I will be seeing this movie in theaters again
*** DUNE: PART TWO *** (Spoilers)
62,189 Views |
636 Replies |
Last: 10 days ago by Rocagnante
It's why Jessica got scolded for having a boy instead of a girl. They expected that daughter to bear the Kwisatz Haderach. Jessica wanted Paul to be it instead.
Austin Butler's performance is so good, he made himself sound SO much like Stellan Skarsgard
jamesagg said:
Can someone explain to me the part where it's revealed that lady jessica got impregnated by the baron and the baron was Paul's grandfather? I had to run to the restroom and came in the middle of that part.
Jessica wasn't impregnated by The Baron. Paul and Alia both's father is Leto. Jessica is the daughter of the Baron. Paul was suppose to be a girl and was meant to mate with Feyd as part of the breading program, but instead chose to give Leto a boy. So instead Feyd impregnated Margot Fenring, so the Bene Gesset could get his genetic material for the breeding program.
I thought huge chunks/aspects of this movie were absolutely incredible...
- Of course, Paul riding the sandworm.
- Fyed's introduction at the arena - everything about this sequence was jaw dropping.
- Paul's big Lisan al Gaib speech - literally the exact moment Chalamet arrived as a blockbuster movie star.
- Every last beat, sequence, shot, and detail of the final act.
- The performances, from top to bottom.
- The many deeply nerdy, but deeply cool/hardcore sci-fi elements.
- Zimmer's score, which is one of my favorites in years.
All that said, overall, admittedly after only one viewing... I still like Part One more.
Mainly, I think, due to the pacing.
For me, the first half of Part One is about as perfect as a blockbuster gets. It constantly skips from planet to planet - is a masterclass of world building in the process - every scene its own mini-movie, with each one more interesting and character/plot-revealing than the last. Scene-by-scene, it's such a phenomenal build to that halfway point, when Leto is finally betrayed by Doctor Yueh.
Conversely, here, as genuinely and surprisingly funny as Silgar was throughout, the first hour or so just didn't do it for me. There were some cool aspects, no doubt, but it felt like we were spending WAY too much time in the desert - and only the desert - with Paul kind of sort of learning lessons, not a ton of new insight being revealed, some random/disorienting time jumps, etc. I don't know, I just wanted more cutting back and forth between storylines/planets, and more of a focused sense of here's-what-this-sequence-is-trying-to-accomplish.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but comparatively, there's just something so purposeful, re: the sequences of Jake learning the ways of the Na'vi in Avatar, culminating in him taming/flying a Banshee, and I wanted more of that montage/here's-how-much-time-is-passing vibe here. We got such a sense of Jake growing and learning in those sequences, but I didn't really get that with Paul here. Rather, it all just felt kind of sleepy and random and scattershot.
Granted, once Paul rides the Sandworm the movie finally kicks into gear, starts cutting back-and-forth more between all the storylines, and I loved nearly everything else from that moment on. That, and on second viewing, I'm sure it will all play better for me.
My only other issue/question is this...
I totally get that Dune is about the dangers of false prophets, imperialism, the conflation of politics and religion, as well as being a critique on the white savior trope, etc. What I don't get is what was the alternative choice Paul could have made? I get that he made the "bad" choice, one that I gather ultimately results in jihad and the deaths of billions, but I don't feel like the "right" choice was clearly presented in the movie as a road he actively chose not to go down.
For instance - this is random, and I'm not at all saying it should have been this obvious - but in The Wolf of Wall Street there's that moment where DiCaprio's character is presented with the option to leave his company, avoid jail time, remain wealthy and with his wife/family, etc. It's clear as day that's the road he should go down, but then he of course can't help himself and that's when we get the famous "I'm not leaving!" scene in front of his staff, at which point it's beyond obvious he's doomed.
Again, I'm not asking for that level of obviousness here, I just literally don't know what the alternative was. Paul doesn't drink the Water of Life? He doesn't untie the Freeman and lead them against the Harkonnens? He keeps the status quo? Allows the oppressors to keep oppressing and the oppressed to remain oppressed? He dies in the desert? I'm not advocating for what he did, I'm just literally asking what was he supposed to do instead? Nothing?
Anyway, I'm hoping someone here has an answer, and that it all clicks for me, and that the first hour or so plays better next go around as well. I just want to talk through as much of this as I can, and get as many answers as I can, to be as armed as possible for my next viewing (on Tuesday).
- Of course, Paul riding the sandworm.
- Fyed's introduction at the arena - everything about this sequence was jaw dropping.
- Paul's big Lisan al Gaib speech - literally the exact moment Chalamet arrived as a blockbuster movie star.
- Every last beat, sequence, shot, and detail of the final act.
- The performances, from top to bottom.
- The many deeply nerdy, but deeply cool/hardcore sci-fi elements.
