Dune: Part Two 2023 (Denis Villeneuve)

Dune: Part Two | Official Trailer 3

__________________
Entertainment Log
Letterboxd profile

In Part 1 and the ads for Part 2 this DUNE is leaning into the "noble savage." Our hero saves and is saved by a purer culture (e.g., Last Samurai, Avatar). This is hilarious, because the Fremen are basically extremist fundamentalists who go on pogroms which exterminate entire planets, a Jihad/crusade which "cleanses" the universe. Villeneuve's DUNE basically finger waggles, "Colonialism is bad, mmmmkay?" which is only half the message of the book. Lynch's DUNE is a true-believer's DUNE. Lynch's Paul Atreides is a savior-god and the Fremen are righteous.
This time around Paul has some Colonial guilt to purge, but the Fremen are still righteous. We know this because they are largely brown whereas the casting of the Landsraad (e.g., the great houses and the emperor) are pale and stale.

Frank Herbert's DUNE is the story of total human frailty/stupidity and humanity trapped by its various inventions and ambitions (e.g., the Butlerian Jihad, the trap of prescience, the trap that is Arrakis, the traps of politics and religion). The Fremen are not the "goodies." Paul cannot control the forces he unleashes. He walks a narrow path to just stay alive and keep his family safe. And it falls to Leto II to walk the Golden Path, a path of absolute tyranny, which is vaguely necessary for the preservation of all humanity.

Instead of getting Herbert's big picture view, the great diorama of history, technology, ecology, politics, and religion, the new movie only raises its gaze in a way that fits with contemporary progressive themes. The Fremen are violent, but they're justified because they're decolonizers and Paul is OK ("I hope to be as a good as you Chani," said Paul like a lost puppy in the ad) only because he's on "the right side of history."

A late addition to the cast has just been announced



Not sure what role they are playing but I'm sure there will be spoilers out there, somewhere, so be careful if you don't want to know who they've been cast to play.

Microsoft Flight Simulator x Dune - Official Launch Trailer

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...162700726.html

Denis has opinions.

I am shocked, shocked at the idea of directors saying anything just to get headlines!

They all should shuuush.

Still trying to avoid specific spoilers about visual sequences and directorial approach, so I am still just skimming reviews, but from what I can tell, Chalamet is successful in delivering a properly complex and conflicted Paul Atreides - probably the most complex character in the book - which is something I was concerned about with this second film. I am also glad to read that this film is a take-down of sorts of the creatively bankrupt fare that blockbusters have become over the last decade or perhaps longer, even if it's just to show that mature, creative, serious blockbusters can still be made in this day and age. Not sure they will become any more frequent post-Dune Part 2, but one can hope.

I have said in the past that Dune seems like material that is impossible to properly execute in a single film, so I am glad Villeneuve ended up splitting the first book across a full 322 minutes. It seems he was mostly successful in his adaption, but I have seen complaints that the story needed more time to wrap up properly, even at its extended length. Those who have read the book will understand why.

No film is perfect and I am sure Dune Part 2 is no exception, but I am getting pretty excited to see it, and will do so in just over a week. After seeing the first in cinema the first time, some friends and I made a pact to see the second half together, and one of them (Piledriver here on the site) is away in Vegas, as his billiards team is participating in the national championships. So...looks like March 10th or so for me as far as when I will get to see the film.

__________________

Going tomorrow, I'll leave my complaining until then.

I'm seeing it tomorrow, hopefully.

I thought it was better than the first part. Really enjoyed the politics and the music. All the destruction, for lack of a better word, falls a little flat, but other than that, it’s okay. Not at all bad.

I was underwhelmed by the first one, but it serves a purpose in the hind sight.

The second was great and epic and it sets up an even more epic third part, if box office performance allows. I hope that it does.

People.- go see it!

"mature, creative, serious blockbusters" are still being made in this day and age - just not by Denis Villaneuve.

I've already posted my opinion on the film in the "Last movie you watched" thread so I'll just say that, given the almost unlimited resources at his disposal, DV could and should have made a much, much better movie than this.

Please, do recommend some.

Thanks!

