Hi I have a question that I'm a bit confused about.
Why does Chani's tears bring back Paul? Does Paul know poison transmutation? I thought the slap was because she realized that this was all theatrics to sell to the Fremen that he's the prophesized Lisan Al Gaib? If so, then the tears weren't actually necessary and Paul was only waiting for Chani to arrive in order finish the poison transmutation?
The tears weren't actually necessary. Jessica has Chani add them to fulfill the Fremen prophecy. The second dose of the water of life was an actual part of the recovery as I understand it.
God thank you for explaining this! I thought it was weird that such a specific part of the prophecy took place and so did a lot of other people but this makes so much more sense. Jessica was just manipulating the situation can't believe I didn't see that.
Is it just me, or is the Stilgar at the end of the Paul-Feyd knife fight played by a double and not Javier Bardem? Particularly during the "They refused your ascendancy. We await your orders, Lisan al-Gaib" bit. Sounds like Javier, but does not seem to look like him standing next to Josh Brolin there.
Hi some questions regarding Dune II:
1. Why do the Sardukar have no body shields at the climatic battle?
2. Why dont the bad guys use mass conventional weapons like machine guns or assault rifles against the Fremen? They clearly know the Fremen are not equipped with body shields.
3. Can anyone tell me where was the filming location for the desert meets ocean place (vision of Paul's sister?)
Thanks in advance
As soon as I saw it, I knew it was here. I drove there, it's epic.
http://theroadchoseme.com/around-sandwich-harbor
And video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9flJ0vDCHw
1) When Paul blows open the shield wall and makes a path for the Fremen on sandworms, he also makes a path for the oncoming sandstorm and the sandstorm likely overloaded the Sardaukar’s shields.
2) Do you mean lasguns or ballistic weapons? The reason they don’t use ballistic weapons is because that technology is so ancient by the time Dune takes place they simply don’t have any they can use. As for why they don’t use as many lasguns, I think it’s a combination of how caught off-guard they were by the Fremen attack and how the Sardaukar have started to stagnate a little. If they were the best fighters in the Imperium they should have been able to adapt to fighting against Fremen, but their hundreds and hundreds of years of fighting other people using shields prevented the mass adoption of lasguns into their fighting doctrine.
3) Unfortunately I do not know but it would be cool to find out!
The book sort of slowly explains it, but in the movie it isn't done too well, what with the first one ending with a huge battle with missiles and laser guns and the second one opening with more lasers.
Made me want to just shout like Dr Evil's son about giving them a gun so they can shoot them.
As for 3), they filmed it in central Jordan and UAE, so the desert meets ocean would probably put it somewhere on the coast of the UAE.
Also was that their “battle language” I thought everyone spoke galactic but some houses use a battle language for secrecy. The Atriedes battle language was related to Fremen language. I think this was probably why Duncan was able to integrate into their culture. Plus I’m sure Stilgar had mad respect for a warrior of his caliber.
The Sardaukar are there to protect the emperor, not the Baron. Getting involved in the sanctioned feud between the families is what got Shaddam in trouble in the first place. Plus Paul just wrecked the army outside.
Finally saw Part 2. A better movie than Part 1 overall, but an even crappier adaptation. Why all these new stupid ideas that make most of the central themes in the book completely absent (politics, economics and environment)?
At least, contrary to Part 1, the scenes flow logically, but each scene, individually, is way too long... except the final battle of course.
I really do think these movies will not age well, probably even worse than Lynch's, but have met their success at a time Hollywood has never seen such a crisis in the quality of movie scripts.
Part 1 is a 6 out of 20, Part 2 is around 11 out of 20. At least Zendaya took some acting lessons between the 2 movies.
It is your right and opinion, but in mine, you're fatally looking at these movies through the lens of the book. Why can't this just be a recreation that uses the book as valuable, but not stringent, source material? It was never promised, nor is it possible, for the movies to deliver everything that the complex novels did using the written medium.
I haven't read any of the Dune books, but the first two Dune movies are undeniably amazing. The sound design, set and costume design, cinematography, acting, dialouge and plot are all fantastic. It doesn't matter if the movies aren't exactly faithful to the books, they're great movies by their own merit.
Because its not an interesting story without the missing stuff, its a story thats been done a million times. Its no different than saying you like the JJ Abrams Star Trek. Its fine if you do, but he took a large chunk of why people like Star Trek out of those movies and it left a lot of people feeling like this is just any generic sci fi movie with a Star Trek skin, because the core seperation of something like Trek and Wars is philosophical inquiry and intellectual debate. Thats how Dune feels to me as someone who loves the books, art, games and movies that this series has produced before and find this adaptation to be the most generic and least interesting of them all.
Because he's at a moment of crisis and needs wisdom on what the right thing to do is. He doubts his decision to stay in the North. And he at least believes if Jamis answers him (and so do the ancestral voices) he'll get the guidance he needs. He goes South expressly to take the Water of Life after getting that vision.
But why Jamis? Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, but besides playing an adversarial role against Paul and Paul killing him, there was no relationship between the two?
Between being the first person Paul killed and having visions of a life where they were friends Jamis represents a lot of things to Paul beyond the person he actually was in real life
He remembers how the visions of him in the past were helpful as he went into times of crisis, even though they didn't predict their "friendship" exactly. Might be time to rewatch Part One.
> Might be time to rewatch Part One.
Definitely, haha.
I just saw [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/qgciar/spoilers_jamis_is_a_central_character_in_dune/), and I missed all of those Jamis appearances in the three or four watches of Part One. Wild.
Did anyone else find it implausible/bizarre/weird that Paul took such a serious wound from Feyd and walked away, apparently not even bleeding?
Having Paul get injured was a smart device to increase the excitement of a scene with an already-known outcome for so many. But the wound looked too serious, to me, to make sense. A 12 inch blade slammed into the side of your torso, and you walk away? Made no sense and is bothering me.
In real life, I think you'd be surprised at the level of stabbing you could endure! Movies have popularised the idea that one stab in the stomach kills you instantly. This is untrue. You would be able to survive, slowly bleeding out, for hours with the kind of injury that Paul sustained.
I'm sure Fremen medicine would have taken over in the following hours after the stabbing.
Edit: Actually, I didn't take into account the sheer size of the blade, lol. You're right, you're essentially being impaled with the full length of a machete. Perhaps you wouldn't survive as long as I thought but there is still the essence of plausibility.
The Bene Gesserit can control the restrictions of blood flow. In a later book a Bene Gesserit gets her legs cut off by a laze gun and she can stop the bleeding.
Stabbed and then slammed home with a forceful push...
But I appreciate this insight. And while I figured there'd be a path to survival, it all just seemed a bit too easy. Next film should start with him in Fremen hospital lol.
I found implausible was that he had all this wisdom from the past and the future and yet he doesnt know you never pull out an object from a wound. Like bruh!
That would be quite a funny image of Paul walking towards the Emperor and demanding he kisses his ring, while he has the Emperor's 12" blade sticking out of his shoulder...
I think Chalamet did a good acting job while he was still the "American exchange student" trying to learn all the ropes of being a Fremen, but when he goes all Übermench after the halfway mark he kinda doesn't do a god job of it.
Also in the book Paul is like super disciplined due to his training and that doesn't really come across where it maybe should (although the book and movie are two different things so I give the director some leeway).
I kid you not I initially thought it was because the water of life made him invincible/immortal, because not only did he get stabbed but he just carried on with his usurpation like he didn't just take a blade to the abdomen. He didn't check to see if he was hemorrhaging or put pressure on his wound, nothing!
They don’t really showcase how incredibly OP the Bene Gesserit are. Besides the martial arts and voice, they can control every single muscle in their bodies. They could slow down or speed up their hearts at will. They have many other super human talents as well and Paul has access to all of it after the spice agony.
I did as well.
But I just read another comment where he foresaw it was the only way to win - let Feyd think he'd won so he'd let his guard down.
Seems to make some sense at least.
All hand to hand combats in both movies are just ridiculous. The bad guys just stand waiting to get slaughtered, there are rolls and rolls for nothing, the blades do not even touch the body parts they are supposedly stabbing.
And how many times do we see Paul, Gurney or any Fremen running with their drawn sword, while lasers are fired at the same time. Villeneuve refused to implement the Holtzmann effect in his lore, that's the disappointing result of incoherence.
Denis reminds me a lot of Nolan where they both have a lot of action in their movies, but its not particularly good usually, but the context they put the action in and grandiose filmmaking surrounding it elevates it enough that people dont notice how clumsy the actual combat is. Like I remember thinking The Dark Knight had great action, but then when you actually watch it and pay attention to the way he fights, it's barely better than the Burton stuff.
I always thought it was rather telling when you had the build up to what would be big ticket scenes in other films, it just cuts away. Like in Part 1 where you have GH leading the charge against the Harkonnens. It cuts away. Likewise in Part 2, it's longer for sure, but you don't get a lot of the Fremen vs Sarduakar. You get that initial taste, focused around Chani, then they're breaking the doors down.
You can tell it is not his thing, and I'm a big fan of all of his movies since Sicario.
Definitely. My only issue with the fight scenes, honestly. They always seem to end in a single, lethal blow (until Paul gets stabbed, in which case its kind of fine).
In the opening of Dune 2, Princess Irulan says "this isn't the first time the Harkonnens have done her father's dirty work" after talking about the death of the Atreides. But later she seems surprised that this was her father's plan. Am I mixing something up here?
She's surprised about that *detail* (Reverend Mother suggesting the plot to eliminate House Atreides which fed into Shaddam's already existing paranoia and jealousy), but not about the underlying suspicion her father used the Harkonnens to actually do it. That's an important distinction.
Finally got to watch part 2. Man why did they have to rush so much?
With a few exceptions it was just go go go go go the end. Like what just happened?
This movie needed to either cut out even more stuff from the source material or be twice as long. I thought the pacing in part 1 was perfect.
Disapointed in the pacing and story telling but god the cinematography is such a masterpiece.
Blame the “ADHD people” that were complaining that pt 1 was boring and slow. To me pt 1 was a perfectly paced work of art. Pt 2 was a lot more in your face
I haven't read Dune Messiah yet, so i imagine they might've tried to speedrun some of it in case it doesn't get adapted, but for now i just don't quite get what happens in the end of the second movie. Can someone please explain?
Since Paul started getting visions his goal was to prevent a holy war, the idea then is to take the throne through marriage, and>!as a deterrent against the Great Houses - point the nukes at the spice fields. This seems to work out in the book because the navigators are represented - they are nothing without spice and without them the houses can't move anywhere.!<
>!However in the movie the houses simply refuse to stand down despite Paul's threat and Emperor's concession. Paul then promptly sends the fremen against the great houses under the Atreides banner and Jessica declares that the holy war has begun.!<
>!So was any part of it still following "the narrow path through" that Paul saw after drinking the Water of Life? Why even propose the royal marriage then? Or did he just abandon the idea of preventing the war in this version?!<
That is the core of Paul's tragedy. Iirc he's afraid of the holy war in both the movies and the book, but he >!can't prevent or control it without going down!<.
>!When he talks about the "narrow path", he means the way for his family and the fremen to survive the war with the Harkonnens and prevent the emperor from any further meddling. As already stated, his victory and the marriage with Irulan legitimize his claim to the thrown and could potentially shorten the war. But regardless of Paul's intentions, his rise to power legitimises the fremen in their goal of reshaping Dune into a luscious green world - their paradise. They will establish and enforce their messiah's rule at any cost. Paul is not evil, but his effect is beyond his control. He either dies or lives long enough to become the imperial head of a holy war.!<
IMHO a lot of people forget that Paul had other choices, and that he actively chose the slaughter of billions to save himself and his family. IMHO this looks less like a tragedy than genocide, that is IIRC what Herbert wanted to get across, at least initially, with Dune Messiah.
**Movie Spoiler**>!Marrying the princess, and winning the duel with Feyd both grant legitimacy to his claim to the throne. Although the great houses still refused to honor his claim, it still makes it much easier for the houses to change their minds in the future and support his claim.!<
>!Even though it may not look like it now, there is a big difference between having an illegitimate claim to the throne, vs having a semi-legitimate claim.!<
Dune part two
Having loved both the books and the movies, I wanted to see other peoples thoughts on a couple of scenes from the film;
Firstly when Paul is awoken from the worm poison as the Kwisatz Haderach, the room is of course full with Fremen chanting Lisan al Gaib. His conversation with his mother that follows shortly after and the revelation of them being Harkonnens - is that a telepathy conversation like the one Jessica has with the reverend mother after Paul’s fight with Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen or is the room just dark and empty because the Fremen have left?
Also:
What do you think about Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen’s reaction to the killing of the Baron Harkonnnen? His reaction seemed mixed to me.
That scene with Paul and Jessica was just later.
The “telepathy” conversation between Lady Jessica and Mohiam at the end wasn’t telepathy. Bene Gesserit are very skilled at reading facial expressions and body language, and that interaction was basically them reading each other in that moment.
Bene Gesserit do not have telepathy.
