"Dune" 
Directed by David Lynch 
137 minutes, 1984, 
PG-13

"Dune" 
Directed by John Harrison 
288 minutes, 2000

There are two adaptations of the science-fiction 
book by Frank Herbert called "Dune." The Harrison 
version is much longer with more special effects.

The two versions reflect the politics of the time. 
In 1984, the United $tates was supporting Osama 
bin Laden, but by 2000 the Amerikan love of 
Islamic freedom-fighters had died down with the 
collapse of the Soviet Union.

That is why the first version actually has more 
fanatic religious overtones than the second 
version. In Lynch's version, the last words are 
mouthed in a surrealistic way and point to the 
religious powers of the main character Paul 
Atreides. In a scene missing from the second 
version, Paul Atreides splits the solid rock 
ground beneath him after winning a fight, thus 
proving that his powers go beyond merely mortal 
combat.

In the Harrison version, Paul Atreides criticizes 
his own religion at various points, has more 
dialogues about using religion for his own ends 
and completes the movie merely as someone retaking 
the throne in family tradition. The last scene is 
not about his great powers splitting the earth and 
causing rain as in the Lynch version but about 
tension in his polygamous life regarding wimmin 
characters.

In the first version, the bad guys are homosexual 
blood-suckers, literally. The second version tones 
down the homophobia so that the two factions 
seeking control of the planets seem closer to 
being merely imperialist rivals. In the second 
version the fighting ends with a marriage between 
rival families. In any case, the rulers come from 
outside the planet. The political intrigues are 
more like those of feudalism, with barons, princes 
and house of this versus house of that fighting. 
In both versions, Paul Atreides turns to the 
indigenous peoples for an alliance to oust the 
rival imperialist--a perfect explanation for how 
the United $tates aided Osama bin Laden to 
overthrow Soviet influence in Afghanistan.

MIM encourages readers to hear "Iraq," when 
thinking of the planet where the fighting happens-
-"Arrakis." The fighting over "spice" is fighting 
over oil and "desert power" has to do with the 
military strength of Mideast peoples. In both 
films, there is no mistaking that the power of the 
throne on Arrakis stems from the control of oil 
and the potential ability to blow it up and starve 
the whole universe of this irreplaceable 
commodity.

Even containing a discussion of suicide bombers, 
"Dune" is very contemporary in its overtones. The 
political differences in the two versions reflect 
approximately the strategic differences in outlook 
of U.$. imperialism in 1984 and 2000. The U.$. 
rulers fancy themselves the rightful rulers of the 
Mideast, bringing progress to the oppressed people 
there who rose up to put them on the throne. 
Such is the interpretation of Afghanistan today. 
MIM says the Amerikkkans should learn that they 
are dreaming and such dreams do not even belong in 
science-fiction movies.

The potential for a progressive thrust in the 
movie is there, because not only do the desert 
peoples fight for their destiny, but also Paul 
Atreides has some possibility to turn traitor to 
his own imperialist culture by taking up the 
desert people's ways. It does not take much to see 
Paul Atreides helping to break the back of the 
whole empire but whether or not he will truly 
serve the interests of the oppressed people is 
still left in the open at the end of both films. 
The first film trails off into religious fog, thus 
leaving us in doubt and the second version ends 
with the mere victory of one imperialist rival 
over another. Despite these ambiguities, we mildly 
recommend both films. They are quite entertaining 
and the imagination should be exercised enough by 
both films to provide a more suitable ending for 
both films.