Review: Frank Herbert’s Children of Dune


“To know the future is to be trapped by it.” — Leto II Atreides

Children of Dune is one of those sci-fi miniseries that feels a little rough around the edges, but still manages to hit with real ambition, atmosphere, and a lot more emotional weight than its modest TV budget might suggest. It is based on Frank Herbert’s Dune Messiah and Children of Dune, aired on the Sci Fi Channel in 2003 as a three-part miniseries, and it serves as a continuation of the 2000 Frank Herbert’s Dune adaptation.

What makes this version stand out is that it doesn’t just try to retell a story about desert politics and giant worms. It digs into legacy, prophecy, religious fanaticism, and the terrifying cost of being treated like a messiah. That sounds heavy, and it is, but the miniseries keeps moving with enough drama, betrayals, and strange mythic energy that it rarely feels static.

The opening section works especially well because it immediately reminds you that Paul Atreides’ victory was never a clean one. By the time the story gets going, his empire is already rotting from the inside, and the series makes a strong case that power on Arrakis is always poisoned by something, whether it is politics, faith, or the sand itself. The shift from Paul’s once-legendary rise to the unraveling of the world around his children gives the story a tragic tone that fits Herbert’s universe perfectly.

A big reason the miniseries works is that it understands Dune is not really about flashy action, even though it has some. It is about ideas, and this adaptation is willing to spend time on them. The show’s best material comes from the way it frames religion as both weapon and trap, especially once the myth of Muad’Dib starts consuming the people who worshiped him. That theme gives the whole thing a haunted feeling, like everyone is living inside a prophecy they do not fully understand.

The cast does a lot of heavy lifting, too. Alec Newman brings a wounded, exhausted quality to Paul that fits the role well, and his scenes carry real sadness because he feels like a man who has seen too far and cannot unsee it. Jessica Brooks, James McAvoy, and Julie Cox all help ground the family drama, while Susan Sarandon brings a cold intensity that gives the political side of the story some bite. Even when the dialogue gets stiff, the actors usually sell the material better than the script itself does.

One of the most interesting choices in Children of Dune is how it treats the twins, Leto II and Ghanima, as more than just plot devices. Their importance is obvious from the beginning, but the series gradually builds them into the real center of gravity. That works because the story is partly about inheritance, and these kids are inheriting not just a throne, but a nightmare of destiny, expectation, and manipulation. The series knows that the most dangerous thing in this universe is not a blade or a bomb, but a future someone insists is already written.

The production design is another area where the miniseries earns a lot of goodwill. It has that early-2000s TV look, sure, and some effects are clearly limited by the era, but the sets, costumes, and overall visual imagination give it a strong sense of place. Arrakis feels harsh and ceremonial at the same time, which is exactly what it should feel like. The costumes also help sell the political divide between factions, making the whole thing look more like a living empire than a generic sci-fi stage.

There are moments where the miniseries feels very theatrical, almost to a fault. Characters occasionally deliver lines with so much seriousness that the show risks sounding like it is declaring its themes instead of dramatizing them. That said, this is also part of the charm. Children of Dune is not embarrassed by its own scale or its own weirdness, and that confidence helps it pull off material that could easily have collapsed under a more self-conscious approach.

The pacing is mostly solid across the three parts, though it does have the usual miniseries issue of compressing a very large story into a limited runtime. Because it covers most of Dune Messiah in the first installment and then adapts Children of Dune in the later parts, some transitions feel abrupt and some developments move faster than they probably should. Still, the adaptation largely keeps its focus, and it is impressive how much story it packs in without turning into total chaos.

If there is a weakness here, it is that the miniseries can sometimes feel like it is working harder to explain the mythology than to make you feel it. Herbert’s world is notoriously dense, and this version does not always smooth that out for viewers who are not already familiar with the books. A newcomer could easily feel like they have been dropped into the middle of a dynastic collapse with very little hand-holding. But for a follow-up to Frank Herbert’s Dune, that density is more of a feature than a bug.

The best compliment I can give Children of Dune is that it respects the seriousness of its material without becoming completely lifeless. It has the courage to be grand, strange, and a little mournful all at once. Even when the execution is uneven, the miniseries understands that the heart of this saga is not a simple battle for power. It is the burden of seeing the future and realizing it may be worse than the present.

As a sequel, it improves on the sense of scale and emotional consequence from the earlier adaptation. It feels less like an introduction to a universe and more like the tragic fallout of one. That makes it a more satisfying watch for viewers who want Dune to feel like an epic family tragedy instead of just a sand-covered political thriller. The fact that it does this on TV, with all the limitations that implies, makes the achievement even more impressive.