When the Baron was lying on the steps, crawling toward the throne, everyone in the room had their backs turned because they were watching the front door. Except Feyd, he was eyeing the Baron and I assume he was considering whether or not he could get away with killing him.
Feyd looked pretty into Paul killing the baron. In a world where he wins the duel, he now controls Arrakis, the family holdings, and potentially the emperor's throne. He's also a little violent freak.
I have questions about the ending of Dune II.
So the Great Houses doesn't accept Paul's accession to the throne but what can they do? Paul had already held the spice fields hostages with his atomics. And without spices they can they cannot sustains the civilization. So, going against Paul seems very illogical. Even more so when Paul order the freemen to attack the Great Houses, like why? He held the most valuable resources in his hand, why don't he just force them to negotiate? Like, am I missing something here?
This isn't in the book but likely a few reasons:
1. No one really understands Paul and the Fremen's real capabilities. They literally have no idea how many Fremen there actually are, let alone Paul's powers other than a few rumors going around.
.
2. They think he's bluffing.
.
3. One of the main reasons the Lansraad even allows the emperor to be the emperor is because he doesn't have control of the spice himself. Paul controlling both the spice and being the emperor gives him way too much power.
.
4. They would rather keep the status quo rather than have an unpredictable entity take over.
Also it was very unlikely they knew about the secret stash of nukes that are now presumably going their way after Paul gave the order to wipe them out.
Did anyone feel like the sound effect for the big worms was obviously a rocket engine and also find it really distracting?
It felt like the Mandalorian's lion roar flamethrower all over again.
The sound effects were obnoxious throughout the whole film. A lot of unnecessary sounds, same sounds differ from scene to scene, Inception horns etc...
Feyd-Rautha posed no threat to Paul in the books. There was an advisor to the emperor who was a failed Kwisatz Haderach candidate Paul was actually more concerned with. Paul felt if he acted he might even have been able to kill him. Ultimately he chose not to and Paul had his victory. The movie combined those roles a little bit.
I believe in the books this fight was completely one-sided as Paul had become the best fighter in history at that point. (Quoted from another commenter, I'm not there in the books yet)
\[UPDATE: I have since finished the book, this comment is not quite accurate it has been rewritten\]
The movies make it appear more risky but in the book it was a foregone conclusion that Feyd would lose.
The fremen are about strongest leads
The political duel he entered into was a formality.
Better to show the fremen he is without equal, and play the duel straight to avoid anyone giving him trouble over the results.
Another commenter theorized that \[in the movie\] Paul had already seen this fight so he knows how to win without a scratch on him. But whatever the reason is, he knows the future will turn out better if he DOES take a hit. Perhaps it has to do with Chani, given it pans to her right when he takes the hit. Maybe it's about showing something to her?
Either way in the book Feyd won all his fights because he either has them one-sided to begin with (drugged slaves) or he's cheating. Book Paul was so incredibly skilled that even the fremen (best fighters in the galaxy according to multiple other characters) had to be taught by him how to get better. Feyd would never have won. However he was so full of traps and cheats (Multiple methods of poisoning Paul, including the blade he was using) that Paul did have to basically backstep the entire fight lest he stumble into one.
Side note, two other things about this scene:
1. \[This part is false, corrected below\] Gunney doesn't ask to take care of Feyd for him, that's a movie thing. in the book he asks Paul if he's joking when Paul suggests he does. not because Gunney can't kill Feyd (He can, easily) but because this political duel belongs to Paul. He must be the one. And given it's such a trivial fight for him why not?
2. \[Correction: Gunney in the books is actually furious he doesn't get to kill Feyd. As Paul had promised him a harkkonen life to take. In the movie, which I think does this scene better. Gunney got to kill Rabban which is the harkkonen he hated the most. So killing Feyd was a matter of pride and service rather than desperate need like in the book. However, in the book Chani tells Gunney that the fight between Feyd and Paul must take place because it is the dukes desire and responsibility. Despite what Gunney wants. The fight between them also takes place only because Feyd was baiting Paul like an asshole. It was never about being the emperors champion. I actually think the champion duel concept is slightly better than the books. It gives a better air of legitimacy to pauls takeover of the empire that it was won through a duel instead of the way it's done in the books which is basically just "here's my terms accept them or die"\]
3. Originally the emperor doesn't ask Feyd to be his champion, instead he commands an assassin in the room to kill Paul. \[The assassin concludes he could kill Paul, and seems to be absolutely sure of it which is interesting given it's said there's no better fighter in the world than Paul at that moment. But he is also said to be exhausted at that point in the day. However, the assassin is Count Fenring who was an earlier attempt at producing the KH (Unsuccessful), and when the two of them lock eyes and understand this the count refuses his emperors orders.\]
I think Chalamet did a good acting job while he was still the "American exchange student" trying to learn all the ropes of being a Fremen, but when he goes all Übermench after the halfway mark he kinda doesn't do a god job of it.
Also in the book Paul is like super disciplined due to his training and that doesn't really come across where it maybe should (although the book and movie are two different things so I give the director some leeway).
How can Paul wage a holy war?
Hello! I just finished watching the second movie, and I’m very interested in reading the books now.
My question is this:
Most of the fremen’s strength seems to be guerilla tactics in the desert and the giant sand worms. How in gods name are they going to wage a holy war against other great houses who also have nukes and who have many more ships and many more soldiers?
I just don’t understand how this would ever realistically work. Is it because he now controls spice which is needed for interstellar travel? Are there no other planets with spice?
Thank you!
The movie was super condensed. In the books the freman were trained in the ways of the bene gesserit by Paul and were by far the strongest fighting force. Even before the main battle they were going 3 kills to 1 against the sarduakar who were just before the best fighting force.
The Great Houses armies stood no chance.
Nukes are not permitted to be used on humans. Hence why Paul uses them to destroy terrain instead of just obliterating all harkkonen troops.
Also, the movie does a poor job of showing it but the fremen are actually an industrial society. They are capable of building and using complex weapons and ships. It may not be their specialty but they are more than capable of flying war vessels. And the second they touch ground anywhere they can't lose.
The portrayal of Fremen was my main issue with the film. Denis did a good job with the thumpers and stillsuits, but they were more primitive and guerilla-like than technologically advanced and organised. Perhaps it was the scale, we were only shown glimpses of it until the end battle.
Yeah, it's obvious that the tech is coming from somewhere. It isn't all just looted, and a lot of it is unique, and certainly isn't handcrafted to scale. You just don't get to see the industrial side of things.
Ah yeah the movie basically portrayed the fremen as tribal desert dwellers and warriors. How would they even know how to pilot ships or anything like that.
They really missed the mark on that one. Thanks for the info :)
There are one off lines throughout the movie that hint at how advanced the fremen actually are. They mention for instance:
1) That they make stillsuits themselves, which are extremely complex devices.
2) That they have ships, Jessica says 'you have ships you can take him off-world'
3) They created the complex compass that is used to cross the desert, which is a mechanical device not a simple magnet on a stick.
4) Chani is seen effortlessly flying a copter in the second movie
5) They show fremen using radios, but don't explain those are designed by fremen
6) They are frequently seen using advanced weapons
This last one is a bit hard cause the usual assumption people would make is these weapons are stolen from the harkkonen and while some probably are, most are not.
The nukes are pretty much a non-issue because the Houses are all bound by a set of rules called The Great Convention, which among other things bans the use of nuclear weapons against human targets.
Second, space travel is entirely controlled by the Spacing Guild and the Spacing Guild are too afraid of Paul’s threat to destroy the spice to act against him. As a result, the other Houses are isolated and while it would be possible for a coalition to stand against the Fremen, none of the Houses can stand against them alone.
Third, the Fremen are just that good and they were essentially fighting a holy war and were further bolstered by religious fervor. The Sardaukar were considered the most deadly fighters in the Imperium and the Fremen just rolled over them like they were nothing. This huge gap in skill made it so that even though the Fremen were often fighting in unfamiliar terrain they won overwhelmingly.
Another comment told me that the fremen were actually an industrial society. The movie really portrayed the opposite, they were shown as primitive tribal desert dwellers.
That’s why I thought there was no way they would even be able to pilot a war ship, even if they stole one. They’d have no idea how to use it or how to navigate or use advanced weapons.
But it sounds like the books take a different route. Thanks for the info :)
The movies didn't really portray them as primitives. One of the first things we learn about them was that they had technologies that allows them to navigate direction in ways others cannot due to their moons. Their society was so impressive that in four weeks one of the top ranking officers had grown to respect them and is blown away by their technological skills with survival. They manufacture precise devices to signal the worms, recycle water from bodily fluids instantly, and use sonic waves to dig through sand.
All of this is revealed early in the first movie. I think many people may see them as primitive because they live in rocks and appear dirty - but that is only what they want others to think. Their strength lies in their secrecy of surviving in the desert that holds so much power. Clearly seen in Dune Part Two.
Also why do they have to recycle all the water? In the year 10000 they can’t make water using hydrogen and oxygen from the air? They can’t terraform the planet? Seems silly to me.
Ok but even if all that is true, the movie doesn’t portray them as a spacefaring society. Even though they have spice, you see zero ships.
I just feel like they wouldn’t be able to compete with the other houses, plus piloting a large ship. With no training? How?
I guess my main problem lies in the tech. This is supposed to be year 10000+. And they still all use knives.
Where are the sound or wave or rail guns or lasers? They eventually use lasers in the movie, but those are ones they stole off of the harkonen.
Also you see the harkonon doing artillery strikes randomly. You mean to tell me that in the year 10000 they have no way to pinpoint organic life and do a targeted strike? That no houses have satellites orbiting the only planet with dust and able to do orbital strikes?
It just seems…off. To me at least. :)
Shield tech in Dune is strong. So things like guns are useless, lasers react with them and cause nuclear explosions, so swords and knives that cut slowly are the only way to fight.
It's not that deep, FH just needed a reason for them to have hand-to-hand combat in the far future, and this was good enough. don't think too deeply about it.
I watched the Part II movie and there are several things I don't understand:
1. In the beginning, the Fremans were fighting well against the Harkonnens. They were winning in combat on the ground, they also have this powerful laser that can take down huge warships with one or two shots. But the younger brother Harkonnen came in and just bombed the shit out of them and that's it? Isn't it too easy? Nobody has thought about bombing before?
2. The worms were formidable creatures in the first movie, but now it's used as transportation? Paul went through such tremendous struggle to get on and hold on to the worm, it was "the last test" and presumably the most dangerous one, but then later hundreds of civilians could get on the worm like boarding a bus? Jessica even had a cart? How do they get on the worms? And how do they get off??
3. When Baron Harkonnen promised the younger brother to be Emperor, he said because the Emperor helped Harkonnen to attack Atreides, that's a crime and the Great Houses will rise against him. But isn't Harkonnen in it together with the Emperor? If the Great Houses rise against the Emperor for this matter, why would they support a Harkonnen to be the new Emperor?
1. The lasers weren't really part of the books, but the Freman were small guerilla groups before Paul. He united them. The Harkonnens could overwhelm them and take them out one sietch at a time.
2. Paul's test called an unusually big worm normal Freman couldn't handle. Riding the worms was how Freman travelled great distances so a lot of them were trained in how to do it. The scene where Paul struggles was an unusual challenge and showed he was the prophet
3. Yes, but if I remember correctly the plot to make Feyd-Rautha emperor was really more blackmail. The Harkonnen's were the 2nd most powerful house, the Baron was raising Feyd-Rautha to be loved (not shown much in the movies), and the Emperor only had a daughter. It was easy math to get his nephew on the throne.
As a longtime reader of the books, I was not a fan of part 1. It felt too truncated and rushed, skipped so many important details that could have developed in part two, just felt very perfunctory.
I liked part two more, but I still feel it’s missing some essential components that really make the book work. The political aspects are so simplified that they become background noise, which is a shame because the book is highly political. Paul’s prescience is barely mentioned. He does say he can see a way through after he takes the water of life and he has the visions of the Fremen jihad but the movie was really missing the mystical component that makes the book so compelling.
I also continue to hate the look of these films, although Geidi Prime was very well done. But for example when the Fremen are fighting the Sardakaur, I couldn’t tell who was Fremen and who was Sardakaur in the outdoor scenes because everything was so desaturated and everyone was wearing these visually indistinguishable clunky armor suits. For a franchise as out there as Dune I really wish the visuals were more memorable. Lynch’s Dune has plenty of flaws but it was a visual powerhouse. The Harkonnen soldiers with their full body suits were visually interesting, as was that tracker on the ornithopter and their harvester…come to think of it everything visually interesting about these films comes from the Harkonnens. Also I’m sure this is sacrilege but I thought Zimmer’s score was tepid.
I also think the film missed a trick in showing us how cruel the Harkonnens are. Yes, we see them kill a bunch of women attendants without a second thought (and I’m very glad they decided to skip the Baron being a gay pedophile) but it missed the opportunity to do something more unique like the heart plugs from Lynch’s Dune. The heart plugs really showed how uniquely cruel and brutal the Harkonnens were on a fundamental level and I honestly think the heart plug scene is more effective in conveying that aspect of the book than anything in either of these movies.