- Zimmer's score, which is one of my favorites in years.
All that said, overall, admittedly after only one viewing... I still like Part One more.
Mainly, I think, due to the pacing.
For me, the first half of Part One is about as perfect as a blockbuster gets. It constantly skips from planet to planet - is a masterclass of world building in the process - every scene its own mini-movie, with each one more interesting and character/plot-revealing than the last. Scene-by-scene, it's such a phenomenal build to that halfway point, when Leto is finally betrayed by Doctor Yueh.
Conversely, here, as genuinely and surprisingly funny as Silgar was throughout, the first hour or so just didn't do it for me. There were some cool aspects, no doubt, but it felt like we were spending WAY too much time in the desert - and only the desert - with Paul kind of sort of learning lessons, not a ton of new insight being revealed, some random/disorienting time jumps, etc. I don't know, I just wanted more cutting back and forth between storylines/planets, and more of a focused sense of here's-what-this-sequence-is-trying-to-accomplish.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but comparatively, there's just something so purposeful, re: the sequences of Jake learning the ways of the Na'vi in Avatar, culminating in him taming/flying a Banshee, and I wanted more of that montage/here's-how-much-time-is-passing vibe here. We got such a sense of Jake growing and learning in those sequences, but I didn't really get that with Paul here. Rather, it all just felt kind of sleepy and random and scattershot.
Granted, once Paul rides the Sandworm the movie finally kicks into gear, starts cutting back-and-forth more between all the storylines, and I loved nearly everything else from that moment on. That, and on second viewing, I'm sure it will all play better for me.
My only other issue/question is this...
I totally get that Dune is about the dangers of false prophets, imperialism, the conflation of politics and religion, as well as being a critique on the white savior trope, etc. What I don't get is what was the alternative choice Paul could have made? I get that he made the "bad" choice, one that I gather ultimately results in jihad and the deaths of billions, but I don't feel like the "right" choice was clearly presented in the movie as a road he actively chose not to go down.
For instance - this is random, and I'm not at all saying it should have been this obvious - but in The Wolf of Wall Street there's that moment where DiCaprio's character is presented with the option to leave his company, avoid jail time, remain wealthy and with his wife/family, etc. It's clear as day that's the road he should go down, but then he of course can't help himself and that's when we get the famous "I'm not leaving!" scene in front of his staff, at which point it's beyond obvious he's doomed.
Again, I'm not asking for that level of obviousness here, I just literally don't know what the alternative was. Paul doesn't drink the Water of Life? He doesn't untie the Freeman and lead them against the Harkonnens? He keeps the status quo? Allows the oppressors to keep oppressing and the oppressed to remain oppressed? He dies in the desert? I'm not advocating for what he did, I'm just literally asking what was he supposed to do instead? Nothing?
Anyway, I'm hoping someone here has an answer, and that it all clicks for me, and that the first hour or so plays better next go around as well. I just want to talk through as much of this as I can, and get as many answers as I can, to be as armed as possible for my next viewing (on Tuesday).
hunter2012 said:
Moving this here from the main thread:
So far I only have 2 minor gripes.
First, the pacing and time skips are a little bit wonky, months go by in the first 2 acts and it's a little hard to keep up with how much time has passed between scenes. To be fair the book jumps about 5 years between Leto's death and Paul's ascendancy, so this may just be an issue the overall universe since the whole thing is on a huge timescale.
My second gripe is Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, particularly the end. In the books she was pivotal in supporting Paul's burden in the war that he wages and his pursuit of the "narrow way". She understood the political necessity that his marriage to Irulan was to be in stabilizing the imperium. I disagree that book Chani would sandworm off into the desert. It makes her come across as a petulant jealous lover. In the books she was swept along with everyone else by the legend of Muadib also Spoiler alert for books 2 & 3:she can't bear the twins if they've broken up. But that's an issue for messiah, I just hope he doesn't have to pull a retcon/plot realignment like the Star Wars sequel trilogy in order to get the larger story back on track. I get that Zendaya is a super star right now, but does the movie really have to end with her doing that? or are they really going to write off their kids completely? It would be a real shame because Leto II is a great foil for his father.
IMO, as a non-book-reader, this change was absolutely necessary. Someone had to be the voice of caution, as an audience surrogate of sorts, and it makes so much sense for it to be her. Again, I just wish that she would have better-stated or explained what Paul should do instead. Then again, maybe she did and I just missed it.
Either way, I didn't see her as "a petulant, jealous lover" at all. I saw her as a heartbroken lover, one who only knows how to express herself through anger and stoicism. In fact, I'm trying to imagine a version of the story where she's not mad or heartbroken and I just can't see it. Her supporting Paul's choice would feel not just frictionless, but pointless.
