Dune Part Two
I wish there was something unique, or even truly interesting, about Denis Villeneuve's latest pseudo-spectacle, but ultimately, there really isn't.
It's especially frustrating because he's been given resources most indie directors would absolutely
kill for - he's got a fantastic cast and crew, seemingly unlimited resources, and even stronger backing from WB than Christopher Nolan got before parting ways with the studio.
Strip away the eye candy and ear-shattering score from
Dune: Part Two, and what's left? Not much, really. There's a lot of desert (like in the first one) and a lot of palace intrigue (like in the first one), a kind-of-cultish mystery sect, and a sort-of protagonist who appears headed to be the "white savior" in this sprawling intergalactic soap opera. Or maybe he's not. Oh, wait, never mind, he's changed his mind again. Oh well.
Oh, and there's also worms. Many worms. It kind of makes you wonder why the would-be invaders of Arrakis didn't bother looking for a good dewormer.
Since you could never pay me enough money to actually read the original novels that have inspired countless movies and mini-series, I'll just have to make an educated guess that the source material simply isn't very cinematic in any conventional sense. And, sadly for fans of the Dune novels, George Lucas got there first and came up with his own vision, in an inherently cinematic way that still remains unsurpassed.
My best guess is that the kind of stuff that Dune novels rely on so heavily could only be made truly cinematic if it were presented as a Shakespearean drama - one where a lot of inner conflicts and turmoil could be expressed in a kind of soliloquy. Maybe that would be the only way to really milk the material for all that it's worth.
While admittedly a lot less annoying than he was in
Wonka, Timothée Chalamet absolutely sucks at creating a compelling character undergoing some kind of serious internal conflict or spiritual turmoil. When compared with all-time greats like Peter O'Toole in
Lawrence of Arabia or Paul Scofield in
A Man for All Seasons, Chalamet comes across like the equivalent of the leading kid in a high-school play getting stuck in a $250m production.
There seems to be a lot of palace intrigue going on in these movies, and unfortunately it is never really explained in any way that would make it seem more than a half-baked excuse for a plot. "Just hang in there," the movies seem to be saying, "it's all part of some incredible grand design, just wait until we get there!!".
Out of all the people in the cast (and it is a nice cast), Zendaya comes closest to giving us a character we can truly care about; unfortunately she's still coming across more as an accessory for the male hero than anything else. Couple that with a mysterious cult at the heart of it all that gives off seriously misogynistic vibes (blame Herbert, not Villaneuve for that one) and it's hard to care very much about any of the remaining characters in this one.
It doesn't help that two of the most charming actors from the first movie (Oscar Isaac and Jason Momoa) played actors that got killed off in that one; they had a sort of presence that really helped to ground the series as something vaguely relatable. Javier Bardem might do that in this one if he were given a chance to do anything more than play second banana to a younger, less experience actor.
Léa Seydoux, Florence Pugh and *cough, cough* the lady who appears unbilled in this one can be quite charming on screen, with the right material - but they are given next to nothing here, adding to the list of disappointing aspects of the movie.
And Christopher Walken brings some appreciated gravitas, but the role doesn't really call for him to do anything more than stand around, looking fairly dazed most of the time, with a look on his face that most closely resembles a deer caught in the headlights.
It takes almost 3 hours* for this movie to finally end, and when it does, it makes it fairly clear that all that has come before is merely a taste of something much bigger that still awaits moviegoers. Or does it? One doesn't need to be a clairvoyant to see how it will all pan out.
*the 3-hour running time is actually closer to 3 hours and 15 minutes once you factor in the previews, which in some places can run as long as 30 minutes or so. At least the 70mm IMAX version doesn't really allow for any trailers before the movie, so you're at least spared
that.