Dune: Part Two 2023 (Denis Villeneuve)

I enjoyed Dune and Dune Part 2. Look forward to the 3rd installment.

__________________
“Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are, it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!” ~ Rocky Balboa

The sequel is much better than part 1.

Something along those lines, yes. I believe that ban was attached to the tech ban that got rid of the thinking machines as well, if I recall. That is one detail that I didn't really focus on, so even though I read Dune again in 2021, I can't recall exactly.

__________________

Saw Dune Part II at the massive Dolby DLX theater yesterday afternoon. So, right off the bat, I will say that as far as a cinematic experience, a visual and aural spectacle, this gets an easy +. Just a tremendous achievement in that regard, with all four of the people I went with being completely blown away. The seamless blending of practical and computer effects, the score, the absolutely massive scale all combine to present something that is truly epic in every sense of the word. A must-see in cinemas, and a resounding argument for the continued support of film as a big-screen experience. The visual effects are the best I have even seen in a film.

Does that perfect plus rating hold up for the rest of the film? It does not. While most of the actors did a tremendous job with the material, especially Chalamet, Bardem, and Butler, others such as Walken and Bautista just sort of played themselves. Even worse, Zendaya was miscast; she was unable to bring the necessary seriousness and gravitas to the role, and delivered many of her lines sounding like a post-modern teen. I was disappointed in her performance, and really wish they had cast someone else. Ferguson was good, but was painted into a corner with a voiceover used to deliver exposition in the same way Lynch employed it in the 1984 version. Apparently Dune can't be put to screen without having to do this.

The rest of the cast was good, even if some of them, due to their sparse appearance in the source material, didn't have much to do. Lastly, Villeneuve's choice to shorten the amount of time in which all the events take place had him using the character Alia in a very odd way, I am still deciding what I think of that. Oddly, I didn't mind the almost entirely new take on Chani's character, as I always found her unquestioning devotion to Paul in the book to be kind of a thin characterization. My issues with Chani here are entirely with the performance of the actress.

As far all the intricacies of the Fremen culture and political machinations on the whole? Pretty much nailed it. He was never going to get it all on screen, and I think it would have been unwieldy and perhaps a bit boring if he did. The way it was handled made me realize how Lynch's version pretty much entirely failed in this regard, painting the Fremen as monolithic and shallow in comparison. Dune Part II is a film mostly about the Fremen, and I think that was the good choice.


At the center of it all is Paul, and the success of the film rested squarely on the shoulders of the actor playing him. Like many people, I wondered if Chalamet would be able to transform from the wispy fop from the first film into the commanding and intimidating character he would need to portray in the second. He did, and then some. Hell, I wanted to follow the guy into battle by the end of the film. He totally nailed it.

Anyway, my overall rating for the film should probably be a , but I am going to go with a due to the sheer magnitude of the spectacle and clear dedication to presenting the very best version of a cinematic Arrakis possible. For the enitre run time, I felt as if I was on that planet. My desert...my Dune!

After giving my IMAX tickets away, we saw it this week at a “local” theater. Great movie to test for screen blemishes, due to all the sand shots.

Well made, enjoyable, but can’t say I’m thinking about it much. Will see “Messiah” when it comes out, cuz that’s when the crazy starts 😏

I asked this question a few days ago, and so far nobody has said anything about it... so I'll ask again: did you all notice the little homage to David Lynch?

It's really kind of funny, if you think about it.

Absolutely. I won't name it specifically, but the homage was to Lynch's Blue Velvet.

Seems weak. I will watch many weeks from now.

I'll be rooting for the remake, tho.

__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

Your rhyme was good though, which was perhaps the intent of the post.

Aye, I was just being a horse's ass. Except for the part about seeing it many weeks from now. I suspect I will see it in July or August. Or however long it takes for them to subsidize the cost.

Figured as much, but the rhyme was still good.

I enjoyed Part 2. Introducing new characters midway could make a movie incoherent, but in Part 2 that didn't happen. It felt organic. The battle scenes and the scenes in Arrakis in particular were visually amazing. Acting wise everyone did their job. The actor who played Baron jr. was top notch in the little time he got. Chalamet did what he could do but I don't think he is suited (yet) to play a role where he has to be a leader. Having to endure Zendayas angry face every 5 seconds was not very delightful. Joy Taylor and Pugh were okay I guess.


Story wise the movie gave us more than a glimpse of the Harkonnen and Bene Gesserit. It's a slow burn for sure but you do get what you want at the end. I haven't read the books yet, but something tells me Chalamet and his mom will not be getting the sympathy points in Part 3.


Can't wait for Part 3

Caught it last night for a 6pm showing. I enjoyed it well enough. I wish Chalamet kept or added to the intensity in the final scenes that he showed in the southern rally speech. Intensity seemed to peak too soon for me. Too, his 180 seemed out of place. I'll need to watch it again to put my finger on that one.

__________________
"My Dionne Warwick understanding of your dream indicates that you are ambivalent on how you want life to eventually screw you." - Joel

"Ever try to forcibly pin down a house cat? It's not easy." - Captain Steel

"I just can't get pass sticking a finger up a dog's butt." - John Dumbear

*SPOILERS*

HA! I think I'm one of the few people who not only watched but loved Balls of Fury. Great mash up.

Balls of Fury
Kung Pow!
Pootie Tang!!!
Real Men!!!!!
....and maybe Shakes the Clown.


(not to drift off topic, of course)

7 main characters ranked best to worst:
1. Jessica (by Rebecca Ferguson)
2. Princess Irulan (by Florence Pugh)
3. Paul Atreides (by Timothée Chalamet)
4. Stilgar (by Javier Bardem)
5. Gurney Halleck (by Josh Brolin)
6. Chani (by Zendaya)
7. Feyd-Rautha (by Austin Butler)

Got another viewing in last night, which was my wife's first time seeing the film. My appreciation for the film only grew on this subsequent viewing. My wife was totally blown away, and is already bugging me this morning to do a double feature, watching both films in succession. My issues with Zendaya remain, but since I knew what was in store with her, they didn't bother me much this time around. My wife says this is the best sci-fi story ever put to screen, and in some ways, it's hard to argue.

I mean, how does one truly set aside nostalgia for the stuff that came before? I guess one could attempt to try to consider a viewer who had never seen any of it sitting down to watch everything: what would they say is the best? These films would be near the top of the list. The sheer scale of some of the scenes is unmatched by anything, that's for sure. Add n that no film is perfect, so anyone claiming there is a flawless science fiction picture out there is kidding themselves. Once you sort of divide the films into more cerebral or contemplative films vs stuff that contains some action or a lot of action, it becomes harder to compare them equally. Obviously films like 2001 and Arrival do the philosophical stuff better, or something like Aliens is perhaps more action packed on the whole, while not matching the scale and seamlessness of effects etc.

That said, these Dune films do a whole lot really well: plenty of political and philosophical stuff to consider and unpack, fantastic production values and artistry in the film making, massive mind-blowing set pieces, and the acting on average stands toe to toe with pretty much anything in the genre, even with my previous complaints considered.
@ynwtf

I think Paul's turn makes sense when you consider that he was having sort of cloudy, half visions before imbibing the water of life, and afterward, he had a focused prescience that snapped everything into focus for him - he saw the one path he must take clearly for the first time.

Anyway: easily top tier sci-fi, and I think these films will age like fine wine. Regardless of whatever nonsense we have endured on the site about Denis being some sort of hack copycat, I think it's clear with his run from Blade Runner 2049 through Dune Part 2 that he is the director for science fiction in today's world of film.