That, and for me, there's nothing better than a blockbuster with a great, big, bittersweet ending, a la The Empire Strikes Back, the first two The Lord of the Rings movies, The Dark Knight, The Batman, etc. This one fell right in line with those, and it doesn't happen with Chani reacting exactly the way she does.
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:
The movie was great as both a stand-alone and the conclusion to the first part. I have only read Dune Messiah once, back in the 80s, so I cannot determine what changes were made to be able to set up DV's third movie. Possibly something with Chani heading into the desert rather than staying with Paul as already discussed.
I thought Chalamet did a great job portraying Paul's growth over these two movies. And damn if his reunion with Gurney was not an emotional moment. I also like Javier Bardem's work as Stilgar - he provided some humor here but was also used to great effect to show the religious aspect that drove the Fremen, well, the southern Fremen apparently. Good choice in not having Alia actually born as in the 1984 movie. Oh, and Rebecca Ferguson is strong as Jessica but also good to look at.
I listened to the score several times this week. I thought it was good, but now having heard it in the movie, it became so much better. This is my typical experience with Zimmer.
So one question. I don't think I missed any explanation, not sure one was provided, but once one gets on a worm to go for a ride, how does one get off that thing?
This bugged the sh*t out of one of my friends. He enjoyed the movie overall, but after they made it a point to show just how hard it was to get on one of those things, my buddy couldn't understand how a pregnant Jessica & co not only got on one, but how the hell they all got off. He said just the thought of it kept taking him out of the movie. I told him he needed to let it go, but he harped on it for a good three minutes, in pretty hilarious fashion.
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
725
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
That is why he is more of a tragic figure than a hero. He doesn't really have options that don't result in billions of people dying. He is put in that position by all these external forces and it isn't what he wants, but every door he walks through will end in some kind of massive death. The book makes that aspect clear.
And, that's what makes the early desert stuff work for me so much. It shows him really just loving being Paul Maud'Dib, fremen, living a life with Chani.
I also get the gripe that time feels hard to grasp, but I think Villeneuve is using Jessica's pregnancy as the gauge. Essentially 9 months pass in this film, as she just found out she was pregnant in Part One and looks ready to give birth at the end of Part Two.
I do think they should have probably intercut more in the first hour, but I loved the desert stuff so much I didn't care.
And, that's what makes the early desert stuff work for me so much. It shows him really just loving being Paul Maud'Dib, fremen, living a life with Chani.
I also get the gripe that time feels hard to grasp, but I think Villeneuve is using Jessica's pregnancy as the gauge. Essentially 9 months pass in this film, as she just found out she was pregnant in Part One and looks ready to give birth at the end of Part Two.
I do think they should have probably intercut more in the first hour, but I loved the desert stuff so much I didn't care.
This is good way to explain it.
I just keep seeing all these takes and tweets, painting Paul as if he actively made some kind of horrible, unforgivable decision to embrace the whole Messiah thing, as if he had any other choice. When the movie I just watched, at least, didn't seem to present him having an out or "good" road fork in the road. In other words, the consensus seems to be that Paul is "bad," but I think the way you put it - "tragic" - is so much more appropriate. There's a fine but crucial line between the two.
I just keep seeing all these takes and tweets, painting Paul as if he actively made some kind of horrible, unforgivable decision to embrace the whole Messiah thing, as if he had any other choice. When the movie I just watched, at least, didn't seem to present him having an out or "good" road fork in the road. In other words, the consensus seems to be that Paul is "bad," but I think the way you put it - "tragic" - is so much more appropriate. There's a fine but crucial line between the two.
And yeah, I did like that they marked the passage of time with Jessica's pregnancy as a gauge. I got that, I just wish there was more intercutting, or more of a montage feel of time passing, to make the transitions themselves feel more coherent, focused, and purposeful.
Denis Villeneuve says he "found a way" for the Fremen to get off the sandworms in #Dune: "I can’t wait to put that on screen."https://t.co/zuaWWTjDeB
— Variety (@Variety) March 2, 2024
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
725
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
This honestly does bother me too, but not a ton.
I was telling my five year old about what movie I went and saw and that there were giant sand worms that people rode. Her first question, no joke, was, "How do they get down?" I told her a lot of people were wondering that as well haha.
I was telling my five year old about what movie I went and saw and that there were giant sand worms that people rode. Her first question, no joke, was, "How do they get down?" I told her a lot of people were wondering that as well haha.
Quote:
I totally get that Dune is about the dangers of false prophets, imperialism, the conflation of politics and religion, as well as being a critique on the white savior trope, etc. What I don't get is what was the alternative choice Paul could have made? I get that he made the "bad" choice, one that I gather ultimately results in jihad and the deaths of billions, but I don't feel like the "right" choice was clearly presented in the movie as a road he actively chose not to go down.
