the leader of an underground movement to usurp the power of the Emperor and fulfill his destiny as a bringer of peace to the universe.

Sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it? And if you go with what the book says, it IS kind of straightforward. There are no more nor less characters in this book than there would be in your typical novel about kingdoms, leaders, battles, hidden civilizations and destinies to be fulfilled. The book, as mentioned before, is very good.

But I'm not here to talk about the book, am I?

First of all, and I think this is the biggest problem Dune has, is Lynch's approach to the material. For a galactic religious allegory (young man frees universe from conventional laws in holy war, becomes god-like in process to bring water to the desert planet Arrakis), the look of this film suggests that Lynch examined the style of Michael Cimino's Heaven's Gate, with some of the dullest, brownish-yellowish-est look to a multi-galactic movie ever. And it's not like the cinematographer was a slouch, but I'll get to that.

Lynch directs dialogue and many multi-character scenes so flat and static that he does seems to have come in to this cold, though I know that isn't true (he'd worked on it for three years or so). Unusual for the man who brought us such wild and varied films as Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart and Lost Highway to bring about such a disinterested work.

The story goes that Lynch passed on the chance to direct Return of the Jedi to do this. In retrospect, that's probably a good thing.

Now about the cinematography. This was headed by Freddie Francis - the SAME Freddie Francis who lent his hand to many of the more atmospheric of Hammer Studios' horror movies. He was a man known for his rich, luxurious vistas and bright colors (especially blood red). Here, it's all flat, dull, dark, grungy and undefined. Seeing all that's onscreen, it's hard to tell at times any difference between the different planets (Atredies, Arrakis, Harkonnen, etc.) without the helpful subtitles for each planet that come up in the beginning.

Lynch's adaptation of Herbert's story is no help; it tries to follow the first book but trusts so little of the audience's intelligence that the largest part of the story is exposition! Look at films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Forbidden Planet, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and The Sixth Sense. Low to nil on exposition, and all good films, do we agree? I think a big factor in that is because the audience is trusted to just pay attention to the stories and follow them through, like a good book. Here, it was as if several chunks of book were omitted to permit for the running time. When Princess Irulan (Virginia Madsen) explains what's going on in the beginning and it still makes no sense (her image even fading in and out as she remembers to include information), who can be blamed?

And what is it with Lynch's penchant for disturbing images in a movie where they really serve no purpose? Baron Harkonnen had no boils or welts on his face that needed drained in the book. Neither did he have to have his attendants' eyes and ears sewn shut. Both are true here. The added grotesqueness adds nothing to Dune; it just serves as another off-putting side note in a movie full of them.

What a great cast was assembled for this film! I already mentioned the principle actors but what about the fact that we have such well-regarded names as Linda Hunt, Freddie Jones, Richard Jordan, Everett McGill, Jack Nance, Paul L. Smith, Max Von Sydow, Dean Stockwell, Patrick Stewart, Sting and Sean Young and so little is done with any of them? They have all been involved in great things before and since and all of them have talent! A couple have even won some pretty impressive golden statues of their own!

So what happened here? Is it me or does everyone seem shell-shocked and somewhat deadened in their acting, especially in a situation where the weight of the story rests on what is said and how it is worded. Nothing sounds as urgent, important, desperate, intriguing or as good (or bad) as it should. Rather, it all sounds and looks like one big dress rehearsal BEFORE the real film was to take place.

The spaceships herein all look the same: black, undetailed and stationary. Even when they "fly" it doesn't look any more nor less convincing than when you made student films in school, trying to ape the Star Wars dogfights. Bet yours came out looking better. And the sand worms? Good for looking at a moment or two, but on close examination (and they get closer examination, being as central to the plot as they are) they aren't as well-designed or articulated as they could be. Same goes for the huge floating worm/brain creature. The effects were done here by Carlo Rambaldi, famous for doing E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial. And this was released 2 years after? What a difference 730 days make.

And as far as the music goes...Toto? I think Brian Eno's "Prophecy Theme" was exceptional and very mystical; good stuff. But again - Toto? I know what Lynch and De Laurentiis were probably thinking; hey, the group's hot and they can at least get some kids to shell out bucks for the sound track. I thought the main theme was good, but after they repeated it the twelfth or thirteenth time, it began to be somewhat akin to water torture.

The main feeling that went through my mind when I saw Dune was that there were a lot of parts of this movie where Lynch put in some of his usually dependable "symbolism for symbolism's sake" of exploding planets, water droplets, an outstretched hand floating in mid-air, and those always-odd touches of black humor which usually gets Lynch purists their prerequisite chuckle. They weren't enough, however, to make it feel like this was anything else but one long (very long) meditation on a theme that should have been meditated on longer before cameras rolled.

Dune, then, is an incomplete movie. And by incomplete I mean it simply doesn't feel as if everything went into it before it was finished. Huge sets were built but without detail or interest. The Fremen are introduced as keepers of the water beneath Arrakis but they are seen as nothing more than a warrior race without digging deep into their history and purpose as Herbert's book had. One of the best lines of the book, "A million deaths were not enough for (Doctor) Yueh" is treated as a throwaway when it should have been a centerpiece.

When all was said and done, however, no one could argue with the bank. Dune made just barely over half of its $40 million budget and very few of the original reviews were very encouraging.

David Lynch can say he was enthusiastic about Dune all that he wants, but the plain fact of the matter is that this version of "Dune" is not the version of "Dune" you would be looking for. That is, if you've read the book. More likely, this is the version to watch if you HAVEN'T read any of Frank Herbert. Granted, you'll still need a score card to follow along. And you'll probably need a nice long nap afterwards. Or a good drink. Maybe both.

I know there will be people who defend this movie to their dying breath and feel it is the absolute best adaptation of "Dune" to be had because, after all, it WAS directed by David Lynch. Anything he does is worth watching for his fans. Dune belongs to neither he nor Herbert, however; this is a project that ends up, both visually and story-wise, adrift in a sea of drab and dirty stars.

However, if you are a fan of Frank Herbert and watch this movie regardless, think about a couple of things: wouldn't it have been better if they'd added more original book story and added an hour or so, maybe even split into a two-parter? Maybe Brian Eno should had done the entire sound track? How about some more color being brought into the proceedings? Think of what David Lean did in Lawrence of Arabia, where 90% of the scenes played out in the desert - maybe if they'd went with Lean originally? What if a younger actor played Paul (MacLachlan was good, but maybe one closer to the preteen Paul in the book could have made for even more bold acting opportunities)?

Of course, the horse is long gone out of the barn, so there's no need in closing the door now. Whenever you try to literalize a novel, you make enemies of the writers' fans who say it cannot be done and the movie fan who could not/will not understand what the story is trying to say. Same thing with writing about it; what one opinion can embody every movie viewer?

You may love the movie. Good for you. As for me, I'm still looking for the perfect visualization of Frank Herbert's work. Hey, SyFy Channel couldn't even do it! Is such a thing possible?

Maybe someday THAT sleeper will awaken.