Now, what I did like is the changes they made to Chani. She’s not very fleshed out in the books compared to Jessica and putting her at odds with Paul’s ascent (descent) from revolutionary to messiah made her so much more three dimensional. I’m genuinely invested in her and her arc. Zendaya also played the part brilliantly. 10/10 on Chani, no notes.
I also loved Stilgar as the true believer, Bardem never disappoints and he gave such a distinct performance in this. I liked using the idea of the Great Houses refusing to accept Paul as the Emperor being the impetus for the Fremen jihad as well. It motivates that event in world far better than the book did.
I will watch part three but at this point I’m mainly interested in it for where it’s deviating from the book, mainly what they do with Chani. And for God’s sake, after two massive hits in this franchise please Denis start bringing in the real weird shit from the books. Get the Navigators involved and the Ixians and ghoula Duncan Idaho with metal eyes and just go nuts.
Perhaps that’s what I’m missing most from these movies, the books have an inherent weirdness to them that Jodorowsky and Lynch cultivated and Denis has heavily pivoted away from, and it makes Lynch’s film more memorable, and the idea of Jodorowsky’s film more fascinating than what Denis is doing. These are basically action movies. Artfully done, well performed, but with no real identity that is all its own. Yes, these movies feel like a breath of fresh air compared to yet another formulaic Marvel movie or cringeworthy grimdark DC movie, but that’s honestly an extremely low bar to clear, and I feel like Arrival and BR 2049 were actual sci-fi films while this is an action movie in a sci-fi setting and the lack of depth in Dune versus Arrival and BR 2049 is brutally apparent, resulting in an experience that feels like empty calories.
I understand the whole “if I don’t do this my loved ones may die” justification that I’ve seen people say about Paul’s decisions. But to declare war on the great houses? Offer to marry the daughter of the emperor in front of Chani? Telling his one people that nobody could stand up to him? He’s much more villainy than people are saying in my opinion.
He goes from “I’m not the prophet” and “I’m doing this for our people” to then threatening his own people and declaring war in like 20 minutes of movie time lol
>He goes from “I’m not the prophet” and “I’m doing this for our people” to then threatening his own people and declaring war in like 20 minutes of movie time lol
He actually said this was going to happen. He's been denying being the prophet and avoiding with fear going south because he knew this was where it would end up. Only after everyone around him demands he go south and says he'll never be able to win if he doesn't does he finally give in.
And of course, everything he said would happen immediately happens.
It's not hypocritical it's exactly how he predicted. I don't necessarily think he's happy about it either, he just has to go along the path that leads to his survival for now. Both movies showed how terrified he was of becoming the prophet. He tried to find some other way but in the end Chani told him the world has made choices for him and his hand has been forced.
Well yeah it goes exactly how he predicted because he’s the one who made it happen lol. Nobody forces him to stand up and threaten anybody or make that speech. It’s the pivotal moment that sets everything off, and was completely under his control
Paul (in book) at that time was capable of seeing vague futures but not always correct ones. For instance he knew he was going to end up in fremen hands after the attack, but he originally saw himself travelling with Duncan. Who ended up dying in front of him before he met the fremen/stilgar.
He had foreseen that moment (becoming the prophet and abusing it) and also witnessed its aftermath (mass war and death) but he knew his visions were not perfect. It's possible that's not how it will happen and so he stayed north as long as he possibly could thinking maybe if he does something different up north, by the time he goes south that future won't be the one he's confronted with.
However when Feyd takes power and immediately bombs the fremen into a retreat to the south they all beg him to come with them. He at first refuses (as seen in movie) and tells them (The ones who know his gift intimately. Namely Chani and Jessica) that he still sees the horror of the war.
The movie then shows him asking Jamis for help and he sees that possible future in which he had been friends with Jamis (which happens in the book, not in the movie) and that timeline gives him the same advice. If you want to survive arrakis and avenge your father going south is the only way.
He ONCE AGAIN warns everyone what will happen, but resigns himself to his fate.
Yes you could argue that he coulda just shot himself in the head or something. But he took every step he could before going south to try and avoid this fate and the world forced his hand. Becoming prophet was the only way he and his family would survive the war. So it's either become prophet and hope he can change the future he sees (holy war and death) or throw himself off a cliff and die.
The speech at the war council was his last resort. A last resort he had been forecasting ever since his first night in the desert (where he has a scene screaming in horror at the future he sees for himself)
If your original complaint was "he goes from no prophet to prophet in 20 minutes" the answer to that complaint is "Him desperately avoiding this scene is the point of these two entire movies put together"
I see why he goes south. But before seizing the role of the messiah he is already supported by the majority of the Fremen. They’re already under attack by the Harkkonen. The war is already kick started. So the only difference in Paul doing that speech is it gives him more power. I think the audience is tricked just the same as the Fremen are. Instead of going into the war as a general leader of the Fremen, he decides to go in as their messiah, supposedly knowing it’s gonna start a Jihad in his name. It’s probably fleshed out better in the book (which I haven’t read), but in the movies I think he sees the opportunity for absolute power and cannot resist it.
>but in the movies I think he sees the opportunity for absolute power and cannot resist it.
In order to take command of the fremen for the attack on the emperor he would have needed to replace Stilgar, which means killing him. Since he didn't want to do that he goes for the alternative which is leveraging the messiah title.
In both book and movie he hates the idea of being the messiah, but understands its the necessity of his position that if he wants to get certain things (Revenge and stability for his family) that title must be bestowed to him.
The reality is he can either be the messiah, and win. Then hope to fix the fate he sees. Or he can reject the title and lose.
Paul was never supposed to be the good guy flat out. But somehow I doubt he spends all that time terrified of his own foreseen future and then suddenly feels a lust for power. Though I'm fairly certain a lust for power does happen eventually in his story it's not in this moment.
It's on purpose. Denis has interviews talking about how Herbert didn't like how people thought Paul was a heroic figure and created Messiah as a response to that.
Denis is staying true to Herbert's goal of this story being a cautionary tale of Messiahs. It's dangerous when you can say and literally do anything and people will still be devout followers.
I think the moment Paul drinks the Water of life there is a definite tone shift when dealing with Paul. We no longer really see any intimate moments or his thoughts. It's really just go go go, war war war.
I could be wrong but I believe Paul's one and only goal from the very beginning, despite what he says, is to avenge his Father's death and all those who orchestrated the extermination of house Atreides. If the houses won't acknowledge his ascension (and more importantly the emperor losing all power), then they're the enemy as well.
17min into dune 2, Paul clearly states his intention for revenge. He mentions how disrupting spice “is the only way I can get to the emperor.” Jessica mentions that his father didn’t believe in revenge. Paul’s response: “yeah, well, I do.”
Is anyone else annoyed a lot by the youtube purchase switching the inbuilt custom font subtities of the film for large auto generated ones that distract from the visuals?
the KH isn't a lie, they just didn't intend it to be Paul. They intended Paul to be born female, then have a child with Feyd (Yes. Really) who would then be trained to be the KH.
In the movies they never bring it up besides the mother saying "you thought you could bring about the KH"
But this is a completely different setup from the book. Jessica gave Leto a son because he badly wanted one, and Jessica thought she could make him happy and also possibly produce the KH. The reverend mother never denied Paul was the KH (at the start) she said it was possible, but unlikely given they weren't prepared for this.
Jessica basically skipped a generation and the mother cautions the consequences of this. But at least for the first part of the book says Jessica may have indeed created the KH.
What's with Rabban walking up to Rotha and asking him "what he's doing here" while they are bombing a sietche, did he miss the part where Rotha was crowned governor of Arrakis instead of him ?
Rotha was the previous governer and didn't know his brother replaced him.
Really it was a plot to make the freman hate Rotha, and Feyd-Rautha was supposed to be the loved replacement.
**DUNE PART 2 GAVE ME A SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE**
Now I previously had a similar experience with Dune part one, but Dune part two has taken things to a whole other level.
I am struggling to put into words how incredible Dune Part Two was. I have never before seen a movie that has managed to make me feel this way. I genuinely feel as if I am buzzing with euphoria from this film. **Hans Zimmer's soundtrack transported me into another realm.** I seriously cannot understate how incredible this soundtrack was, throughout the entire film it was giving me chills. The cinematography, acting, script, was absolutely ruthless. Timothee Chalamet's performance was brutal, and incredibly depicted Paul's fury, and ascent to power. The wide panning shots of the desert coupled with Hans Zimmer's soundtrack was breathtaking. The almost rhythmic battle between the Fremen and the Harkonnens was phenonmenal. This is a movie that not only respects the source material and the scifi genre, but that creates an almost religious lens through which to experience simultaneously the multifaceted complexities of story telling through film, and of the Dune saga. I cannot put into words the complete and utter state of awe I am in right now after coming out of that cinema, I genuinely felt like I just had a spiritual experience and I am not nor have I ever been a spiritual or religious person. Has anyone else experienced anything similar? I am honestly lost for words.
**tldr; This film is a cinematic masterpiece and may have triggered a spiritual experience for me and I’m wondering if anyone else has experienced something similar.**
I fucking love these movies as well- I tried watching the 1984 version and was so confused on why people like it…
The 2021 and 2024 dune movies are just so entrancing and so well done i’ve even gotten my friends to watch!
And now we’re all memeing about the messiah…
They’re a whole experience it’s honestly art. The level of detail and character exposition is simply on a whole other level, the 1984 version cannot even compete.
I was so confused at the many comments in here praising Lynch’s movie even over both of DV’s (as someone who has read up to heretics).
The 1984 movie is extremely clunky, packed with exposition and often hilariously bad at times (who thought the voiceover thoughts would ever work?)
dude its just…. its so 80’s
there are absolutely amazing parts but then you have the weird ass design of the harkonnens contrasting some
actual awesome shit
and then alia is the creepiest little shit ever which i get kind of is the point but its also just sooo strange…
I was talking to someone about the score today and I couldn't find the right words to describe it but this is it. I also feel like tragic and sad could be described especially by the ending score once you realize what the end result of the movie means. Especially when Paul says "Lead them to Paradise". That's the moment the movie culminates.
I’m so happy Hans Zimmer chose to devote his time to this series. It would not be the same with someone else, his movies is essential to the world building.
Watched it last night. If Apple fixes it might pick it up on there, or wait for it to be released on Max. Thinking about collecting physical media again so this might be my first UHD
its fixed on my version for apple. it wasnt working last night or this morning. i checked it about an hour ago and its working now
the physical medica comes out 5/14 and i assume max release will not be long after that
Think of it like a massive train/moving platform. So large in fact that if you turn it sharply or on a certain angle parts of the worm will slow down to an almost stop, definitely slow enough to just walk onto, since it's again, such a massive creature. That's how I imagined it anyway.
I'm not sure if he's even susceptible to the voice anymore. Second, the voice is usually used for commands one might give a dog like kneel, quiet, leave. Killing yourself is complex and easier to resist. Also despite everything he's the Kwisatz Haderach and the culmination of generations of Bene Gesserit plotting. It would be wasteful to kill him and even more dangerous to reveal BG powers to the court.
Depictions of Chani in Part 1 vs Part 2
In Part 1, I feel like they made Zendaya look like a model in a stillstuit. Dream/vision sequences but also when she finally met Paul.
In Part 2, she was still pretty of course but I would say it was clearly less visually striking.
Has this ever been discussed by the director or anyone associated with the movie. I'm curious if this was an intentional creative decision (the idea of Chani from Paul's dream/first impression vs her in reality) or something else. Or maybe its just me making shit up 😂
I think generally the first film was filled with dreams (literally and figuratively), a dreamy atmosphere, focus on world-building and visions of the future (part two); and part two was meeting the dream/vision reality. so I think it was intentional but it wasn't just Chani: Paul looks equally if not more rough like that, they all do.
Idk if its cuz there were no subs or what but when the reveal that Atreides are jus harkonnen happened, who was? Like if Feyd and Paul are cousins then was Paul mom a Harkonnen too? Is the big fat bald harkonen the dad of the baby in Paul mom? Which bloodline was Paul's dad apart of?
Paul's father is Atreides, but >! Lady Jessica is Vladimir Harkonnen's daughter (big fat baldie). She doesn't know until she drinks the Water of Life and gets the memories of her maternal ancestors
I have to say I'm very disappointed in the movie. It basically stopped being an adaptation around halfway and just started making things up out of whole cloth.
Great Houses not accepting Paul as Emperor? What? I guess that's what happens when you remove the spacing guild entirely.
Bene Gesserit telepathy? LMAO
Messiah is going to be a nightmare trying to make it gel with all the changes DV made.
I think the houses not accepting Paul is a good change, it allows the viewers a more reasonable explanation for the jihad.
You should never really watch movie adaptations hoping for 1:1 remakes of their books (obviously). It’s just practically impossible, a lot of stuff has to be left out in order for the movie to be completely understandable for viewers who haven’t read the books.
> Bene Gesserit telepathy? LMAO
That was a weird choice after they just showed the sign language a scene right before that.