In the end, Children of Dune is a flawed but memorable miniseries that succeeds because it commits to its own strange seriousness. It may not be sleek, and it may not always be easy to follow, but it has ideas, mood, and a genuine sense of doom that suits Herbert’s universe. For fans of the books, it is one of the more interesting screen adaptations because it is willing to lean into the philosophical and tragic side of the saga rather than sanding it down into something safer. For everyone else, it is still a fascinating piece of early-2000s sci-fi television that swings bigger than most shows of its era.

Review: Frank Herbert’s Dune


“Mercy is a word I no longer understand.” — Paul Atreides

Frank Herbert’s Dune, the 2000 Syfy Channel miniseries, stands as a scrappy yet heartfelt attempt to tame the untamable beast that is Frank Herbert’s sprawling sci-fi epic Dune. Clocking in at nearly four hours across three parts, it doesn’t pretend to be the cinematic knockout punch of Denis Villeneuve’s Dune: Part One and Dune: Part Two, nor does it dive headfirst into the psychedelic rabbit hole of David Lynch’s notoriously bonkers 1984 film. Instead, it carves out its own lane as the faithful workhorse adaptation—the one that prioritizes stuffing in every major plot thread, faction rivalry, and philosophical nugget from the novel without apology. That dogged completeness earns it major points from book purists, even if the early-2000s TV production values leave it looking like a glorious mess next to today’s blockbuster standards. It’s the version you revisit when you want Dune’s full political chessboard laid bare, rough edges and all.

Right from the opening narration, you sense this miniseries is playing a different game. While Villeneuve hooks you with those thunderous sandworm roars and vast desert expanses that make Arrakis feel like a character unto itself, and Lynch blasts you with industrial-gothic sets and nose-plug close-ups that scream “weird,” the Syfy take eases in with expository voiceover and sweeping shots of Caladan’s misty nobility. The budget screams made-for-TV: thopters wobble like cheap models on strings, sandworms shimmer with dated CGI that wouldn’t pass muster even in 2000, and interstellar travel feels more like a quick fade than a hyperspace spectacle. Yet there’s charm in the earnestness—the ornate costumes drip with imperial excess, from House Atreides’ regal blues to the Harkonnens’ sickly pallor, capturing Herbert’s baroque universe better than Lynch’s fever-dream excess or Villeneuve’s minimalist severity. It’s alien and opulent without trying to reinvent the wheel visually, letting the story’s inherent strangeness do the heavy lifting.

What truly sets this adaptation apart is its unhurried commitment to Dune’s core as a tale of interstellar realpolitik, not just laser swords and monster chases. The miniseries luxuriates in the scheming: extended scenes of Bene Gesserit whispering manipulations across generations, Emperor Shaddam IV plotting from his golden throne, and the Spacing Guild’s monopoly stranglehold get room to breathe. Lynch crammed this into a frantic 137 minutes, resorting to on-screen crawls and “the spice must flow” explainers that border on parody, while Villeneuve elegantly implies much of it through mood and subtext, trimming for pace. Here, the trap closes deliberately—Duke Leto’s honorable doom unfolds with all its tragic inevitability, Paul’s Fremen transformation simmers with ecological and messianic tension, and the Baron’s depravity feels like a rotting empire’s symptom. It’s talkier, sure, but that density mirrors the novel’s heady mix of ecology, religion, and colonialism, making the good-vs-evil surface hide a much murkier power grab.

Faithfulness is the miniseries’ superpower, and stacking it against the films drives that home. Lynch’s Dune is a directorial fever dream—brilliant in bursts (those Guild Navigators floating in spice tanks are iconic), but it mangles the timeline, invents “weirding modules” and pain boxes that Herbert never dreamed of, and caps with a cheesy resurrection and empire-toppling finale that feels like fanfic. Villeneuve’s duology is a masterclass in restraint and awe: Part One builds unbearable dread through silence and scale, Part Two unleashes Paul’s holy war turn with chilling clarity, but both demand sequels and sacrifice chunks like Thufir Hawat’s full betrayal arc or the ecological long-view for runtime efficiency. The Syfy version? It hits about 90% of the book’s beats in one self-contained package—Paul drinks the Water of Life, rides the first worm, unites the tribes, all while fleshing out Yueh’s guilt, Gurney’s survival, and Irulan’s expanded role as a scheming narrator who spies on the action. Smart tweaks like inner-monologue voiceovers clarify the mental gymnastics without Lynch’s exposition overload.

