The movie did follow the book fairly closely. If you have a quarrel with the movie, complain to Frank Herbert that the things they did were stupid in the book. Oops he died in 1986. But you can always complain to Brian Herbert, the author's son.

I liked the movie but you need a willful suspension of disbelief.

"Grown replacement parts are going to be feasible in the 21st century on Earth" Let us not forget that there are people RIGHT NOW who have bionic eyes. Admitedly the resolution sucks, but Moore's law should fix that before too long.

Obviously another wannabee online critic HACK who wants to feel pretentious by seeming unaffected by an adaptation of a literary classic. Instead of critiquing based upon novel vs screenplay or acting vs original character intent, or just plain movie technicality; this hack presumes to absorb a complex mythical story by scantily watching some scenes and in turn spout a mount of trash and hubris as valid intellectual commentary.

Chris, Wannabe? We can all be critics. You are being a critic of my writing. Do you feel pretentious? You certainly sound pretentious.

Literary classic? Who's being pretentious now? Dune is not a great classic. Nowadays everything is called a classic. Well, come back in a couple of centuries and let us see if Frank Herbert is as well remembered as Victor Hugo or Shakespeare. I think that is exceedingly unlikely.

A complex mythical story? Maybe. But in that case it is a complex dumb mythical story.

You should do your readers a service and read the book; feel free to correct me, but it seems evident that you have not. Yes, you're reviewing the movie version. No, it can't be properly reviewed with a knowledge of how it came into existence. But since you asked questions, I will supply the answers.

The greening of Dune is essential in the scope of the entire series of books, not in this one in particular. Paul does not see a future one year ahead but millenia. Without this action, humankind will extinguish itself. Leto's decision to transform himself plays into this future as well. The battle was not with Alia directly; what you seem to miss (and was not well-represented in the movie admittedly) is the scale of the decision making. For this reason, I think they set themselves up for failure by contriving to capture a story not fit for the screen.

I concur with you that the movie stunk; the art direction in particular was positively the worst I have ever seen. But you were not the intended audience; readers were.

Moreover, I think you would enjoy reading this book and would change your opinion of its ability to be remembered far into posterity. Better than Shakespeare? No. But so far from it in form that you do both a disservice in the comparison. Better than Hugo? Without a doubt.

It really is important in this case to read the books if one wishes to understand the meaning of the story and criticize the story capably. Leto II imposes the greening of Arrakis and imposes Leto's Peace precisely in order to destroy all rivals. The greening of Arrakis, the destruction of the sandworms, and Leto's becoming The Worm symbolize the imposition of Leto's Peace, the destruction of all rivals, and Leto's assuming the status of universal God-Emperor. As God-Emperor, Leto institutes a breeding program that destroys the threat that he himself sees is posed to mankind by foresight such as his own, by breeding human beings who are immune to such foresight. The proof of his success is that he himself is destroyed by the product of his breeding program. He disintegrates into the individual sandtrout that make up his worm-body. The sandtrout mature and reconstitute the multiplicity of sandworms, with the difference that all of the new sandworms live one of Leto's dreams, in perpetuity. Likewise, in the universe at large, mankind dissolves again into multifarious peoples who scatter throughout the universe in the wake of the destruction of the God-Emperor. They pursue new dreams, led by the descendants of the assassin whom Leto bred precisely in order to found a race that would make another tyrant such as him impossible.

For further reading, see Machiavelli and Nietzsche.

I only had to read the first two paragraphs to realize that you are talking out of your ass and have not read the book. There are six books in the dune, written over 20 years, and there are all remarkably well linked together. To think you can critize the third book in the series, while only having seen a movie which gives a very bare sketch of the plot, is ludicrous. By the way, many, many, MANY, authors will tell you that Frankn Herberts Dune is one of the best books every written, it seemlessly weaves together religion, philosophy, politics, mythology, culture, environmentalism, technology, and many other elements of human societies. You can only criticize Children of Dune after you have read all 6 books in the series. Next time inform yourself before you open your pie hole.

I've read most of the Dune books and just finshed The Battle of Corrin and the associated trilogy. Not sure if this is the right place to put this, but it seems there are some holes left as far as technology go throughout the entire series.

First, how could the Guild ever take complete control of interstellar space travel when there still obviosly exist faster than light methods? You always keep a backup, no reason to become TOTALLY dependent on the Guild. And just because the Guild ships are faster, doesn't mean they are a well armed or armored. Somebody in the Dune universe would have realized that.

No way they could ever get rid of all computers and function as a spaceworthy society, do you know how many microprocessors go into ANY moden airplane. No damn way a person is going to be sititng there doing all the instantaneous calculations needed to move a flight surfce or attitude jet on a plane or space craft. You'd need 600 mentats just to fly a modern comercial airliner.