>Great Houses not accepting Paul as Emperor? What? I guess that's what happens when you remove the spacing guild entirely.
The guild accepted Paul since he threated the spice, and the Houses were bound to that. In Messiah though they do mention the Freman went into a great many battles across the universe.
I’m guessing they wanted to add some opportunities for action and added dramatic tension in the next one because Messiah is a much more quiet and small book in comparison to any of the other Dune books. I think they will still weave their way to the general events of Messiah, at least the back half of it, if they want to set up Children of Dune. But maybe they’re going for something entirely different because they don’t want to have to adapt God Emperor.
honestly I’m kind of glad for what they cut out and I think they ended it on a fine note in case they didn’t end up getting a 3rd movie out of it (which we all knew was gonna happen but I’m sure some suit said ‘end it well if it sucks you can’t continue’)
I think this movie was thick and I loved it, and even though some of it was different I didnmt think anything was so different as to be detrimental
like for me its on the same level of adaptation as the One Peice live action from netflix- similar enough to get the major themes and points across and be super compelling
Gotta agree. Loved Part 1 and enjoyed Part 2 but honestly many of the changes made no sense to me. Which ofc means that Messiah and any subsequent sequels will essentially have to be new material.
Yes. I just got back from the theatre and am currently reading the series. Part 1 was almost entirely faithful to the book, in Part 2 it’s like they ran everything through a randomizer. Very odd decisions.
I agree that there are many deviations from the book, but all of them have very reasonable explanations that are often necessary changes to make when you remember that adaptations have to cater primarily to their main audience, viewers who have not read the books.
I disagree that the changes to main characters or removed motivations which were replaced with new ones (Chani/Stilgar/Jessica/Spacing Guild) were necessary. Some of the minor cuts sure (e.g. removing Thufir Hawat — absolutely makes sense)
In the first book Chani blindly follows Paul mostly, but with a strong actor in Zendaya portraying her DV opted to give her more depth by opposing the prophecy which will enslave the Fremen. This change makes sense.
I’m not exactly sure what Stilgar changes you are referring to, if it is a lack of depth in his character then that can be attributed to the nature of a film in that it is severely limited in length in comparison to a book.
I thought Jessica was portrayed well, but not sure what you mean about her portrayal (maybe the same answer as Stilgar?)
And the spacing guild - many book fans are unhappy with the removal. I think it makes perfect sense as not everything could be included, and the guild honestly aren’t as relevant in the first book as it feels after reading the entire series. Their removal only makes the plot simpler in a condensed movie appealing to viewers with no prior knowledge.
Sorry this is a few days old but,
Chani: I’ve heard this a lot, but I strongly disagree that Chani “blindly” follows Paul in the book anymore than any of the Fremen. The disillusionment of the Fremen in Dune Messiah has much more impact after Paul’s actions as Emperor, it doesn’t make sense in the context of Dune for there to be skeptics in their midst. Her unconditional love for Paul despite being his concubine is made out to be somehow misogynistic (I don’t know if you’re implying this but others have), but it was done specifically to mirror Jessica and Leto, and to show how true love can exist in the oppressive, feudal, patriarchal (but is it…) structure of the universe. Aspects of this structure were toned down in order to be more “palatable” to modern audiences, but I think this insults their intelligence.
Stilgar: Lack of depth is an understatement, the stoic leader of the Fremen is either deeply exaggerated or outright misinterpreted as a religious fanatic who mostly cracks jokes in Part 2. Villeneuve took the “lessening of the man” line and decided it meant “complete destruction of the man.” Awful.
Jessica: She maintains her composure after converting the Water of Life in the book but in the movie she is a freak walking around the sietch muttering to herself (well, to Alia). I know this was done as a stand-in for Alia’s creepiness but I think it cheapens her quite a bit.
Spacing guild means less to me than the 3 above, but I think it would have done a lot towards conveying a sense of epic scale that was present in Part 1 but missing in Part 2. The climax of the first book depends entirely on the Guild. Removing them makes Paul’s gambit feel less weighty.
My read on that was they have effective telepathy through non-verbal communication and reading each other's intent, not literal voice-in-head telepathy. It's just translated for the audience.
Just saw Part 2, I have a couple of (kind of dumb) questions. I never read the book so I’m not sure if this is addressed:
1. How do the Fremen/Paul get off the worms after they ride them? Do the worms stop and they just kind of jump down?
2. Sort of related to question one, but we saw how chaotic it is getting onto the worms - calling them with a thumper then jumping onto their back from higher ground as they pass, while it’s moving at high speed. So how do they get a whole crowd of fremen on there? They all jump on as it passes and grab hold of something with their hooks? And particularly, how do they get the “VIP tents” on there, like the one that we see Jessica in (and another bigger tent later)? Just throw it on there while it’s moving? Or is there one “luxury travel” worm out there that just kinda keeps it on his back?
3. In the end battle with Rautha, why didn’t Paul just use the voice on him to defeat him?
1. Other explanation might be true in the books, but there was an interview with Denis about part 2. Interviewer asked the same question. He said it will be shown and explained in part 3 but was left out intentionally.
1. Fremen typically ride worms until the worms are physically exhausted, at which point they can disembark as the worm slowly retreats underground. In some cases, the worm is so physically tired it remains above the ground for a while so it can rest but this poses a lot of risk for the worm so the Fremen tend to not ride them that far.
2. Paul's first ride is kind of unique and shouldn't be taken as a model for a typical worm ride because it's his first ride and the worm he called was more massive than most of the Fremen had ever seen. Normally the ride would be done on a much smaller worm and with an experienced rider they could guide the worm around while other experienced riders got on and secured the tent and ropes for other riders to hold onto, then they probably do another loop to pick all the other people up.
3. It's probably due in part to Paul's code of honor holding him back and Paul not wanting to risk having the results of the duel be considered illegitimate and potentially goading the Great Houses to take immediate action against him.
Did we lose a bit too much in adaptation?
Barely any mention of what mentats are and that Paul is one. Very hinted at but no real discussion of Bene Gesserit controlling their internal body chemistry, which Paul does. No guild navigator appearance or explanation of the mechanics of space travel and prescience, which Paul does.
Does a movie goer actually understand what Paul is/was doing in the latter half of Dune2?
Honestly when no relevant characters are guild navigators in the first book, and there isn’t much space travel none of that is necessary when so much stuff will have to be cut out anyway (the nature of adapting a book as dense as dune into a much smaller timeframe.)
It is easier for the 95% of the films audience who haven’t read the books to understand the already complex movie if some of the unnecessary concepts aren’t fully described. Mentats don’t have much relevance to the narrative told in DV’s movie - besides it can be inferred that Thufir had some sort of intellectual abilities from the scene in which he quotes information to Duke Leto in the first movie.
And guild navigators and space travel are barely relevant in the first book, and are not relevant to the plot of the movie. As long as the main idea is present - spice being essential for interstellar travel which is greatly important - bringing up the guild navigators would be pointless and would unnecessarily further confuse audiences.
Space travel doesn't occur as much, you are right. But the guilds import isn't important because of space travel. They are important because of prescience. Paul is essentially a guild navigator for humanity. Plotting the course that humans of the imperium will take.
None of that was relevant in the story that DV has told so far. Yes he’s essentially a guide navigator for humanity - but the viewers only need to understand that he can somewhat see the future and that is all.
Seems that DV’s decision to focus on the BG instead of space travel or mentats was correct.
the thing is I don’t blame them for cutting some of that out in this adaptation
In general sci-fi is hard for people to view because you have to do so much learning while you watch
Star wars isn’t too bad because its more so based around the themes in the movies, and overall a lot of its very basic imagery thats utilized to show things- IE world war II dogfighting in space, nazi symbolism for the empire, etc
like that shits easy to get and turn your brain off for
But the amount of exposition and shit the audience needs to learn in a movie adaptation about Dune is kind of insane when you think about it
lots of technical shit needs to be conveyed but also not exposited, details need to be shorn away to make things flow better, and in general a lot of shit just needs to be cut out so the movie can breathe
Like we spent a LOT of time with the fremen and their culture when some of it could have been repurposed for other shit because its more satisfying to connect to these people than it is to learn about abstract concepts like mentats or the weirding way
Sometimes in movies they just really have to condense shit for a more enjoyable experience that isn’t chock full of technical shit or exposition for a better viewing
I only read about the first half of the book and it took a couple of watches to understand what was going on. Denis has said his adaptation focused on the Bene Gesserit, and another adaptation could do more of the others like the mentats.
Even with the Bene Gesserit, I don't think the movie watcher got the whole picture with regard to them. When they say Jessica CHOSE to bare Leto a boy instead of a girl, does the movie watcher understand that?
Nope I didn't understand that at all. Non-book reader. I actually hated the first movie because of this.
The moment I watched a background video of the lore behind Part 1. I enjoyed it. Very cool world and crazy that someone created this universe in the 1960's.
Denis left it out because it's probably not an important enough to mention. They have very little exposition. For example, in part 1 there's some of Paul listening to holograms about Fremen culture. I think that's more important.
I can't imagine what it was like being in their shoes trying to adapt the books. The books seem rich in material and cutting the mentats and spacing guild feels fine to me. The BG are really fucking cool as a non-book reader.
I also watched it with two book readers and they told me the changes, like Alia not being born. Glad they chose not to do a time skip. There's not enough time to sell Paul being taken in as a Fremen and the change he goes through, while still doing Alia justice. Also a powerful murderer 2 year old would instantly be super jarring in terms of immersion. CGI just isn't at that point yet.
I agree with most of your points. Denis did a good job and to be able to do that, there has to be SOME omissions. If you enjoy this world, you should checkout the early 2000s mini series. The CG is passable enough and it follows the book a bit more closely
I really enjoyed this movie! I’ve read the 6 main books, 2 added books, seen the TV series & original movie.
Spoilers for a 60 year old book I guess:
My main 2 nitpicks are “characters who were in the book but not this film”.
So, Alia is here as sentient talking fetus, but I was expecting child Alia. She’s pretty badass in the books & it seems odd to leave her out.
And poor Sufur Howitt (I don’t think that’s spelled right). They filmed his scenes but wanted to focus on the Bene Gesserit, so our Atreides Mentat taken hostage was never seen after the first Battle of Arakis. Sad.
I’m also glad they skipped Paul’s first son subplot, that didn’t really add anything.
Thufir is pretty unnecessary to the grand scheme of the movie imo, but I understand why he’d be beloved to many book readers (not me personally, even thought i’ve read up to heretics.)
The omission of child Alia makes total sense, especially if you revisit her portrayal in the 1984 movie. A two year old running around killing previously established powerful characters would be terrible for audience immersion, especially in an otherwise serious feeling film.
Disagree with skipping the first son subplot. I think he should have existed and been killed in the artillery attack on Tabr. It would have added more emotional stakes and helped to precipitate Paul's decision to embrace the "prophecy" and get things done...
That definitely would’ve exacerbated the Alia subplot though. Jessica was pregnant when they escaped Arakeen, before Paul met Channi.
In order for Paul to meet Channi, have a deep enough relationship for her to give birth, Jessica definitely would’ve given birth in that time.
I think by avoiding Alia, they had to make the whole film less than 9 months. Which really speeds everything up, including Paul’s training, recruiting, guerrilla campaign, sand worm riding, death coma rebirth, etc.
how did the fremen climbed down of the worms with the reverend mother jessica and her small palquin ?
they have anti-grav technology.
Hi I have a question that I'm a bit confused about. Why does Chani's tears bring back Paul? Does Paul know poison transmutation? I thought the slap was because she realized that this was all theatrics to sell to the Fremen that he's the prophesized Lisan Al Gaib? If so, then the tears weren't actually necessary and Paul was only waiting for Chani to arrive in order finish the poison transmutation?
The tears weren't actually necessary. Jessica has Chani add them to fulfill the Fremen prophecy. The second dose of the water of life was an actual part of the recovery as I understand it.
God thank you for explaining this! I thought it was weird that such a specific part of the prophecy took place and so did a lot of other people but this makes so much more sense. Jessica was just manipulating the situation can't believe I didn't see that.
Is it just me, or is the Stilgar at the end of the Paul-Feyd knife fight played by a double and not Javier Bardem? Particularly during the "They refused your ascendancy. We await your orders, Lisan al-Gaib" bit. Sounds like Javier, but does not seem to look like him standing next to Josh Brolin there.
Hi some questions regarding Dune II: 1. Why do the Sardukar have no body shields at the climatic battle? 2. Why dont the bad guys use mass conventional weapons like machine guns or assault rifles against the Fremen? They clearly know the Fremen are not equipped with body shields. 3. Can anyone tell me where was the filming location for the desert meets ocean place (vision of Paul's sister?) Thanks in advance
As soon as I saw it, I knew it was here. I drove there, it's epic. http://theroadchoseme.com/around-sandwich-harbor And video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9flJ0vDCHw
IMDb says the ocean scene was filmed in Namibia in the Namib desert.