You may not want this answer. There are a few more things coming that he sees in the future that his narrow way will potentially prevent. However the narrow way, or Golden Path in books, has an extreme cost of the death of billions with a jihad in his name. More details are book spoilers and therefore possibly next movie spoilers too. If you want to know go read about the Golden Path on a Dune wiki.
Ultimately his only other choice was his own death, which prevents the terrors of his jihad, but allows something else he sees.
Like his dad he also would have liked a simple life in a Sietch with Chani in the North. But what his mom was doing in the South and the Harkonen raids against the Fremen made that impossible.
Veryfuller hit the nail on the head. Paul had no "good" choice; only choices that were less bad, or caused less suffering. His inner struggle is very real in the first two books.
As far as dismounting the worms, basically they were ridden to the point that they were exhausted and over-heated. At that point the worm would seek cooler sand down deep and would not just consume the riders. They were steered by opening the skinflap lower down to cause the worm to move and change direction to avoid getting sand in the opening. Insert the Anakin sand gif here. To speed the worm up, Fremen would ride near the back of the worm and beat on it with instruments to drive it faster. On trips into the deep south several worms would have to be ridden.
As with so many other book to movie conversions, I can't recommend enough that one should read this book at least, if not all of the Frank Herbert written books. Avoid his son's books, unless you borrow them from a library; don't waste your money on them.
As far as dismounting the worms, basically they were ridden to the point that they were exhausted and over-heated. At that point the worm would seek cooler sand down deep and would not just consume the riders. They were steered by opening the skinflap lower down to cause the worm to move and change direction to avoid getting sand in the opening. Insert the Anakin sand gif here. To speed the worm up, Fremen would ride near the back of the worm and beat on it with instruments to drive it faster. On trips into the deep south several worms would have to be ridden.
As with so many other book to movie conversions, I can't recommend enough that one should read this book at least, if not all of the Frank Herbert written books. Avoid his son's books, unless you borrow them from a library; don't waste your money on them.
TCTTS said:hunter2012 said:
Moving this here from the main thread:
So far I only have 2 minor gripes.
First, the pacing and time skips are a little bit wonky, months go by in the first 2 acts and it's a little hard to keep up with how much time has passed between scenes. To be fair the book jumps about 5 years between Leto's death and Paul's ascendancy, so this may just be an issue the overall universe since the whole thing is on a huge timescale.
My second gripe is Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, particularly the end. In the books she was pivotal in supporting Paul's burden in the war that he wages and his pursuit of the "narrow way". She understood the political necessity that his marriage to Irulan was to be in stabilizing the imperium. I disagree that book Chani would sandworm off into the desert. It makes her come across as a petulant jealous lover. In the books she was swept along with everyone else by the legend of Muadib also Spoiler alert for books 2 & 3:she can't bear the twins if they've broken up. But that's an issue for messiah, I just hope he doesn't have to pull a retcon/plot realignment like the Star Wars sequel trilogy in order to get the larger story back on track. I get that Zendaya is a super star right now, but does the movie really have to end with her doing that? or are they really going to write off their kids completely? It would be a real shame because Leto II is a great foil for his father.
IMO, as a non-book-reader, this change was absolutely necessary. Someone had to be the voice of caution, as an audience surrogate of sorts, and it makes so much sense for it to be her. Again, I just wish that she would have better-stated or explained what Paul should do instead. Then again, maybe she did and I just missed it.
Either way, I didn't see her as "a petulant, jealous lover" at all. I saw her as a heartbroken lover, one who only knows how to express herself through anger and stoicism. In fact, I'm trying to imagine a version of the story where she's not mad or heartbroken and I just can't see it. Her supporting Paul's choice would feel not just frictionless, but pointless.
That, and for me, there's nothing better than a blockbuster with a great, big, bittersweet ending, a la The Empire Strikes Back, the first two The Lord of the Rings movies, The Dark Knight, The Batman, etc. This one fell right in line with those, and it doesn't happen with Chani reacting exactly the way she does.
Thinking on it a bit more, the below scene might actually go a long way toward answering this. Tell me if this tracks…
We already know Chani hates the whole Messiah thing. That's made loud and clear. But more specifically, instead of embracing the Messiah role, Chani wants Paul to be her equal; to simply be a fellow Freman and take down the Harkonnen that way. No Messiah bullsh*t, just her, Paul, and all the Fremen rising as up as one.
Paul earnestly agrees… but then slowly but surely is manipulated into going the Messiah route, via Jessica, his sister, and his visions, culminating in drinking the Water of Life, at which point there's no going back. He now sees all roads, the truth, etc, and realizes that jihad is unavoidable whether he's the Messiah or not, so it might as well be him calling the shots?
In other words, this scene serves as the "good" path Paul could have taken, but ultimately doesn't…
His dad wanted the simple life of a pilot too. Paul would have wanted a simple life too. But his mom, visions, and Harkonens made that impossible.