Why didn't Omnius and the thinking machines utilize non-gel circuitry (ie. good old von-neuman or other more sophisticated styles microprocessors) controlled machines to take up the fight when anti gel circuitry wepons are being used against them. And you CAN make a machine that has far quicker reaction times than any human, especially if you extrapolate out several thousand years, where they could be super armored, super fast, and smart enough to deal with Holtzman shielding in close comabt, and invincible to any buzzing sword. A Terminator for lack of a better example, would wipe his ass with Ginaz swordmasters and any other idiot that got int he way with a hand weapon, and if that idiot pulls out his projectile weapon and turns off his shield to fire, he'd be shot down before he pulled the trigger (assuming the machine was designed to be faster than a human, of which there would be a 100.1 % chance several thousand years from now.

And speaking of the body shield, I wonder why the machines didn't steal the technology, they had many many chances during aand after battles to take the shield units from dead or living soldiers and reverse engineer them to utilize them themselves, as well as attempt to discover their weaknesses (like to lasers), the logical thing to do.

That said, I still enjoy Dune, but it is not serious Sci-Fi, more like Fantasy. I've been reading the Dune novels since I was a kid, and have always had these questions in my mind. Brian Herbert only made it look more ridiculous.

Dave, I do not see where it is hard to understand the guilds monopoly on space travel. In the early industrial age, before government regulations, many companies established almost complete monopolies in different areas. Anyways, no one ever has a complete monopoly on anything, and perhaps you have forgotten, there are smugglers in the dune universe, and the rich and powerful use them at times to bypass the guild.
As for BH and KA, everything they write is crap. Also, well as a huge Dune fan, I feel assaulted somewhat when people rip on it. In
Also, the Butlerian Jihad eliminated advanced computers and thinking machines, but it did not completely eliminate basic computer technology. Basically, the Butlerian jihad made computers socially taboo, but people in the dune universe will tolerate simple computerized mechanisms if they do not have to deal with them personally. Thus the Ixians and there technology is tolerated. Also, do not forget that in Dune, the Reverend Mother Gauis Helen Mohiam says that the Guild emphasizes pure mathematics. She also despises them, presumably because of their basic computer technology. I do not know if you have read the later books, but this becomes much more apparent in them, when Leto II's fish speaker spy actually uses a computer. In Chapterhouse, Miles Teg is said to use esoteric headgear connected to a command pod, which is obviously a VR unit.
As for BH and KA, everything they write is crap.
Lastly, as a huge dune fan I am slightly offended by the fact that you say Dune is not serious SF. You could just say you don't especially like it. Anyways, what is serious SF. In my opinion, no SF ever written is more serious than Dune. Just because it does not have aliens, and androids does not mean it is not very serious SF. It is, besides being the most popular SF novel of all time, the most critically acclaimed.

Dune sucks (original that is)

It's all just a bunch of pseudo-science hoodoo.
There are some good things in Dune, don't get me wrong. But the bad swamps the good. Clumsy writing, heavy-handed symbolism, self-righteousness, unbelievable dialogue, characters even a comic book would blush at... A book that insults the intelligence at every level.

First of all, calling something "pseudo-science" is not really relevant and on the place. Science fiction doesn't make an attempt to explain the world instead of science, science fiction uses scientific observation to creating a stories. It uses facts, most commonly, be it from history and/or social sciences or more exact oriented sciences like math etc.
Pseudo science would be attempting to explain some observable things in physical world via supernatural forces, ie. influence of a demon or something. Science fiction is not like that. Poor guess.

Secondly, self rightneousness is the last thing that Dune novels contain. If you read them, you'd know that it talks about rights of ALL individuals and how they confront between each other.
Comic books? Oh, let me laugh at it.
Dune novels don't insult the intelligence of the reader, by the way. Some of most intelligent readers found it fascinating and inspiring work.

One note plus, Dune series are NOT fantasy. There are technologies used that aren't available in now, thus it moves it to science fiction genre. Those technologies are not based entirely on some "magical" functioning or jinxes, have their- whatever flawed or hardly understandable- theories behind, and thus it is not fantasy. At least not pure one. (Just a note for that reader above me)

Thirdly, I second what others said. First read, then speak. Otherwise it is just uninformed garbage. I doubt any one of you, so called critics, would like to look as fools where apparently everyone else knows what they are talking about, but only critics pretend to know and don't see how laughable they seem.

The concept some do not seem to grasp is that Dune is a fictional work. This gives the author room to fill in blanks and to imagine. If one cannot stand these choices read non-fiction. In those books they do not invent strange worlds and even stranger concepts.