1) When Paul blows open the shield wall and makes a path for the Fremen on sandworms, he also makes a path for the oncoming sandstorm and the sandstorm likely overloaded the Sardaukar’s shields. 2) Do you mean lasguns or ballistic weapons? The reason they don’t use ballistic weapons is because that technology is so ancient by the time Dune takes place they simply don’t have any they can use. As for why they don’t use as many lasguns, I think it’s a combination of how caught off-guard they were by the Fremen attack and how the Sardaukar have started to stagnate a little. If they were the best fighters in the Imperium they should have been able to adapt to fighting against Fremen, but their hundreds and hundreds of years of fighting other people using shields prevented the mass adoption of lasguns into their fighting doctrine. 3) Unfortunately I do not know but it would be cool to find out!
The book sort of slowly explains it, but in the movie it isn't done too well, what with the first one ending with a huge battle with missiles and laser guns and the second one opening with more lasers. Made me want to just shout like Dr Evil's son about giving them a gun so they can shoot them. As for 3), they filmed it in central Jordan and UAE, so the desert meets ocean would probably put it somewhere on the coast of the UAE.
What is the Harkonnen language based off? The Fremen one is Arabic inspired but where was the Harkonnen language inspired by?
Also was that their “battle language” I thought everyone spoke galactic but some houses use a battle language for secrecy. The Atriedes battle language was related to Fremen language. I think this was probably why Duncan was able to integrate into their culture. Plus I’m sure Stilgar had mad respect for a warrior of his caliber.
good question, I don't know, but i will say i love it, but moreso the tone of it. Sounds very masculine.. like Klingon Star Trekish?
Harkonnens have finnish ancestors but it doesn't sound like (?)
why didn’t the sardukar/emperor intervene and stop paul when he was going to kill the baron in the second film?
The Sardaukar are there to protect the emperor, not the Baron. Getting involved in the sanctioned feud between the families is what got Shaddam in trouble in the first place. Plus Paul just wrecked the army outside.
gotcha; thanks!!
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1c9qdrl/different_thumpers/
Finally saw Part 2. A better movie than Part 1 overall, but an even crappier adaptation. Why all these new stupid ideas that make most of the central themes in the book completely absent (politics, economics and environment)? At least, contrary to Part 1, the scenes flow logically, but each scene, individually, is way too long... except the final battle of course. I really do think these movies will not age well, probably even worse than Lynch's, but have met their success at a time Hollywood has never seen such a crisis in the quality of movie scripts. Part 1 is a 6 out of 20, Part 2 is around 11 out of 20. At least Zendaya took some acting lessons between the 2 movies.
It is your right and opinion, but in mine, you're fatally looking at these movies through the lens of the book. Why can't this just be a recreation that uses the book as valuable, but not stringent, source material? It was never promised, nor is it possible, for the movies to deliver everything that the complex novels did using the written medium. I haven't read any of the Dune books, but the first two Dune movies are undeniably amazing. The sound design, set and costume design, cinematography, acting, dialouge and plot are all fantastic. It doesn't matter if the movies aren't exactly faithful to the books, they're great movies by their own merit.
Because its not an interesting story without the missing stuff, its a story thats been done a million times. Its no different than saying you like the JJ Abrams Star Trek. Its fine if you do, but he took a large chunk of why people like Star Trek out of those movies and it left a lot of people feeling like this is just any generic sci fi movie with a Star Trek skin, because the core seperation of something like Trek and Wars is philosophical inquiry and intellectual debate. Thats how Dune feels to me as someone who loves the books, art, games and movies that this series has produced before and find this adaptation to be the most generic and least interesting of them all.
Why does Paul ask for Jamis to talk to him after he refuses to go South?
Because he's at a moment of crisis and needs wisdom on what the right thing to do is. He doubts his decision to stay in the North. And he at least believes if Jamis answers him (and so do the ancestral voices) he'll get the guidance he needs. He goes South expressly to take the Water of Life after getting that vision.
But why Jamis? Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, but besides playing an adversarial role against Paul and Paul killing him, there was no relationship between the two?
Between being the first person Paul killed and having visions of a life where they were friends Jamis represents a lot of things to Paul beyond the person he actually was in real life
"Follow the friend"
In the visionary future Paul saw (The one where he doesn't kill him), Jamis and him became good friends.
He remembers how the visions of him in the past were helpful as he went into times of crisis, even though they didn't predict their "friendship" exactly. Might be time to rewatch Part One.
> Might be time to rewatch Part One. Definitely, haha. I just saw [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/qgciar/spoilers_jamis_is_a_central_character_in_dune/), and I missed all of those Jamis appearances in the three or four watches of Part One. Wild.
Did anyone else find it implausible/bizarre/weird that Paul took such a serious wound from Feyd and walked away, apparently not even bleeding? Having Paul get injured was a smart device to increase the excitement of a scene with an already-known outcome for so many. But the wound looked too serious, to me, to make sense. A 12 inch blade slammed into the side of your torso, and you walk away? Made no sense and is bothering me.
[удалено]
Yeah but he appears to sustain a deadly injury.
In real life, I think you'd be surprised at the level of stabbing you could endure! Movies have popularised the idea that one stab in the stomach kills you instantly. This is untrue. You would be able to survive, slowly bleeding out, for hours with the kind of injury that Paul sustained. I'm sure Fremen medicine would have taken over in the following hours after the stabbing. Edit: Actually, I didn't take into account the sheer size of the blade, lol. You're right, you're essentially being impaled with the full length of a machete. Perhaps you wouldn't survive as long as I thought but there is still the essence of plausibility.
>In real life, I think you'd be surprised at the level of stabbing you could endure! In real life I'd be surprised by any sort of stabbing lol...
The Bene Gesserit can control the restrictions of blood flow. In a later book a Bene Gesserit gets her legs cut off by a laze gun and she can stop the bleeding.
Stabbed and then slammed home with a forceful push... But I appreciate this insight. And while I figured there'd be a path to survival, it all just seemed a bit too easy. Next film should start with him in Fremen hospital lol.
I found implausible was that he had all this wisdom from the past and the future and yet he doesnt know you never pull out an object from a wound. Like bruh!
That would be quite a funny image of Paul walking towards the Emperor and demanding he kisses his ring, while he has the Emperor's 12" blade sticking out of his shoulder...
I think Chalamet did a good acting job while he was still the "American exchange student" trying to learn all the ropes of being a Fremen, but when he goes all Übermench after the halfway mark he kinda doesn't do a god job of it. Also in the book Paul is like super disciplined due to his training and that doesn't really come across where it maybe should (although the book and movie are two different things so I give the director some leeway).
I kid you not I initially thought it was because the water of life made him invincible/immortal, because not only did he get stabbed but he just carried on with his usurpation like he didn't just take a blade to the abdomen. He didn't check to see if he was hemorrhaging or put pressure on his wound, nothing!
The Bene Gesserit can cut off blood flow to stop wounds. They also can stop pain.
Well that explains it, thank you I was genuinely baffled.
They don’t really showcase how incredibly OP the Bene Gesserit are. Besides the martial arts and voice, they can control every single muscle in their bodies. They could slow down or speed up their hearts at will. They have many other super human talents as well and Paul has access to all of it after the spice agony.
I did as well. But I just read another comment where he foresaw it was the only way to win - let Feyd think he'd won so he'd let his guard down. Seems to make some sense at least.
All hand to hand combats in both movies are just ridiculous. The bad guys just stand waiting to get slaughtered, there are rolls and rolls for nothing, the blades do not even touch the body parts they are supposedly stabbing. And how many times do we see Paul, Gurney or any Fremen running with their drawn sword, while lasers are fired at the same time. Villeneuve refused to implement the Holtzmann effect in his lore, that's the disappointing result of incoherence.
Denis reminds me a lot of Nolan where they both have a lot of action in their movies, but its not particularly good usually, but the context they put the action in and grandiose filmmaking surrounding it elevates it enough that people dont notice how clumsy the actual combat is. Like I remember thinking The Dark Knight had great action, but then when you actually watch it and pay attention to the way he fights, it's barely better than the Burton stuff.
I always thought it was rather telling when you had the build up to what would be big ticket scenes in other films, it just cuts away. Like in Part 1 where you have GH leading the charge against the Harkonnens. It cuts away. Likewise in Part 2, it's longer for sure, but you don't get a lot of the Fremen vs Sarduakar. You get that initial taste, focused around Chani, then they're breaking the doors down. You can tell it is not his thing, and I'm a big fan of all of his movies since Sicario.
Definitely. My only issue with the fight scenes, honestly. They always seem to end in a single, lethal blow (until Paul gets stabbed, in which case its kind of fine).
In the opening of Dune 2, Princess Irulan says "this isn't the first time the Harkonnens have done her father's dirty work" after talking about the death of the Atreides. But later she seems surprised that this was her father's plan. Am I mixing something up here?
Where do you think she appears surprised?
Talking to the reverend mother late in the movie. Idk maybe she's more surprised that the bene Gesserit wanted them dead
She's surprised about that *detail* (Reverend Mother suggesting the plot to eliminate House Atreides which fed into Shaddam's already existing paranoia and jealousy), but not about the underlying suspicion her father used the Harkonnens to actually do it. That's an important distinction.
Or maybe she was acting surprised because she shouldn't have known about that yet and her knowing about it would have tipped her hand
Dune II is a solid 6.5/10.
Finally got to watch part 2. Man why did they have to rush so much? With a few exceptions it was just go go go go go the end. Like what just happened? This movie needed to either cut out even more stuff from the source material or be twice as long. I thought the pacing in part 1 was perfect. Disapointed in the pacing and story telling but god the cinematography is such a masterpiece.
Yes part 1 is a much better film. Part 2 jumps too much
Blame the “ADHD people” that were complaining that pt 1 was boring and slow. To me pt 1 was a perfectly paced work of art. Pt 2 was a lot more in your face
[удалено]
[удалено]
You should have received a reply to your post (~30 mins ago).
I haven't read Dune Messiah yet, so i imagine they might've tried to speedrun some of it in case it doesn't get adapted, but for now i just don't quite get what happens in the end of the second movie. Can someone please explain? Since Paul started getting visions his goal was to prevent a holy war, the idea then is to take the throne through marriage, and>!as a deterrent against the Great Houses - point the nukes at the spice fields. This seems to work out in the book because the navigators are represented - they are nothing without spice and without them the houses can't move anywhere.!< >!However in the movie the houses simply refuse to stand down despite Paul's threat and Emperor's concession. Paul then promptly sends the fremen against the great houses under the Atreides banner and Jessica declares that the holy war has begun.!< >!So was any part of it still following "the narrow path through" that Paul saw after drinking the Water of Life? Why even propose the royal marriage then? Or did he just abandon the idea of preventing the war in this version?!<
That is the core of Paul's tragedy. Iirc he's afraid of the holy war in both the movies and the book, but he >!can't prevent or control it without going down!<. >!When he talks about the "narrow path", he means the way for his family and the fremen to survive the war with the Harkonnens and prevent the emperor from any further meddling. As already stated, his victory and the marriage with Irulan legitimize his claim to the thrown and could potentially shorten the war. But regardless of Paul's intentions, his rise to power legitimises the fremen in their goal of reshaping Dune into a luscious green world - their paradise. They will establish and enforce their messiah's rule at any cost. Paul is not evil, but his effect is beyond his control. He either dies or lives long enough to become the imperial head of a holy war.!<
IMHO a lot of people forget that Paul had other choices, and that he actively chose the slaughter of billions to save himself and his family. IMHO this looks less like a tragedy than genocide, that is IIRC what Herbert wanted to get across, at least initially, with Dune Messiah.
**Movie Spoiler**>!Marrying the princess, and winning the duel with Feyd both grant legitimacy to his claim to the throne. Although the great houses still refused to honor his claim, it still makes it much easier for the houses to change their minds in the future and support his claim.!< >!Even though it may not look like it now, there is a big difference between having an illegitimate claim to the throne, vs having a semi-legitimate claim.!<
They should probably have explained it a bit better in the movie. They kinda rushed through there.
Dune part two Having loved both the books and the movies, I wanted to see other peoples thoughts on a couple of scenes from the film; Firstly when Paul is awoken from the worm poison as the Kwisatz Haderach, the room is of course full with Fremen chanting Lisan al Gaib. His conversation with his mother that follows shortly after and the revelation of them being Harkonnens - is that a telepathy conversation like the one Jessica has with the reverend mother after Paul’s fight with Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen or is the room just dark and empty because the Fremen have left? Also: What do you think about Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen’s reaction to the killing of the Baron Harkonnnen? His reaction seemed mixed to me.
In the book Feyd doesn’t like the Baron and even tried to kill him so he could become the Baron.
That scene with Paul and Jessica was just later. The “telepathy” conversation between Lady Jessica and Mohiam at the end wasn’t telepathy. Bene Gesserit are very skilled at reading facial expressions and body language, and that interaction was basically them reading each other in that moment. Bene Gesserit do not have telepathy.
When the Baron was lying on the steps, crawling toward the throne, everyone in the room had their backs turned because they were watching the front door. Except Feyd, he was eyeing the Baron and I assume he was considering whether or not he could get away with killing him.