Leto in part 1 taking control of Arrakis knowing it is a trap:
"We are House Atreides. There is no call we do not answer. There is no faith that we betray."
Leto in part 1 taking control of Arrakis knowing it is a trap:
"We are House Atreides. There is no call we do not answer. There is no faith that we betray."
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
725
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
That's why I like the changes they made to her character in the film. Because that path doesn't really exist. There is no path in which he goes forward in that way and she lives and they are happy. So he is choosing her, she just doesn't see it that way. And she wouldn't believe his explanation if he tried because she doesn't believe in any of that.
In the book she supports him because she knows he can see all manner of futures.
I do think Part Three will flesh this out quite a bit more. Honestly it seems like it'll be the best book to movie adaptation because there is less plot to communicate and more character development to mine, IMO. And this movie sets it all up so nicely.
In the book she supports him because she knows he can see all manner of futures.
I do think Part Three will flesh this out quite a bit more. Honestly it seems like it'll be the best book to movie adaptation because there is less plot to communicate and more character development to mine, IMO. And this movie sets it all up so nicely.
Pauls choice is very similar to Dr. Strange in Infinity War. He can choose to do something bad (in Strange's case, it's to willingly hand over the time stone to Thanos) in order to secure a chance at the future where he wins. You could argue Strange was responsible all of the deaths that stuck on his conscience from then on. The choice is whether to still go through with revenge pretty much knowing that once you take power, your hands are forced to only get dirtier in order to maintain it. And starting on the path takes away agency from the friends and loved ones that are hiding you. Are you responsible for everything that happens when you can see all the possible outcomes of your choices?
hunter2012 said:
Moving this here from the main thread:
So far I only have 2 minor gripes.
First, the pacing and time skips are a little bit wonky, months go by in the first 2 acts and it's a little hard to keep up with how much time has passed between scenes. To be fair the book jumps about 5 years between Leto's death and Paul's ascendancy, so this may just be an issue the overall universe since the whole thing is on a huge timescale.
My second gripe is Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, particularly the end. In the books she was pivotal in supporting Paul's burden in the war that he wages and his pursuit of the "narrow way". She understood the political necessity that his marriage to Irulan was to be in stabilizing the imperium. I disagree that book Chani would sandworm off into the desert. It makes her come across as a petulant jealous lover. In the books she was swept along with everyone else by the legend of Muadib also Spoiler alert for books 2 & 3:she can't bear the twins if they've broken up. But that's an issue for messiah, I just hope he doesn't have to pull a retcon/plot realignment like the Star Wars sequel trilogy in order to get the larger story back on track. I get that Zendaya is a super star right now, but does the movie really have to end with her doing that? or are they really going to write off their kids completely? It would be a real shame because Leto II is a great foil for his father.
Calling Chani petulant is amazing considering she got stabbed almost as badly as Fayd. Couldn't love what they did with her character more and though the end scene and her acting was one of the best parts of the film.
I'm on my phone so going to avoid a whole quote. But as a book reader, and knowing you haven't read the books I'm impressed by your observations.
On the point of liking movie 1 a little more, I'm glad to see you say this, I actually agree. I can see where non-book readers would like movie 2 more based on the elements of the cinematography in all of the worlds (Geidi Prime in B/W was hair tingling), action, sci-fi technology, action, etc. But I agree as far as telling a story the pacing was much better in the first movie and felt it made a more complete picture. Which is interesting because movie 1 covers well over half the book (closer to 2/3rds?). Movie 2 story line was a bit more rushed and felt it missed a lot of detail from the book relating each major event. So felt jumpy and rushed in some instances. But that being said thought it was still an amazing film and the better from an eye candy perspective. I might feel different though had I didn't read the books and favored 2 more (which seems to be the general consensus). Impressed with your observation.
Stilgar's humor. Oddly enough I also deviate from the masses and found this distracting. Even the humor amongst the Fremen in general I wasn't crazy about. I know the goal was probably to humanize them, bit I'm always a skeptic on these types of things and hate to see goofy Hollywood moments in movies to appease the audience and get the laugh. The Fremen were portrayed as serious, fierce, and loyal in the books. And the image portrayed in the movie didn't match up for me. A very minor point that really didn't have an impact for me (and see where he felt necessary for the audience), but would have been selfishly happy without it.
On the point of liking movie 1 a little more, I'm glad to see you say this, I actually agree. I can see where non-book readers would like movie 2 more based on the elements of the cinematography in all of the worlds (Geidi Prime in B/W was hair tingling), action, sci-fi technology, action, etc. But I agree as far as telling a story the pacing was much better in the first movie and felt it made a more complete picture. Which is interesting because movie 1 covers well over half the book (closer to 2/3rds?). Movie 2 story line was a bit more rushed and felt it missed a lot of detail from the book relating each major event. So felt jumpy and rushed in some instances. But that being said thought it was still an amazing film and the better from an eye candy perspective. I might feel different though had I didn't read the books and favored 2 more (which seems to be the general consensus). Impressed with your observation.