Well, it’s debatable whether blockbusters need to be ‘mature and serious’ — I would say it’s almost a contradiction in terms. How mature is anything with blindingly obvious Judeo-Christian parallels, really.

I mean, I think it's fairly obvious the source material was written coming from a very patriarchal, colonialistic and Euro-centric view of the world. Whether or not an adaptation is able to transcend that would be fairly significant in even trying to be mature. I'm not really convinced that DV has risen to the challenge.

A book about tribes of desert dwellers analogous to ancient tribes of Islam rising up to overthrow an emperor fits into that how again? As you have already admitted, no one could pay you enough to actually read the book (a hassle, I know). Someone should pay you to not comment on stuff you clearly know very little about.

I won't comment on the film until I have actually seen it, but from what I can tell, you went into it with a giant post-modern chip on your shoulder, just looking for something else to rag on.

Absolutely nothing could be further from the truth. I approached this movie as I do with every film, with a completely open mind. (In hindsight, I do suppose it may have been a bit naive to buy into the hype, which imho this movie absolutely doesn't deserve).

The movie almost had me going well into the first hour; I think it would have been perfectly fine entertainment if we'd just gotten to know the local inhabitants of the planet even better, and shared more of their struggles. That stuff seemed pretty compelling, at least up until it dove headfirst into a lot of poorly explained and half-baked hocus focus.

But the more the movie went on, the more boring and aloof it seemed to me; there's probably a lot more to the backstory of some of the characters in the books, but in the movies, it's hard to find anyone to really care for very much, at least for me. Even at this point, I am a lot less interested in what happens to Paul Atreides than in what happens to the average Fremen, how their culture and their society is going to be affected by the ongoing galactic turmoil.

Believe me, nobody would have been happier than me if the movie had been worth the hype. I absolutely love it when a movie really delivers.

For the most part, I’m always down for more complex, more nuanced, more postmodern and less straightforward stuff, including perspective shifts, and such.

That said, I think both the novel and Villeneuve’s take on it (especially Part 2) do make it pretty noticeable that Paul isn’t . All of which does suggest (to me) that we get a reasonably critical take on Paul.

I don’t know who could watch Villeneuve’s Part 2 and not notice the shift towards . Same with Jessica pretty much . As far as I’m concerned, that was a big part of why l enjoyed Part 2 more than Part 1, towards the end I for sure did not for a moment perceive Paul as ‘a good guy’. That’s what makes it fun! Granted, maybe not everyone sees it that way.

In terms of the backstory/things being left unexplained, I think that’s a valid criticism. Then again, the novel is famously cumbersome and rather convoluted, so to me it just doesn’t seem feasible to work the background stuff in organically. It’s just a limitation of the medium.

In terms of focusing on Paul over the Fremen, I don’t know, again, the original novel is clearly a messianic-ish Judeo-Christian pastiche thing. If you’re making a conscious decision to adapt that, convoluted as it already is, doesn’t it make sense to focus on that as much as you can? Granted, I understand you don’t feel Villeneuve has done a particularly good job adapting, which is fair. However I’m always a little perplexed by the complaints that such-and-such film didn’t pay enough attention to the disadvantaged communities in the narrative, whatever they may be.

I mean, I understand that you’re more interested in what happens to the Fremen and that’s valid (I’m someone who usually wonders what will happen to such-and-such villain’s kids, we all have our own stuff that we focus on), but I was much more interested in the ‘higher’ politics and the Bene Gesserit. Ultimately Villeneuve himself is probably more interested in Paul than the Fremen, and I think that’s also valid. It seems a bit odd to require any science-fiction/high-concept speculative storyline to pay attention to the disadvantaged communities.

I felt a lot of attention was paid to the Fremen, personally. If anything, I got a very clear sense from Part 2 (more so than Part 1) that whoever ventures into the desert uninvited won’t fare well, no matter what heavy artillery they bring; that the Fremen are actually really powerful and bloody spectacular at self-defence. As such, I didn’t feel that I needed any more on them.

I didn’t think the film was great or anything, but perfectly serviceable.

Saw it today. Not quite as fantastic as the first one, which I loved, but still very well directed with some strong performances and excellent production design and cinematography. 8/10 would be my rating. Dune Part Two is the best film of 2024 so far out of what I have seen.