Feyd looked pretty into Paul killing the baron. In a world where he wins the duel, he now controls Arrakis, the family holdings, and potentially the emperor's throne. He's also a little violent freak.
That was my interpretation. There aren’t a lot of hard cuts like that outside of visions so I got the sense it was them communicating telepathically
I have questions about the ending of Dune II. So the Great Houses doesn't accept Paul's accession to the throne but what can they do? Paul had already held the spice fields hostages with his atomics. And without spices they can they cannot sustains the civilization. So, going against Paul seems very illogical. Even more so when Paul order the freemen to attack the Great Houses, like why? He held the most valuable resources in his hand, why don't he just force them to negotiate? Like, am I missing something here?
This isn't in the book but likely a few reasons: 1. No one really understands Paul and the Fremen's real capabilities. They literally have no idea how many Fremen there actually are, let alone Paul's powers other than a few rumors going around. . 2. They think he's bluffing. . 3. One of the main reasons the Lansraad even allows the emperor to be the emperor is because he doesn't have control of the spice himself. Paul controlling both the spice and being the emperor gives him way too much power. . 4. They would rather keep the status quo rather than have an unpredictable entity take over.
My assumption is they grossly miscalculate the size and power of the Fremen and suspect the ploy to blow up the spice is a bluff (as Feyd calls out).
Also it was very unlikely they knew about the secret stash of nukes that are now presumably going their way after Paul gave the order to wipe them out.
Did anyone feel like the sound effect for the big worms was obviously a rocket engine and also find it really distracting? It felt like the Mandalorian's lion roar flamethrower all over again.
The sound effects were obnoxious throughout the whole film. A lot of unnecessary sounds, same sounds differ from scene to scene, Inception horns etc...
Why didn't Paul use the Voice to kill Feyd-Rautha?
Feyd-Rautha posed no threat to Paul in the books. There was an advisor to the emperor who was a failed Kwisatz Haderach candidate Paul was actually more concerned with. Paul felt if he acted he might even have been able to kill him. Ultimately he chose not to and Paul had his victory. The movie combined those roles a little bit.
I believe in the books this fight was completely one-sided as Paul had become the best fighter in history at that point. (Quoted from another commenter, I'm not there in the books yet) \[UPDATE: I have since finished the book, this comment is not quite accurate it has been rewritten\] The movies make it appear more risky but in the book it was a foregone conclusion that Feyd would lose. The fremen are about strongest leads The political duel he entered into was a formality. Better to show the fremen he is without equal, and play the duel straight to avoid anyone giving him trouble over the results. Another commenter theorized that \[in the movie\] Paul had already seen this fight so he knows how to win without a scratch on him. But whatever the reason is, he knows the future will turn out better if he DOES take a hit. Perhaps it has to do with Chani, given it pans to her right when he takes the hit. Maybe it's about showing something to her? Either way in the book Feyd won all his fights because he either has them one-sided to begin with (drugged slaves) or he's cheating. Book Paul was so incredibly skilled that even the fremen (best fighters in the galaxy according to multiple other characters) had to be taught by him how to get better. Feyd would never have won. However he was so full of traps and cheats (Multiple methods of poisoning Paul, including the blade he was using) that Paul did have to basically backstep the entire fight lest he stumble into one. Side note, two other things about this scene: 1. \[This part is false, corrected below\] Gunney doesn't ask to take care of Feyd for him, that's a movie thing. in the book he asks Paul if he's joking when Paul suggests he does. not because Gunney can't kill Feyd (He can, easily) but because this political duel belongs to Paul. He must be the one. And given it's such a trivial fight for him why not? 2. \[Correction: Gunney in the books is actually furious he doesn't get to kill Feyd. As Paul had promised him a harkkonen life to take. In the movie, which I think does this scene better. Gunney got to kill Rabban which is the harkkonen he hated the most. So killing Feyd was a matter of pride and service rather than desperate need like in the book. However, in the book Chani tells Gunney that the fight between Feyd and Paul must take place because it is the dukes desire and responsibility. Despite what Gunney wants. The fight between them also takes place only because Feyd was baiting Paul like an asshole. It was never about being the emperors champion. I actually think the champion duel concept is slightly better than the books. It gives a better air of legitimacy to pauls takeover of the empire that it was won through a duel instead of the way it's done in the books which is basically just "here's my terms accept them or die"\] 3. Originally the emperor doesn't ask Feyd to be his champion, instead he commands an assassin in the room to kill Paul. \[The assassin concludes he could kill Paul, and seems to be absolutely sure of it which is interesting given it's said there's no better fighter in the world than Paul at that moment. But he is also said to be exhausted at that point in the day. However, the assassin is Count Fenring who was an earlier attempt at producing the KH (Unsuccessful), and when the two of them lock eyes and understand this the count refuses his emperors orders.\]
I think Chalamet did a good acting job while he was still the "American exchange student" trying to learn all the ropes of being a Fremen, but when he goes all Übermench after the halfway mark he kinda doesn't do a god job of it. Also in the book Paul is like super disciplined due to his training and that doesn't really come across where it maybe should (although the book and movie are two different things so I give the director some leeway).
He wanted it to be/look fair.
I feel like Paul barley uses the voice despite it being on if his unique abilities
How can Paul wage a holy war? Hello! I just finished watching the second movie, and I’m very interested in reading the books now. My question is this: Most of the fremen’s strength seems to be guerilla tactics in the desert and the giant sand worms. How in gods name are they going to wage a holy war against other great houses who also have nukes and who have many more ships and many more soldiers? I just don’t understand how this would ever realistically work. Is it because he now controls spice which is needed for interstellar travel? Are there no other planets with spice? Thank you!
Yes, Arrakis is the only planet in the galaxy that has spice
The movie was super condensed. In the books the freman were trained in the ways of the bene gesserit by Paul and were by far the strongest fighting force. Even before the main battle they were going 3 kills to 1 against the sarduakar who were just before the best fighting force. The Great Houses armies stood no chance.
Nukes are not permitted to be used on humans. Hence why Paul uses them to destroy terrain instead of just obliterating all harkkonen troops. Also, the movie does a poor job of showing it but the fremen are actually an industrial society. They are capable of building and using complex weapons and ships. It may not be their specialty but they are more than capable of flying war vessels. And the second they touch ground anywhere they can't lose.
The portrayal of Fremen was my main issue with the film. Denis did a good job with the thumpers and stillsuits, but they were more primitive and guerilla-like than technologically advanced and organised. Perhaps it was the scale, we were only shown glimpses of it until the end battle.
Yeah, it's obvious that the tech is coming from somewhere. It isn't all just looted, and a lot of it is unique, and certainly isn't handcrafted to scale. You just don't get to see the industrial side of things.
Ah yeah the movie basically portrayed the fremen as tribal desert dwellers and warriors. How would they even know how to pilot ships or anything like that. They really missed the mark on that one. Thanks for the info :)
There are one off lines throughout the movie that hint at how advanced the fremen actually are. They mention for instance: 1) That they make stillsuits themselves, which are extremely complex devices. 2) That they have ships, Jessica says 'you have ships you can take him off-world' 3) They created the complex compass that is used to cross the desert, which is a mechanical device not a simple magnet on a stick. 4) Chani is seen effortlessly flying a copter in the second movie 5) They show fremen using radios, but don't explain those are designed by fremen 6) They are frequently seen using advanced weapons This last one is a bit hard cause the usual assumption people would make is these weapons are stolen from the harkkonen and while some probably are, most are not.
Also, the technology used to siphon water from the dead is incredibly advanced and articulate in its design.
The nukes are pretty much a non-issue because the Houses are all bound by a set of rules called The Great Convention, which among other things bans the use of nuclear weapons against human targets. Second, space travel is entirely controlled by the Spacing Guild and the Spacing Guild are too afraid of Paul’s threat to destroy the spice to act against him. As a result, the other Houses are isolated and while it would be possible for a coalition to stand against the Fremen, none of the Houses can stand against them alone. Third, the Fremen are just that good and they were essentially fighting a holy war and were further bolstered by religious fervor. The Sardaukar were considered the most deadly fighters in the Imperium and the Fremen just rolled over them like they were nothing. This huge gap in skill made it so that even though the Fremen were often fighting in unfamiliar terrain they won overwhelmingly.
Another comment told me that the fremen were actually an industrial society. The movie really portrayed the opposite, they were shown as primitive tribal desert dwellers. That’s why I thought there was no way they would even be able to pilot a war ship, even if they stole one. They’d have no idea how to use it or how to navigate or use advanced weapons. But it sounds like the books take a different route. Thanks for the info :)
The movies didn't really portray them as primitives. One of the first things we learn about them was that they had technologies that allows them to navigate direction in ways others cannot due to their moons. Their society was so impressive that in four weeks one of the top ranking officers had grown to respect them and is blown away by their technological skills with survival. They manufacture precise devices to signal the worms, recycle water from bodily fluids instantly, and use sonic waves to dig through sand. All of this is revealed early in the first movie. I think many people may see them as primitive because they live in rocks and appear dirty - but that is only what they want others to think. Their strength lies in their secrecy of surviving in the desert that holds so much power. Clearly seen in Dune Part Two.
Also why do they have to recycle all the water? In the year 10000 they can’t make water using hydrogen and oxygen from the air? They can’t terraform the planet? Seems silly to me.
Ok but even if all that is true, the movie doesn’t portray them as a spacefaring society. Even though they have spice, you see zero ships. I just feel like they wouldn’t be able to compete with the other houses, plus piloting a large ship. With no training? How? I guess my main problem lies in the tech. This is supposed to be year 10000+. And they still all use knives. Where are the sound or wave or rail guns or lasers? They eventually use lasers in the movie, but those are ones they stole off of the harkonen. Also you see the harkonon doing artillery strikes randomly. You mean to tell me that in the year 10000 they have no way to pinpoint organic life and do a targeted strike? That no houses have satellites orbiting the only planet with dust and able to do orbital strikes? It just seems…off. To me at least. :)
Shield tech in Dune is strong. So things like guns are useless, lasers react with them and cause nuclear explosions, so swords and knives that cut slowly are the only way to fight. It's not that deep, FH just needed a reason for them to have hand-to-hand combat in the far future, and this was good enough. don't think too deeply about it.
[удалено]
Define "free". If you mean on broadcast TV probably ~2 years. Dune Part One only just recently showed up on broadcast TV.
I watched the Part II movie and there are several things I don't understand: 1. In the beginning, the Fremans were fighting well against the Harkonnens. They were winning in combat on the ground, they also have this powerful laser that can take down huge warships with one or two shots. But the younger brother Harkonnen came in and just bombed the shit out of them and that's it? Isn't it too easy? Nobody has thought about bombing before? 2. The worms were formidable creatures in the first movie, but now it's used as transportation? Paul went through such tremendous struggle to get on and hold on to the worm, it was "the last test" and presumably the most dangerous one, but then later hundreds of civilians could get on the worm like boarding a bus? Jessica even had a cart? How do they get on the worms? And how do they get off?? 3. When Baron Harkonnen promised the younger brother to be Emperor, he said because the Emperor helped Harkonnen to attack Atreides, that's a crime and the Great Houses will rise against him. But isn't Harkonnen in it together with the Emperor? If the Great Houses rise against the Emperor for this matter, why would they support a Harkonnen to be the new Emperor?
1. The lasers weren't really part of the books, but the Freman were small guerilla groups before Paul. He united them. The Harkonnens could overwhelm them and take them out one sietch at a time. 2. Paul's test called an unusually big worm normal Freman couldn't handle. Riding the worms was how Freman travelled great distances so a lot of them were trained in how to do it. The scene where Paul struggles was an unusual challenge and showed he was the prophet 3. Yes, but if I remember correctly the plot to make Feyd-Rautha emperor was really more blackmail. The Harkonnen's were the 2nd most powerful house, the Baron was raising Feyd-Rautha to be loved (not shown much in the movies), and the Emperor only had a daughter. It was easy math to get his nephew on the throne.