Stilgar's humor. Oddly enough I also deviate from the masses and found this distracting. Even the humor amongst the Fremen in general I wasn't crazy about. I know the goal was probably to humanize them, bit I'm always a skeptic on these types of things and hate to see goofy Hollywood moments in movies to appease the audience and get the laugh. The Fremen were portrayed as serious, fierce, and loyal in the books. And the image portrayed in the movie didn't match up for me. A very minor point that really didn't have an impact for me (and see where he felt necessary for the audience), but would have been selfishly happy without it.
I was surprised by the Chani portrayal as well based on the book. In the book she is loyal and very supportive in his rise to power. The whole anti-messiah narrative is unique only to the movie. I suppose the deviation was to create a uniqueness and standout lever for the movie. And of course audiences love a good lovers quarrel. In the book she is supportive and understands her role. But suspect DV is also setting the stage as a drama catalyst for the 3rd.
How they handled it with Chani was great. I'm not sure any other way would have made sense.
And I took it more that she was fighting it bc she loved him and knew if he rised to the prophecy they would not be together. She also knew there were risks and he could die as well.
I think thier entire dynamic was bc of their love for each other.
And I took it more that she was fighting it bc she loved him and knew if he rised to the prophecy they would not be together. She also knew there were risks and he could die as well.
I think thier entire dynamic was bc of their love for each other.
I think another hint is when they're in the tent after the raid and he gets his name. He says, maybe I will die, maybe you will die too, but others will carry on. His actions totally discard that line of thinking.TCTTS said:TCTTS said:hunter2012 said:
Moving this here from the main thread:
So far I only have 2 minor gripes.
First, the pacing and time skips are a little bit wonky, months go by in the first 2 acts and it's a little hard to keep up with how much time has passed between scenes. To be fair the book jumps about 5 years between Leto's death and Paul's ascendancy, so this may just be an issue the overall universe since the whole thing is on a huge timescale.
My second gripe is Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, particularly the end. In the books she was pivotal in supporting Paul's burden in the war that he wages and his pursuit of the "narrow way". She understood the political necessity that his marriage to Irulan was to be in stabilizing the imperium. I disagree that book Chani would sandworm off into the desert. It makes her come across as a petulant jealous lover. In the books she was swept along with everyone else by the legend of Muadib also Spoiler alert for books 2 & 3:she can't bear the twins if they've broken up. But that's an issue for messiah, I just hope he doesn't have to pull a retcon/plot realignment like the Star Wars sequel trilogy in order to get the larger story back on track. I get that Zendaya is a super star right now, but does the movie really have to end with her doing that? or are they really going to write off their kids completely? It would be a real shame because Leto II is a great foil for his father.
IMO, as a non-book-reader, this change was absolutely necessary. Someone had to be the voice of caution, as an audience surrogate of sorts, and it makes so much sense for it to be her. Again, I just wish that she would have better-stated or explained what Paul should do instead. Then again, maybe she did and I just missed it.
Either way, I didn't see her as "a petulant, jealous lover" at all. I saw her as a heartbroken lover, one who only knows how to express herself through anger and stoicism. In fact, I'm trying to imagine a version of the story where she's not mad or heartbroken and I just can't see it. Her supporting Paul's choice would feel not just frictionless, but pointless.
That, and for me, there's nothing better than a blockbuster with a great, big, bittersweet ending, a la The Empire Strikes Back, the first two The Lord of the Rings movies, The Dark Knight, The Batman, etc. This one fell right in line with those, and it doesn't happen with Chani reacting exactly the way she does.
Thinking on it a bit more, the below scene might actually go a long way toward answering this. Tell me if this tracks…
We already know Chani hates the whole Messiah thing. That's made loud and clear. But more specifically, instead of embracing the Messiah role, Chani wants Paul to be her equal; to simply be a fellow Freman and take down the Harkonnen that way. No Messiah bullsh*t, just her, Paul, and all the Fremen rising as up as one.
Paul earnestly agrees… but then slowly but surely is manipulated into going the Messiah route, via Jessica, his sister, and his visions, culminating in drinking the Water of Life, at which point there's no going back. He now sees all roads, the truth, etc, and realizes that jihad is unavoidable whether he's the Messiah or not, so it might as well be him calling the shots?
In other words, this scene serves as the "good" path Paul could have taken, but ultimately doesn't…
Also after my second viewing last night the scene you linked skyrocked in how much I loved it. There's so much going on in this film, but this scene was such a great intimate moment between people falling in love.