The ensemble punches above the production’s weight, delivering performances that ground the sprawl. Alec Newman’s Paul Atreides evolves from callow youth to burdened Kwisatz Haderach with a steely intensity—more seasoned than Kyle MacLachlan’s wide-eyed innocent in Lynch’s film or Timothée Chalamet’s introspective minimalist in Villeneuve’s, but convincingly haunted by prescient visions. William Hurt’s Duke Leto radiates quiet nobility, a paternal rock that Oscar Isaac matches with fiercer charisma but less screen time. Saskia Reeves’ Lady Jessica is a coiled operative, mastering the Voice while Rebecca Ferguson brings feral maternal fire and Francesca Annis floats as an ethereal priestess. Ian McNeice’s Baron Harkonnen oozes grotesque glee, echoing Kenneth McMillan’s scenery-chewing blimp but with slyer malice; Stellan Skarsgård’s version chills as a tactical monster sans the floating fat-suit camp. Chani fares best as Barbora Kodetová’s fierce Fremen equal, outshining Lynch’s rushed Sean Young and edging Zendaya’s mythic close-ups with raw tribe loyalty. Even bit players like Robert Wisdom’s Idaho shine brighter than their film counterparts.

Directorial choices by John Harrison emphasize theatricality over cinema flair, turning court scenes into operatic standoffs that suit Dune’s ritualistic pomp. Princess Irulan’s upgrade—from bookend quotes to active imperial intriguer—adds a vital scheming perspective Lynch ignored and Villeneuve teases for later. The gom jabbar test throbs with intimate terror, Fremen sietches pulse with cultural depth, and the final duel crackles despite modest effects. Pacing lags in spots—the Atreides downfall stretches, subplots like Feyd-Rautha’s gladiatorial intro feel obligatory—but that thoroughness lets overlooked gems like the dinner-table tensions and spice-blow ecology lectures land fully. Brian Tyler’s score swells bombastically, aping Zimmer’s primal dread without the subtlety, yet it propels the saga forward.

Flaws glare under modern scrutiny: effects age like milk (those ornithopters!), editing chops unevenly between threads, and some line deliveries veer stagey next to Villeneuve’s hushed precision or Lynch’s unhinged energy. It lacks the 1984 film’s quotable weirdness (“The sleeper must awaken!”) or the recent epics’ IMAX transcendence, feeling more like a filmed audiobook than immersive event cinema. Still, that scrappiness fits Dune’s prickly soul—ornate yet precarious, cerebral yet visceral. Herbert crafted a warning about heroes and empires; this miniseries trusts you to unpack it, preserving the unsettling texture the smoother films sometimes polish away.

Revisiting after the others clarifies its niche perfectly. Lynch’s Dune is the cult oddity—fractured, visionary, endlessly memeable despite narrative chaos. Villeneuve’s saga is prestige sci-fi at its peak: disciplined, subversive, a slow-burn symphony begging Part Three. The Syfy miniseries? Your completist’s deep cut—comprehensive, unpretentious, ideal for dissecting the guilds, houses, and prophecies on a rainy weekend. Constraints hobble the spectacle, but the ambition to honor Herbert’s labyrinthine blueprint shines through.

Ultimately, Frank Herbert’s Dune miniseries claims no crowns as the ultimate adaptation—that debate rages between Lynch’s deranged heart, Villeneuve’s cool mastery, or the book itself. At around 1150 words, it’s a worthy underdog: earnest, exhaustive, and true to the novel’s tangled genius. Fire it up if you crave Dune’s unfiltered intrigue over heart-pounding visuals. It respects the spice’s full flow, worms and all.

Film Review: The Snowman (dir by Tomas Alfredson)


So, I finally watched the 2018 thriller, The Snowman, and my main reaction to the film is that it featured a lot of snow.

That’s understandable, of course.  The film takes place in Norway and it’s called The Snowman so, naturally, I wasn’t expecting a lot of sunshine.  Still, after a while, the constant shots of the snow-covered landscape start to feel like almost some sort of an inside joke.  It’s almost as if the film is daring you to try to find one blade of grass in Norway.  Of course, the snow is important because the film’s about a serial killer who builds snowmen at the sites of his crimes.  They’re usually pretty big snowmen as well.  It’s hard not to be a little impressed by the fact that he could apparently make such impressive snowmen without anyone noticing.

Along with the snow, the other thing that I noticed about this movie is that apparently no one knows how to flip a light switch in Norway.  This is one of those films where every scene seems to take place in a dark room.  I found myself worrying about everyone’s eyesight and I was surprised the everyone in the film wasn’t wearing glasses.  I can only imagine how much strain that puts on the eyes when you’re constantly trying to read and look for clues in the dark.

Michael Fassbender plays Harry Hole, a Norwegian police inspector who may be troubled but still gets results!  He’s upset because his ex-girlfriend (Charlotte Gainsbourg) has a new boyfriend (Jonas Karlsson).  He’s also upset because his son (Michael Yates) doesn’t know that Harry is actually his father.  Or, at least, I think that Harry’s upset.  It’s hard to tell because Fassbender gives a performance that’s almost as cold as the snow covering the Norwegian ground.  Of course, he’s always watchable because he’s Fassbender.  But, overall, he doesn’t seem to be particularly invested in either the role or the film.