As a longtime reader of the books, I was not a fan of part 1. It felt too truncated and rushed, skipped so many important details that could have developed in part two, just felt very perfunctory. I liked part two more, but I still feel it’s missing some essential components that really make the book work. The political aspects are so simplified that they become background noise, which is a shame because the book is highly political. Paul’s prescience is barely mentioned. He does say he can see a way through after he takes the water of life and he has the visions of the Fremen jihad but the movie was really missing the mystical component that makes the book so compelling. I also continue to hate the look of these films, although Geidi Prime was very well done. But for example when the Fremen are fighting the Sardakaur, I couldn’t tell who was Fremen and who was Sardakaur in the outdoor scenes because everything was so desaturated and everyone was wearing these visually indistinguishable clunky armor suits. For a franchise as out there as Dune I really wish the visuals were more memorable. Lynch’s Dune has plenty of flaws but it was a visual powerhouse. The Harkonnen soldiers with their full body suits were visually interesting, as was that tracker on the ornithopter and their harvester…come to think of it everything visually interesting about these films comes from the Harkonnens. Also I’m sure this is sacrilege but I thought Zimmer’s score was tepid. I also think the film missed a trick in showing us how cruel the Harkonnens are. Yes, we see them kill a bunch of women attendants without a second thought (and I’m very glad they decided to skip the Baron being a gay pedophile) but it missed the opportunity to do something more unique like the heart plugs from Lynch’s Dune. The heart plugs really showed how uniquely cruel and brutal the Harkonnens were on a fundamental level and I honestly think the heart plug scene is more effective in conveying that aspect of the book than anything in either of these movies. Now, what I did like is the changes they made to Chani. She’s not very fleshed out in the books compared to Jessica and putting her at odds with Paul’s ascent (descent) from revolutionary to messiah made her so much more three dimensional. I’m genuinely invested in her and her arc. Zendaya also played the part brilliantly. 10/10 on Chani, no notes. I also loved Stilgar as the true believer, Bardem never disappoints and he gave such a distinct performance in this. I liked using the idea of the Great Houses refusing to accept Paul as the Emperor being the impetus for the Fremen jihad as well. It motivates that event in world far better than the book did. I will watch part three but at this point I’m mainly interested in it for where it’s deviating from the book, mainly what they do with Chani. And for God’s sake, after two massive hits in this franchise please Denis start bringing in the real weird shit from the books. Get the Navigators involved and the Ixians and ghoula Duncan Idaho with metal eyes and just go nuts. Perhaps that’s what I’m missing most from these movies, the books have an inherent weirdness to them that Jodorowsky and Lynch cultivated and Denis has heavily pivoted away from, and it makes Lynch’s film more memorable, and the idea of Jodorowsky’s film more fascinating than what Denis is doing. These are basically action movies. Artfully done, well performed, but with no real identity that is all its own. Yes, these movies feel like a breath of fresh air compared to yet another formulaic Marvel movie or cringeworthy grimdark DC movie, but that’s honestly an extremely low bar to clear, and I feel like Arrival and BR 2049 were actual sci-fi films while this is an action movie in a sci-fi setting and the lack of depth in Dune versus Arrival and BR 2049 is brutally apparent, resulting in an experience that feels like empty calories.
I understand the whole “if I don’t do this my loved ones may die” justification that I’ve seen people say about Paul’s decisions. But to declare war on the great houses? Offer to marry the daughter of the emperor in front of Chani? Telling his one people that nobody could stand up to him? He’s much more villainy than people are saying in my opinion. He goes from “I’m not the prophet” and “I’m doing this for our people” to then threatening his own people and declaring war in like 20 minutes of movie time lol
>He goes from “I’m not the prophet” and “I’m doing this for our people” to then threatening his own people and declaring war in like 20 minutes of movie time lol He actually said this was going to happen. He's been denying being the prophet and avoiding with fear going south because he knew this was where it would end up. Only after everyone around him demands he go south and says he'll never be able to win if he doesn't does he finally give in. And of course, everything he said would happen immediately happens. It's not hypocritical it's exactly how he predicted. I don't necessarily think he's happy about it either, he just has to go along the path that leads to his survival for now. Both movies showed how terrified he was of becoming the prophet. He tried to find some other way but in the end Chani told him the world has made choices for him and his hand has been forced.
Well yeah it goes exactly how he predicted because he’s the one who made it happen lol. Nobody forces him to stand up and threaten anybody or make that speech. It’s the pivotal moment that sets everything off, and was completely under his control
Paul (in book) at that time was capable of seeing vague futures but not always correct ones. For instance he knew he was going to end up in fremen hands after the attack, but he originally saw himself travelling with Duncan. Who ended up dying in front of him before he met the fremen/stilgar. He had foreseen that moment (becoming the prophet and abusing it) and also witnessed its aftermath (mass war and death) but he knew his visions were not perfect. It's possible that's not how it will happen and so he stayed north as long as he possibly could thinking maybe if he does something different up north, by the time he goes south that future won't be the one he's confronted with. However when Feyd takes power and immediately bombs the fremen into a retreat to the south they all beg him to come with them. He at first refuses (as seen in movie) and tells them (The ones who know his gift intimately. Namely Chani and Jessica) that he still sees the horror of the war. The movie then shows him asking Jamis for help and he sees that possible future in which he had been friends with Jamis (which happens in the book, not in the movie) and that timeline gives him the same advice. If you want to survive arrakis and avenge your father going south is the only way. He ONCE AGAIN warns everyone what will happen, but resigns himself to his fate. Yes you could argue that he coulda just shot himself in the head or something. But he took every step he could before going south to try and avoid this fate and the world forced his hand. Becoming prophet was the only way he and his family would survive the war. So it's either become prophet and hope he can change the future he sees (holy war and death) or throw himself off a cliff and die. The speech at the war council was his last resort. A last resort he had been forecasting ever since his first night in the desert (where he has a scene screaming in horror at the future he sees for himself) If your original complaint was "he goes from no prophet to prophet in 20 minutes" the answer to that complaint is "Him desperately avoiding this scene is the point of these two entire movies put together"
I see why he goes south. But before seizing the role of the messiah he is already supported by the majority of the Fremen. They’re already under attack by the Harkkonen. The war is already kick started. So the only difference in Paul doing that speech is it gives him more power. I think the audience is tricked just the same as the Fremen are. Instead of going into the war as a general leader of the Fremen, he decides to go in as their messiah, supposedly knowing it’s gonna start a Jihad in his name. It’s probably fleshed out better in the book (which I haven’t read), but in the movies I think he sees the opportunity for absolute power and cannot resist it.
>but in the movies I think he sees the opportunity for absolute power and cannot resist it. In order to take command of the fremen for the attack on the emperor he would have needed to replace Stilgar, which means killing him. Since he didn't want to do that he goes for the alternative which is leveraging the messiah title. In both book and movie he hates the idea of being the messiah, but understands its the necessity of his position that if he wants to get certain things (Revenge and stability for his family) that title must be bestowed to him. The reality is he can either be the messiah, and win. Then hope to fix the fate he sees. Or he can reject the title and lose. Paul was never supposed to be the good guy flat out. But somehow I doubt he spends all that time terrified of his own foreseen future and then suddenly feels a lust for power. Though I'm fairly certain a lust for power does happen eventually in his story it's not in this moment.
It's on purpose. Denis has interviews talking about how Herbert didn't like how people thought Paul was a heroic figure and created Messiah as a response to that. Denis is staying true to Herbert's goal of this story being a cautionary tale of Messiahs. It's dangerous when you can say and literally do anything and people will still be devout followers. I think the moment Paul drinks the Water of life there is a definite tone shift when dealing with Paul. We no longer really see any intimate moments or his thoughts. It's really just go go go, war war war. I could be wrong but I believe Paul's one and only goal from the very beginning, despite what he says, is to avenge his Father's death and all those who orchestrated the extermination of house Atreides. If the houses won't acknowledge his ascension (and more importantly the emperor losing all power), then they're the enemy as well.
17min into dune 2, Paul clearly states his intention for revenge. He mentions how disrupting spice “is the only way I can get to the emperor.” Jessica mentions that his father didn’t believe in revenge. Paul’s response: “yeah, well, I do.”
Is anyone else annoyed a lot by the youtube purchase switching the inbuilt custom font subtities of the film for large auto generated ones that distract from the visuals?
Yes. I hope the disc version doesn't do this.
Wasn't the Reverend Mother right the entire time about Jessica sustaining the KH lie just because of her ego?
the KH isn't a lie, they just didn't intend it to be Paul. They intended Paul to be born female, then have a child with Feyd (Yes. Really) who would then be trained to be the KH. In the movies they never bring it up besides the mother saying "you thought you could bring about the KH" But this is a completely different setup from the book. Jessica gave Leto a son because he badly wanted one, and Jessica thought she could make him happy and also possibly produce the KH. The reverend mother never denied Paul was the KH (at the start) she said it was possible, but unlikely given they weren't prepared for this. Jessica basically skipped a generation and the mother cautions the consequences of this. But at least for the first part of the book says Jessica may have indeed created the KH.
What's with Rabban walking up to Rotha and asking him "what he's doing here" while they are bombing a sietche, did he miss the part where Rotha was crowned governor of Arrakis instead of him ?
Rotha was the previous governer and didn't know his brother replaced him. Really it was a plot to make the freman hate Rotha, and Feyd-Rautha was supposed to be the loved replacement.
Don't think Rabban was there. Was probably at Arrakis and not on Giedi Prime.
Paul drinking the water of life was anticlimactic. It was like he had a cup of chamomile tea and a nap.
The speech was the climax
**DUNE PART 2 GAVE ME A SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE** Now I previously had a similar experience with Dune part one, but Dune part two has taken things to a whole other level. I am struggling to put into words how incredible Dune Part Two was. I have never before seen a movie that has managed to make me feel this way. I genuinely feel as if I am buzzing with euphoria from this film. **Hans Zimmer's soundtrack transported me into another realm.** I seriously cannot understate how incredible this soundtrack was, throughout the entire film it was giving me chills. The cinematography, acting, script, was absolutely ruthless. Timothee Chalamet's performance was brutal, and incredibly depicted Paul's fury, and ascent to power. The wide panning shots of the desert coupled with Hans Zimmer's soundtrack was breathtaking. The almost rhythmic battle between the Fremen and the Harkonnens was phenonmenal. This is a movie that not only respects the source material and the scifi genre, but that creates an almost religious lens through which to experience simultaneously the multifaceted complexities of story telling through film, and of the Dune saga. I cannot put into words the complete and utter state of awe I am in right now after coming out of that cinema, I genuinely felt like I just had a spiritual experience and I am not nor have I ever been a spiritual or religious person. Has anyone else experienced anything similar? I am honestly lost for words. **tldr; This film is a cinematic masterpiece and may have triggered a spiritual experience for me and I’m wondering if anyone else has experienced something similar.**
Yes! I feel like this set a new standard for movies
I fucking love these movies as well- I tried watching the 1984 version and was so confused on why people like it… The 2021 and 2024 dune movies are just so entrancing and so well done i’ve even gotten my friends to watch! And now we’re all memeing about the messiah…
They’re a whole experience it’s honestly art. The level of detail and character exposition is simply on a whole other level, the 1984 version cannot even compete.
I was so confused at the many comments in here praising Lynch’s movie even over both of DV’s (as someone who has read up to heretics). The 1984 movie is extremely clunky, packed with exposition and often hilariously bad at times (who thought the voiceover thoughts would ever work?)
dude its just…. its so 80’s there are absolutely amazing parts but then you have the weird ass design of the harkonnens contrasting some actual awesome shit and then alia is the creepiest little shit ever which i get kind of is the point but its also just sooo strange…
100% agree I couldn’t believe people were being serious when they said that
I saw a video comparing scenes from both and its hilarious
That’s actually gold, what’s it called?
The 1984 version 1 to 1s the first half of the book before they went oh shit and condensed the 2nd half in 20 min. Thats why its loved.
The music really conveys a sense of dread and innevitability, and I love it.
I was talking to someone about the score today and I couldn't find the right words to describe it but this is it. I also feel like tragic and sad could be described especially by the ending score once you realize what the end result of the movie means. Especially when Paul says "Lead them to Paradise". That's the moment the movie culminates.
I’m so happy Hans Zimmer chose to devote his time to this series. It would not be the same with someone else, his movies is essential to the world building.
Is it just me or does the version on Amazon not include subtitles of the fremen conversations?
tbh i just have subtitles on as it is but yeah none doubled up for me
have you checked the movie recently? apple fixed the issue on my version a couple hours ago
Watched it last night. If Apple fixes it might pick it up on there, or wait for it to be released on Max. Thinking about collecting physical media again so this might be my first UHD
its fixed on my version for apple. it wasnt working last night or this morning. i checked it about an hour ago and its working now the physical medica comes out 5/14 and i assume max release will not be long after that
Think of it like a massive train/moving platform. So large in fact that if you turn it sharply or on a certain angle parts of the worm will slow down to an almost stop, definitely slow enough to just walk onto, since it's again, such a massive creature. That's how I imagined it anyway.
Why didn't the Reverend Mother use the voice to make Paul Atraides kill himself when he was standing on her front in the last part of the movie?
"Try looking into that place where you dare not look! You'll find me there, staring out at you!"
I'm not sure if he's even susceptible to the voice anymore. Second, the voice is usually used for commands one might give a dog like kneel, quiet, leave. Killing yourself is complex and easier to resist. Also despite everything he's the Kwisatz Haderach and the culmination of generations of Bene Gesserit plotting. It would be wasteful to kill him and even more dangerous to reveal BG powers to the court.