I haven't read the books, but there's no way she's as meaningful of a character if she just goes along with Paul after what he does. He literally discards her and goes back on everything he's said the entire time to her. Expecting her to just go along with that for any reason is a complete dismissal of who she's been portrayed as and the purpose she serves in the movie to warn against the use of prophecy as a method of control. I can't see how she has any agency in the book if that's how she is. I can't imagine that being a better use of her character.
As I said, I haven't read the books, but its also my understand that Herbert makes it clear in later books that how many people felt about Paul wasn't what he intended and he course corrects. Its possible that his use robbing of Chani's agency is why. There's a host of problems involving religous control and white savior complex that Chani's character as used by DV is great at pointing out. And yeah, she's also a scorned lover. How can she not be? The love story is meaningless if Paul tosses it aside and she is just like OH OK THATS COOL.
As I said, I haven't read the books, but its also my understand that Herbert makes it clear in later books that how many people felt about Paul wasn't what he intended and he course corrects. Its possible that his use robbing of Chani's agency is why. There's a host of problems involving religous control and white savior complex that Chani's character as used by DV is great at pointing out. And yeah, she's also a scorned lover. How can she not be? The love story is meaningless if Paul tosses it aside and she is just like OH OK THATS COOL.
MBAR said:
I haven't read the books, but there's no way she's as meaningful of a character if she just goes along with Paul after what he does. He literally discards her and goes back on everything he's said the entire time to her. Expecting her to just go along with that for any reason is a complete dismissal of who she's been portrayed as and the purpose she serves in the movie to warn against the use of prophecy as a method of control. I can't see how she has any agency in the book if that's how she is. I can't imagine that being a better use of her character.
As I said, I haven't read the books, but its also my understand that Herbert makes it clear in later books that how many people felt about Paul wasn't what he intended and he course corrects. Its possible that his use robbing of Chani's agency is why. There's a host of problems involving religous control and white savior complex that Chani's character as used by DV is great at pointing out. And yeah, she's also a scorned lover. How can she not be? The love story is meaningless if Paul tosses it aside and she is just like OH OK THATS COOL.
You're correct, in the book she has considerably less presence and role (her role becomes more pronounced later). So from a purist perspective it was just odd to see. But from a story telling and theatrical perspective I see why DV did it and probably the better product. My OCD sometimes struggles with change, but that's a personal flaw.
Its hard for me to accept changes to a work that people seem to love as much as people love Dune, so I completely get it. I have held off reading as I wanted to get DV's interpretation but now that I have it I'm going to read the 2-3 books.StinkyPinky said:MBAR said:
I haven't read the books, but there's no way she's as meaningful of a character if she just goes along with Paul after what he does. He literally discards her and goes back on everything he's said the entire time to her. Expecting her to just go along with that for any reason is a complete dismissal of who she's been portrayed as and the purpose she serves in the movie to warn against the use of prophecy as a method of control. I can't see how she has any agency in the book if that's how she is. I can't imagine that being a better use of her character.
As I said, I haven't read the books, but its also my understand that Herbert makes it clear in later books that how many people felt about Paul wasn't what he intended and he course corrects. Its possible that his use robbing of Chani's agency is why. There's a host of problems involving religous control and white savior complex that Chani's character as used by DV is great at pointing out. And yeah, she's also a scorned lover. How can she not be? The love story is meaningless if Paul tosses it aside and she is just like OH OK THATS COOL.
You're correct, in the book she has considerably less presence and role (her role becomes more pronounced later). So from a purist perspective it was just odd to see. But from a story telling and theatrical perspective I see why DV did it and probably the better product. My OCD sometimes struggles with change, but that's a personal flaw.
MBAR said:hunter2012 said:
Moving this here from the main thread:
So far I only have 2 minor gripes.
First, the pacing and time skips are a little bit wonky, months go by in the first 2 acts and it's a little hard to keep up with how much time has passed between scenes. To be fair the book jumps about 5 years between Leto's death and Paul's ascendancy, so this may just be an issue the overall universe since the whole thing is on a huge timescale.
My second gripe is Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, particularly the end. In the books she was pivotal in supporting Paul's burden in the war that he wages and his pursuit of the "narrow way". She understood the political necessity that his marriage to Irulan was to be in stabilizing the imperium. I disagree that book Chani would sandworm off into the desert. It makes her come across as a petulant jealous lover. In the books she was swept along with everyone else by the legend of Muadib also Spoiler alert for books 2 & 3:she can't bear the twins if they've broken up. But that's an issue for messiah, I just hope he doesn't have to pull a retcon/plot realignment like the Star Wars sequel trilogy in order to get the larger story back on track. I get that Zendaya is a super star right now, but does the movie really have to end with her doing that? or are they really going to write off their kids completely? It would be a real shame because Leto II is a great foil for his father.
Calling Chani petulant is amazing considering she got stabbed almost as badly as Fayd. Couldn't love what they did with her character more and though the end scene and her acting was one of the best parts of the film.