Harry and his new partner (Rebecca Ferguson) are investigating a missing person’s case, which quickly turns into a multiple murder mystery.  It turns out that the crimes are linked to a bunch of old murders, all of which were investigated by a detective named Gert Rafto (Val Kilmer).  Gert was troubled but he still got results!  Or, at least, Harry thinks that he may have gotten results.  Nine years ago, Rafto died under mysterious circumstances…

Now, I have to admit that when, 30 minutes into the film, the words “9 years earlier” flashed on the screen, I groaned a bit.  I mean, it seemed to me that the movie was already slow enough without tossing in a bunch of flashbacks.  However, I quickly came to look forward to those brief flashbacks, mostly because they featured Val Kilmer in total IDGAF mode.  Kilmer stumbles through the flashbacks, complete with messy hair and a look of genuine snarky bemusement on his face.  Kilmer gives such a weird and self-amused performance that his brief scenes are the highlight of the film.

Before it was released, The Snowman was hyped as a potential Oscar contender.  After the movie came out and got roasted by the critics, director Tomas Alfredson replied that the studio forced him to rush through the production and that 10 to 15% of the script went unfilmed.  Considering Alfredson’s superior work on Let The Right One In and Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.  The film’s disjointed style would certainly seem to back up Alfredson’s claim that there was originally meant to be more to the film than actually ended up on the screen.

The Snowman is one of those films that doesn’t seem to be sure what it wants to be.  At times, it aspires to David Lynch-style surrealism while, at other times, it seems to be borrowing from the morally ambiguous crime films of Taylor Sheridan.  Ultimately, it’s a confused film that doesn’t seem to have much reason for existing.  At the same time, I’ve also been told that the Jo Nesbø novel upon which the movie is based is excellent.  The same author also wrote the novel that served as the basis for 2011’s Headhunters, which was pretty damn good.  So, read the book and ignore the film.

The TSL’s Daily Horror Grindhouse: Long Time Dead (dir by Marcus Adams)


key_art_long_time_dead

Am I the only person in the world who likes the 2002 British horror film, Long Time Dead?

I sometimes think that I may be.  Whenever I mention the film to anyone, they either say they’ve never heard of it or they kind of roll their eyes.  I have yet to read a positive review online.  Long Time Dead has only got a 4.9 rating at the imdb, which is saying something because usually even the worst of films can still manage to score at least a 6.0.

So, I guess it’s true.  I guess only I like Long Time Dead.

Now, I should clarify that, just because I like a movie, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s very good.  Long Time Dead is definitely a flawed film.  This is one of those films where an evil spirit — in this case, a fire demon known as a djinn — pursues a group of friends, killing them one-by-one.  There are eight friends, which seems to be a bit excessive for a 94 minute film.  We’re never quite sure how all of these characters got to know each other in the first place.  Some of them appear to be college students.  Four of them share a flat.  Another one lives on a boat.  And as for the other three, they appear to all live in the same building but still, you’re never really sure how everyone is related.

What’s odd is that we only really get to know five of the eight characters, which again leads the viewer to wonder why we needed the other three.  We know that Spencer (James Hillier) is perpetually stoned and that all of this is kind of his fault because he’s the one who suggested that the group should use a Ouija board to try to contact a spirit.  We know that his girlfriend, Lucy (Marsha Thomason), knows about the supernatural and, for some reason, lives on a boat.  We know that Liam (Alec Newman) was traumatized when his father murdered his mother.  We know that Liam’s girlfriend, Annie (Melanie Gutteridge), has asthma.  We know that Rob (Joe Absolom) appears to be a nice guy.  And then there’s Webster (Lukas Haas), Stella (Lara Belmont), and Joe (Mel Raido), who don’t really have any reason for being in the movie.

(Seriously, what is respected Texas character actor and friend-of-Leonardo-DiCaprio Lukas Haas doing in a low-budget British horror film?)

At first, we’re led to believe that the djinn is killing people because it’s upset that it was dragged out of its world by the Ouija board.  But, as the film progresses, we learn that the djinn has a personal score to settle with one of his potential victims.  We also learn that someone may or may not be possessed by the djinn.  It’s all a bit too much to keep track of.  I’ve read rumors that Long Time Dead was a difficult production and the fact that the film has seven credited writers might provide a clue as to why the film is such a narrative mess.

And yet, despite all of that, I still like Long Time Dead.

Why?

The reason is very simple.

The movie scared me.

Maybe it was because I was watching it late at night and I had the lights out or maybe it was because, as an asthmatic, I related to poor Annie but Long Time Dead scared the Hell out of me the first time I saw it.   Not only is the film full of effective jump scenes but the djinn is a terrifying monster.  He’s relentless, ruthless, and merciless.  I think what truly scared me is that the djinn would attack anyone anywhere.  There was literally nowhere that you could hide from it.

Long Time Dead is no classic but it still made me scream.