I for my part have always enjoyed the books concerning dune and yes I know there are some loose threads. But they don't bother me. This is not because I am a crappy reader, cause as an historian I make a lot of my income by reading, but because I love the ideas in the works of Herbert. And may I suggest writing a book to some critics and discover how difficult that is.

On top of that I would like to mention that saying something is crappy is not being a good critic. Giving good criticism involves more than that.

"Couldn't Mom or Leto have drugged her and then done an exorcism or something else?"

I think a remark such as this shows a singular failure to have read the novels. Is your basis for discussing the content, plot and philosophy of Dune purely from having watched a film adaptation? *rolls eyes*

The 'voices in Alia's head' as you describe it, is in fact her Other Memory: a cacophony of individuals from her genetic past (including her own mother, and her grandfather the Baron Harkonnen who later comes to drown out the others) who infringe upon Alia's own conscience in their attempt to dominate her will so that they might effectively 'live' again. The Trial of Possession does not mean she is possessed in what appears to be your narrow spiritual-based view of possession. It means that one of her inner ancestors has taken control: there is no 'cure', and a judgement of 'guilty' would result in death.

You really ought to read some of the novels because this is explained quite clearly...*rolls eyes*

I would laugh at this point, but only because I've seen this before. First, this was a review not of the books, but the mini series of Children of Dune whih I wathed in it's entirety yesterday. Unlike the reviewer, I've read the books, so I really enjoyed the series. If someone hadn't read the books or been familiar with the story and future events, the series would have been non-sensical. In that respect, the reviewer was probably right in his opinion. Attacking someone for their review of a series based on a book they haven't read and doesn't stand well by itself, is foolish and rude and short sighted.

Also, this was a review of the mini-series, not the book, so many of the fanboys here need to put away your wierding modules and return to your houses. My opinion of this review is that it's probably spot on if viewed without the proper context of the greater story.

"How could Paul "Muad´dib" Atreides have the ability to see the future so well and then get the idea into his head that turning Arrakis into a green planet was a good idea? If the worms can survive only in desert conditions then of course getting rid of the desert will bring catastrophe. One doesn't have to have super powers to see that. So a basic premise of Children of Dune seems stupid from the very beginning. Also, Alia had to see that it was a bad idea - unless she was dumb before she went mad."

You'd understand it all if you ever read the wholes series. There's a plan to all things, you'll discover.

You know there's something wrong when you have to read a serise of books to understand a movie. Look at that tail wage that dog!

As a great fan of the books you have to concede that the miniseries would never be able to adequately cover the vast scope of the story. The understanding of the golden path ALONE would take up a major part of the screen time and could probably only be portrayed via an endless internal monologue.
I remember watching David Lynch's Dune years before I read the books, I loved it but only understood it at a very basic level, it was only upon watching it again after reading the book that a lot of the dialogue actually made proper sense. A line that the guild navigator had right at the start of the film mentioned machines from ix (were the no-ships even mentioned in the first book anyway?!?...it's been so long since I read them I forget) but what relevance did it have to anything in the rest of the film...NONE! The point is the viewer who hasn't read the books will only be (further) confused by comments like this and (in the mini series) 'take the golden path father!'.........take the GOLDEN WHAT!! To do justice to a story like this you need to do what Peter Jackson did with LOTR. The very basis of stories like these are societies steeped in their traditions, the worlds and ways created by the writer in which these characters exist. This is why we read this type of fiction, to remove ourselves as far from reality as possible but to do it on this scale requires the dense story lines and vast swathes of exposition.
So....can all this be reasonably captured in a miniseries?...probably not in which case Mr Parker's review based on JUST the viewing of the miniseries may not be that far from the truth. Is he a kn*b jockey for making a number of absurd comments without even thinking about going to the books to understand what was trying to be portrayed and therefore how well it was done or how hard an adaptation like this might be...definitely. Is he really not as intelligent as he thinks as evidenced by missing large amounts of subtext regarding possession and a number of other issues....absolutely!!

What is all this cinnamon sniffing? Sleeping with your sisters and crap. You could just go to Kentucky or Lousiana and see this. As for sandworms and nasty people with boils on their skins just go to de swamp! Dune is garbage and always will be garbage.

Chris, Wannabe? We can all be critics. You are being a critic of my writing. Do you feel pretentious? You certainly sound pretentious.

Literary classic? Who's being pretentious now? Dune is not a great classic. Nowadays everything is called a classic. Well, come back in a couple of centuries and let us see if Frank Herbert is as well remembered as Victor Hugo or Shakespeare. I think that is exceedingly unlikely.

Most beloved science fiction novel ever written. I think you're a pretentious little prick! Will it be remembered centuries from now? Yeah!