Compared to the book Chani it is petulant, Paul's marriage to Irulon is a sham and all 3 of them understand the arrangement. Chani is his real bride as a court concubine, and Irulon gets to maintain political power by being the empress but Paul never sleeps with her because the Bene Gesserit would likely take or steal their child. Paul even forbids her from having a child by another lover to stem the bene gesserit influence(as well as court appearances). Chani while she does not have title, has Paul's real love, confidence, and bears the family children. This is a major plot line in Dune Messiah, and without retconning it or a "rise of skywalker" type correction it is completely derailed for Dune Messiah.
I agree that if this were the final movie it would be a great ending. however since it's highly likely that Messiah will be made, they will have to commit a considerable about of screen-time to reconcile the 2 characters unless if they want to completely diverge from the book. This is what I fear most because they have followed the first book exceptionally well which is part of why both movies are exceptional. I also hate it when Hollywood scriptwriters hubris believes that they can write the story better than the original freaking author that thought up of everything. I get not every book detail or subplot can make it to film, but at least let keep the original story intact for the most part. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the best example of doing this well that I can think of, yes they cut things from the book, but never in a way that derailed the entire plot.
I had my second viewing last night and I very much enjoyed both of them, but - and honestly this is my fault for not immediately dismissing reaction tweets as hyperbole - but while this movie is excellent (and probably the best looking film I will see all year) I don't think its DV's best and it's def not the best sequel of all time. That being said it had some AMAZING scenes that I really really really enjoyed. Both Dune's have some of my favorite scenes I've ever seen in a theater. Just an amazing use of the technology and tools to give me exactly what I want from a movie in the theater.
That being said, and it sounds insane to say this about a nearly 3 hour long movie, but the film is rushed. It never feels like a long movie because there's so much amazing content, but we also lose a fair amount of the narrative because its not fully fleshed out. The water of life transformations, the imperial characters, and as was discussed above in this thread, what the alternative to these decisions was. There are bits and pieces of those answers scattered throughout the film and after a second viewing I had a much better understanding, but I feel another 30-45 minutes could have been useful to flesh some of those out. But as someone who loves a 90 minute movie, I get why you don't want to do that for a sci fi epic where a telepathic fetus is playing a big role.
The movie isn't perfect because of this, but its pretty ****ing close. This truly feels like nit picking from me.
Felt the film was also very well acted. Rebecca Ferguson was chilling. TC was a legit movie star. Can't wait for the next installment.
That being said, and it sounds insane to say this about a nearly 3 hour long movie, but the film is rushed. It never feels like a long movie because there's so much amazing content, but we also lose a fair amount of the narrative because its not fully fleshed out. The water of life transformations, the imperial characters, and as was discussed above in this thread, what the alternative to these decisions was. There are bits and pieces of those answers scattered throughout the film and after a second viewing I had a much better understanding, but I feel another 30-45 minutes could have been useful to flesh some of those out. But as someone who loves a 90 minute movie, I get why you don't want to do that for a sci fi epic where a telepathic fetus is playing a big role.
The movie isn't perfect because of this, but its pretty ****ing close. This truly feels like nit picking from me.
Felt the film was also very well acted. Rebecca Ferguson was chilling. TC was a legit movie star. Can't wait for the next installment.
Well said, much bette than my attempt earlier. While there was a ton of content, I kept thinking this would be much more enjoyable for the non-book readers if the underlying details/logic from the book was there to connect it all. I know it seems pretty straight forward in the movie, but a lot missing that would give each event a tremendous amount of more depth and understanding. The whole Alia dimension is barely touched upon in the movie and was sad to see because I found it very interesting.
Exactly my thoughts from my initial post.
The movie would've benefited hugely from an extra 30-45 minutes of runtime.
The movie would've benefited hugely from an extra 30-45 minutes of runtime.
How does infrared work? I get that it's another method but practically speaking, were we not just seeing everything in black and white?
But I could definitely tell the colors "popped" a bit more than regular black and white, for sure. People's skin actually looked white.
But I could definitely tell the colors "popped" a bit more than regular black and white, for sure. People's skin actually looked white.
In the book, the timeline is even more expanded. Paul and Chani have a kid and over like 3 years he becomes the unquestioned leader. I think this is what DV was trying to do with the time in the desert, but it didn't translate exactly the same. Chani is also all-in on the Messiah aspect in the book, to the point of her giving the water to both Jessica and Paul.
I feel the same way. I'm fine with how they did it, but it leaves a very big issue that has to be solved in the next film unless they are going to greatly deviate from Dune Messiah.
Featured Stories
See All
19:29
44m ago
952
10:45
19h ago
4.5k
9:40
18h ago
2.4k
Three Things: Thoughts on A&M's upcoming recruiting weekend
by Jason Howell
DeangeloVickers
Dan Campbell has to sell his home due to fan harassment
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
60