But Dune was quite good
Andrew McKie 09 Oct 2007 16:49
while Lord of the Rings was crap. It's true the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was total pants, but there was something to be said for V for Vendetta. And Sin City, though not my cup of tea, was very faithful.
Most of the Batman, Spiderman and Superman films were pretty useless, but then so were mnost of the comics. I shall be interested to see what they do to Neil Gaiman on the big screen. It doesn't look good, from the trailers.
The real miracle of adaptation from sf or comics was A Scanner Darkly. Exactly right.
I hated V for Vendetta. The movie was ponderous, lame and repetitive. The graphic novel was much better but the political philosophy was rather weak, despite the extremely interesting plot. Despite this, anyone who claims that the Dune movie was a better adaptation of a book than the Lord of the Rings movies should shut the hell up. Lord of the Rings had some glaring changes and omissions and I did not agree with all of them, or even some of them, but other than the fairly minor changes that did not affect large chunks of the basic plot of the books, it was a good adaptation of a book given the limitations of the medium of film. Dune, however, was an adaptation so far removed from the origin that you would have to classify it a new species. Sure, it had Fremen, big ass worms, a guy named Paul and some freaky blue eyed women, but much of the basic plot had been thoroughly altered to suit the studio's whims. Directed by Alan Smithee AKA David Lynch, even the four hour extended version with the goofy cartoon segment at the beginning couldn't save the mess of Dune. When I saw Heretics of Dune on a bookshelf, I thought it was about the making of this movie. I still liked it as a Saturday afternoon scifi movie, but it was far from a faithful recreation of the book. The Scifi Channel miniseries comes much closer.
In conclusion, you're wrong.