Dune ,the first book, was one of the best novels I have ever read. Undoubtedly the work of a brilliant and fascinating mind, yet there somethings I found hard to grasp. A star-crossing society that does not use computers would be impossible. Just imagine the resources and research it took to launch a craft capable of leaving earths atmosphere, not mention landing on the Moon. Humans ,unaided, simply cannot contend the with minute measurements and 1/100000th of a second reactions that a required to run modern space shuttles. We did not evolve to do those things so we make machines that can. Everybody in the imperium would have to be many times smarter than a mentat and have reaction times faster than a supercomputer to run just run one highliner and do even get me started on the hundreds of years it would take to be able to safely navigate though foldspace and the length of time the research would take (also impossible without computers). Its just to far-fetched even for sci-fi. And what about lasguns. Lasguns supposedly have been around for many centuries and scientists still can't figure-out how to put a beam though a shield (maybe its because they don't have computers), oh yeah and gas propelled projectiles don't work either. Yet somehow the oldest weapon known to man, save the rock and club, easily defeats the shield, get this, its because you can it move slowly. Yet Herbert makes no provision on other more practical and advanced weapons that could be slowed to puncture shields.
Despite its originality, it imagination, and it odd sensations Dune has way to many loose ends for me.

I take it that the OP hasn't read the book....

Dude, you didn't watch the whole thing, so don't be so quick to pass judgement.

Paul's vision of the future was imperfect - it was made clear in the books (and hinted to in the miniseries) that the Jihad he had started ran further and longer that he'd intended, as did the changes to the planet. Dune was still to remain largely desert - but with oasis areas to make life a little less harsh on the Fremen. But - there were still be be "trials to toughen a man".

When he came back as the Preacher that's one of the things he preached about - the planet and the once tough Fremen had gone too soft - and the desert will reclaim in all.

It was known (or at least suspected) that Alia suffered "abomination" - but of course as she was the regent people couldn't just come along and cart her off to the nut house - she commanded a lot of power and wasn't outwardly crazy in any case. And of course there was the question as to the extent of the abomination, and who it was who was possessing her. They didn't know it was the old Baron until late in the proceedings. I think Alia's own talents acted to hide her state of mind from Leto in any case - Ghanima isn't really credited with any great presience as I recall - Leto's mainly results from that huge spice overdose too.

Leto took on the sandworm skin so he could live forever - with Paul's passing other factions decided to challenge the unstable regency and also the support of the Fremen had been lost - as one who was part sandworm he became one with their god. He also saw a time that humanity would become extinct - and he knew what to do about it - the Golden Path. He had to live for milennia to bring that about.

Paul had to die so the reigns were passed soley onto Leto - Paul was a blind man and as such Fremen law called for him to go into the desert to die. There were artificial Tleilaxu eyes available - but Fremen frowned on them and he wouldn't have been accepted. So there are a few reasons why he died.

Yes, obviously reading the books helps if you want to critisize them or the movies that have been made. Let's just let this go. I pity the fool who hasn't read them.

This story takes place over the course of 20,000 years or so. This is fiction because you need to envision the evolution of humanity...this is not a straight line. These books go beyond fiction because they connect us with ideas and philosophies that, not only are we dealing with today, but will increasingly have to face in the future. Face Dancers, The Evermind, the original but perfected human- Duncan Idaho... these concepts are begging to be taken seriously, but not in terms of how many mentats it would take to run a ship. Look at the bible...wars over semantics...and yet who can argue with "turn the other cheek?". The real challenge for the avid human interested in delving into human issues and human projections is to balance these concepts with their own life. Forget how clever you are about the nuances of machines, the nitty gritty of artificial eyes, this was not the point of Dune. Just as the dimensions of Noah's arc seem a little tedious when compared with the story of Job, or the compassion of Christ, let your over-analytical brains take in the world of Dune as you would a spice-trance. Look at the messages of Frank Herbert. What questions does he really ask? Clues: Who is most loved? Who suffers from the most tragedy? Who commits actions selflessly? These answers are the guides to getting the most of these most illuminating and prophetic books. And please...even Frank Herbert could not have known the impact of his books, nor the evolution of thought they have inspired. Dune has gone beyond the pages and ideas of its conception and continues on in our own personal evolutions. Enough said... read them.

"Dune ,the first book, was one of the best novels I have ever read." I enjoyed it too, when I was 13. But if you pick it up as an adult ... it's awful. It's just poorly written. Like 99% of sci-fi, I'm truly sorry to say. Look, from the ages of 9 thru 19, I read sci-fi non-stop, every day, all year. But, once you grow up, there's just no excuse for most of it.

Save yourself some brain cells and move on to real books.

Hubble, you are a moron. Obviously most of the concepts went over your head and you took it for some kind of space opera, like most SF's are nowadays. Have fun reading through your outdated Shakespeare manuscripts. Idiot.