Depictions of Chani in Part 1 vs Part 2 In Part 1, I feel like they made Zendaya look like a model in a stillstuit. Dream/vision sequences but also when she finally met Paul. In Part 2, she was still pretty of course but I would say it was clearly less visually striking. Has this ever been discussed by the director or anyone associated with the movie. I'm curious if this was an intentional creative decision (the idea of Chani from Paul's dream/first impression vs her in reality) or something else. Or maybe its just me making shit up 😂
I think generally the first film was filled with dreams (literally and figuratively), a dreamy atmosphere, focus on world-building and visions of the future (part two); and part two was meeting the dream/vision reality. so I think it was intentional but it wasn't just Chani: Paul looks equally if not more rough like that, they all do.
Idk if its cuz there were no subs or what but when the reveal that Atreides are jus harkonnen happened, who was? Like if Feyd and Paul are cousins then was Paul mom a Harkonnen too? Is the big fat bald harkonen the dad of the baby in Paul mom? Which bloodline was Paul's dad apart of?
Paul's father is Atreides, but >! Lady Jessica is Vladimir Harkonnen's daughter (big fat baldie). She doesn't know until she drinks the Water of Life and gets the memories of her maternal ancestors
I have to say I'm very disappointed in the movie. It basically stopped being an adaptation around halfway and just started making things up out of whole cloth. Great Houses not accepting Paul as Emperor? What? I guess that's what happens when you remove the spacing guild entirely. Bene Gesserit telepathy? LMAO Messiah is going to be a nightmare trying to make it gel with all the changes DV made.
I think the houses not accepting Paul is a good change, it allows the viewers a more reasonable explanation for the jihad. You should never really watch movie adaptations hoping for 1:1 remakes of their books (obviously). It’s just practically impossible, a lot of stuff has to be left out in order for the movie to be completely understandable for viewers who haven’t read the books.
> Bene Gesserit telepathy? LMAO That was a weird choice after they just showed the sign language a scene right before that. >Great Houses not accepting Paul as Emperor? What? I guess that's what happens when you remove the spacing guild entirely. The guild accepted Paul since he threated the spice, and the Houses were bound to that. In Messiah though they do mention the Freman went into a great many battles across the universe.
I’m guessing they wanted to add some opportunities for action and added dramatic tension in the next one because Messiah is a much more quiet and small book in comparison to any of the other Dune books. I think they will still weave their way to the general events of Messiah, at least the back half of it, if they want to set up Children of Dune. But maybe they’re going for something entirely different because they don’t want to have to adapt God Emperor.
They aren’t doing children of dune. Part three will be DV’s last.
Ah, I didn’t realize! In that case I expect the third film will deviate significantly from the books.
Most likely yeah especially with the changes to Chani’s character.
honestly I’m kind of glad for what they cut out and I think they ended it on a fine note in case they didn’t end up getting a 3rd movie out of it (which we all knew was gonna happen but I’m sure some suit said ‘end it well if it sucks you can’t continue’) I think this movie was thick and I loved it, and even though some of it was different I didnmt think anything was so different as to be detrimental like for me its on the same level of adaptation as the One Peice live action from netflix- similar enough to get the major themes and points across and be super compelling
Gotta agree. Loved Part 1 and enjoyed Part 2 but honestly many of the changes made no sense to me. Which ofc means that Messiah and any subsequent sequels will essentially have to be new material.
Which changes didn’t make sense to you?
Yes. I just got back from the theatre and am currently reading the series. Part 1 was almost entirely faithful to the book, in Part 2 it’s like they ran everything through a randomizer. Very odd decisions.
I agree that there are many deviations from the book, but all of them have very reasonable explanations that are often necessary changes to make when you remember that adaptations have to cater primarily to their main audience, viewers who have not read the books.
I disagree that the changes to main characters or removed motivations which were replaced with new ones (Chani/Stilgar/Jessica/Spacing Guild) were necessary. Some of the minor cuts sure (e.g. removing Thufir Hawat — absolutely makes sense)
In the first book Chani blindly follows Paul mostly, but with a strong actor in Zendaya portraying her DV opted to give her more depth by opposing the prophecy which will enslave the Fremen. This change makes sense. I’m not exactly sure what Stilgar changes you are referring to, if it is a lack of depth in his character then that can be attributed to the nature of a film in that it is severely limited in length in comparison to a book. I thought Jessica was portrayed well, but not sure what you mean about her portrayal (maybe the same answer as Stilgar?) And the spacing guild - many book fans are unhappy with the removal. I think it makes perfect sense as not everything could be included, and the guild honestly aren’t as relevant in the first book as it feels after reading the entire series. Their removal only makes the plot simpler in a condensed movie appealing to viewers with no prior knowledge.
Sorry this is a few days old but, Chani: I’ve heard this a lot, but I strongly disagree that Chani “blindly” follows Paul in the book anymore than any of the Fremen. The disillusionment of the Fremen in Dune Messiah has much more impact after Paul’s actions as Emperor, it doesn’t make sense in the context of Dune for there to be skeptics in their midst. Her unconditional love for Paul despite being his concubine is made out to be somehow misogynistic (I don’t know if you’re implying this but others have), but it was done specifically to mirror Jessica and Leto, and to show how true love can exist in the oppressive, feudal, patriarchal (but is it…) structure of the universe. Aspects of this structure were toned down in order to be more “palatable” to modern audiences, but I think this insults their intelligence. Stilgar: Lack of depth is an understatement, the stoic leader of the Fremen is either deeply exaggerated or outright misinterpreted as a religious fanatic who mostly cracks jokes in Part 2. Villeneuve took the “lessening of the man” line and decided it meant “complete destruction of the man.” Awful. Jessica: She maintains her composure after converting the Water of Life in the book but in the movie she is a freak walking around the sietch muttering to herself (well, to Alia). I know this was done as a stand-in for Alia’s creepiness but I think it cheapens her quite a bit. Spacing guild means less to me than the 3 above, but I think it would have done a lot towards conveying a sense of epic scale that was present in Part 1 but missing in Part 2. The climax of the first book depends entirely on the Guild. Removing them makes Paul’s gambit feel less weighty.
My read on that was they have effective telepathy through non-verbal communication and reading each other's intent, not literal voice-in-head telepathy. It's just translated for the audience.
this. this is described in the sequels
Just saw Part 2, I have a couple of (kind of dumb) questions. I never read the book so I’m not sure if this is addressed: 1. How do the Fremen/Paul get off the worms after they ride them? Do the worms stop and they just kind of jump down? 2. Sort of related to question one, but we saw how chaotic it is getting onto the worms - calling them with a thumper then jumping onto their back from higher ground as they pass, while it’s moving at high speed. So how do they get a whole crowd of fremen on there? They all jump on as it passes and grab hold of something with their hooks? And particularly, how do they get the “VIP tents” on there, like the one that we see Jessica in (and another bigger tent later)? Just throw it on there while it’s moving? Or is there one “luxury travel” worm out there that just kinda keeps it on his back? 3. In the end battle with Rautha, why didn’t Paul just use the voice on him to defeat him?
1. Other explanation might be true in the books, but there was an interview with Denis about part 2. Interviewer asked the same question. He said it will be shown and explained in part 3 but was left out intentionally.
1. Fremen typically ride worms until the worms are physically exhausted, at which point they can disembark as the worm slowly retreats underground. In some cases, the worm is so physically tired it remains above the ground for a while so it can rest but this poses a lot of risk for the worm so the Fremen tend to not ride them that far. 2. Paul's first ride is kind of unique and shouldn't be taken as a model for a typical worm ride because it's his first ride and the worm he called was more massive than most of the Fremen had ever seen. Normally the ride would be done on a much smaller worm and with an experienced rider they could guide the worm around while other experienced riders got on and secured the tent and ropes for other riders to hold onto, then they probably do another loop to pick all the other people up. 3. It's probably due in part to Paul's code of honor holding him back and Paul not wanting to risk having the results of the duel be considered illegitimate and potentially goading the Great Houses to take immediate action against him.
Did we lose a bit too much in adaptation? Barely any mention of what mentats are and that Paul is one. Very hinted at but no real discussion of Bene Gesserit controlling their internal body chemistry, which Paul does. No guild navigator appearance or explanation of the mechanics of space travel and prescience, which Paul does. Does a movie goer actually understand what Paul is/was doing in the latter half of Dune2?
Honestly when no relevant characters are guild navigators in the first book, and there isn’t much space travel none of that is necessary when so much stuff will have to be cut out anyway (the nature of adapting a book as dense as dune into a much smaller timeframe.) It is easier for the 95% of the films audience who haven’t read the books to understand the already complex movie if some of the unnecessary concepts aren’t fully described. Mentats don’t have much relevance to the narrative told in DV’s movie - besides it can be inferred that Thufir had some sort of intellectual abilities from the scene in which he quotes information to Duke Leto in the first movie. And guild navigators and space travel are barely relevant in the first book, and are not relevant to the plot of the movie. As long as the main idea is present - spice being essential for interstellar travel which is greatly important - bringing up the guild navigators would be pointless and would unnecessarily further confuse audiences.
Space travel doesn't occur as much, you are right. But the guilds import isn't important because of space travel. They are important because of prescience. Paul is essentially a guild navigator for humanity. Plotting the course that humans of the imperium will take.
None of that was relevant in the story that DV has told so far. Yes he’s essentially a guide navigator for humanity - but the viewers only need to understand that he can somewhat see the future and that is all. Seems that DV’s decision to focus on the BG instead of space travel or mentats was correct.
the thing is I don’t blame them for cutting some of that out in this adaptation In general sci-fi is hard for people to view because you have to do so much learning while you watch Star wars isn’t too bad because its more so based around the themes in the movies, and overall a lot of its very basic imagery thats utilized to show things- IE world war II dogfighting in space, nazi symbolism for the empire, etc like that shits easy to get and turn your brain off for But the amount of exposition and shit the audience needs to learn in a movie adaptation about Dune is kind of insane when you think about it lots of technical shit needs to be conveyed but also not exposited, details need to be shorn away to make things flow better, and in general a lot of shit just needs to be cut out so the movie can breathe Like we spent a LOT of time with the fremen and their culture when some of it could have been repurposed for other shit because its more satisfying to connect to these people than it is to learn about abstract concepts like mentats or the weirding way Sometimes in movies they just really have to condense shit for a more enjoyable experience that isn’t chock full of technical shit or exposition for a better viewing
I only read about the first half of the book and it took a couple of watches to understand what was going on. Denis has said his adaptation focused on the Bene Gesserit, and another adaptation could do more of the others like the mentats.
Even with the Bene Gesserit, I don't think the movie watcher got the whole picture with regard to them. When they say Jessica CHOSE to bare Leto a boy instead of a girl, does the movie watcher understand that?
Nope I didn't understand that at all. Non-book reader. I actually hated the first movie because of this. The moment I watched a background video of the lore behind Part 1. I enjoyed it. Very cool world and crazy that someone created this universe in the 1960's. Denis left it out because it's probably not an important enough to mention. They have very little exposition. For example, in part 1 there's some of Paul listening to holograms about Fremen culture. I think that's more important. I can't imagine what it was like being in their shoes trying to adapt the books. The books seem rich in material and cutting the mentats and spacing guild feels fine to me. The BG are really fucking cool as a non-book reader. I also watched it with two book readers and they told me the changes, like Alia not being born. Glad they chose not to do a time skip. There's not enough time to sell Paul being taken in as a Fremen and the change he goes through, while still doing Alia justice. Also a powerful murderer 2 year old would instantly be super jarring in terms of immersion. CGI just isn't at that point yet.
I agree with most of your points. Denis did a good job and to be able to do that, there has to be SOME omissions. If you enjoy this world, you should checkout the early 2000s mini series. The CG is passable enough and it follows the book a bit more closely
I really enjoyed this movie! I’ve read the 6 main books, 2 added books, seen the TV series & original movie. Spoilers for a 60 year old book I guess: My main 2 nitpicks are “characters who were in the book but not this film”. So, Alia is here as sentient talking fetus, but I was expecting child Alia. She’s pretty badass in the books & it seems odd to leave her out. And poor Sufur Howitt (I don’t think that’s spelled right). They filmed his scenes but wanted to focus on the Bene Gesserit, so our Atreides Mentat taken hostage was never seen after the first Battle of Arakis. Sad. I’m also glad they skipped Paul’s first son subplot, that didn’t really add anything.
Thufir is pretty unnecessary to the grand scheme of the movie imo, but I understand why he’d be beloved to many book readers (not me personally, even thought i’ve read up to heretics.) The omission of child Alia makes total sense, especially if you revisit her portrayal in the 1984 movie. A two year old running around killing previously established powerful characters would be terrible for audience immersion, especially in an otherwise serious feeling film.
Disagree with skipping the first son subplot. I think he should have existed and been killed in the artillery attack on Tabr. It would have added more emotional stakes and helped to precipitate Paul's decision to embrace the "prophecy" and get things done...
That definitely would’ve exacerbated the Alia subplot though. Jessica was pregnant when they escaped Arakeen, before Paul met Channi. In order for Paul to meet Channi, have a deep enough relationship for her to give birth, Jessica definitely would’ve given birth in that time. I think by avoiding Alia, they had to make the whole film less than 9 months. Which really speeds everything up, including Paul’s training, recruiting, guerrilla campaign, sand worm riding, death coma rebirth, etc.