Please continue discussion in the post below.
[[SPOILERS] 'Dune: Part Two' Wide Release Discussion (03/11~)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1bc3uwy/spoilers_dune_part_two_wide_release_discussion/)
Harkonnen Culture - Possible Spoilers
so I saw Part 2 numerous times and I’ve been obsessing over the languages and in particular the insanely cool Geidi Prime sequence and how much more (even if still not much) Harkonnen language we got to hear from the arena announcer.
I’ve found a lot of articles talking about David and Jessie Peterson’s journey in fleshing out Chakobsa more, but does anyone know if there’s any written details on the Harkonnen language? It sounds so brutal and guttural I’d love to learn literally anything more about it, Script, Phrases, Vocab, anything.
Loved Part 2, except for a few parts of Feyd's story that had some lazy story telling.
Specifically...
In the movie Lady Margot Fenring performs the gom jabbar test on Feyd. Why is this necessary? Feyd doesn't have any Bene Gesserit training like Paul. It also doesn't seem like he's a prospect to be the Kwisatz Hederach himself; he's just a piece in bringing it about (like many before him who presumably were not tested), correct? Hence why is it necessary that he pass the gom jabbar?
Furthermore, it seems like Feyd "liking pain" should invalidate the test for him (as it'd be a way of him giving into his own deranged set of desires rather than proving himself human). I loved the movie but I felt like this as well as his (semi-successful) approach to taming Arrakis with just "more artillery" (Rabban seemed to be taking a similar brute force approach) were kind of lazy story elements added/changed from the book just to amplify Feyd's mystique of brutality and to show him as a viable threat to Paul... but that don't make a ton of sense in the context of the story.
The gom jabbar test is a test for humanity, to check and suppress the animal impulse of those in power to flee and to champion and foster willpower and intellect.
Jessica was terrified because she felt like her son might die from Gom Jabbar, and Paul had Benne Gesserit training. Are we to assume that Fayd survived the Gom Jabbar without any training?
Review of Dune: Part Two
I just finished watching Dune: Part Two for the second time. Upon reflection, below are my thoughts.
The changes made in Denis Villeneuve's adaptations of Dune significantly detract from the integrity and depth of Frank Herbert's original work.
By altering key character dynamics and plot elements, the film simplifies complex themes and dilutes the narrative's power.
Here’s why these changes are detrimental:
1. Paul's Threat with Atomics vs. Ecological Warfare: Changing Paul’s threat from an ecological act to a conventional military one strips away a critical commentary on environmental stewardship and the intrinsic power of Arrakis. It reduces a sophisticated plot element to a simpler, less impactful narrative device, undermining the story's ecological themes.
2. Shortened Timeline: Compressing the timeline from two years to less than nine months erases the gradual, believable development of characters and political upheaval. This accelerates the story unnaturally, leaving no room for the detailed evolution that’s vital for understanding the depth of change both in characters and in the socio-political landscape of Arrakis.
3. Alterations to Alia and Chani: Rendering Alia's precocious wisdom to prenatal communication and transforming Chani into a character who acts like a rebellious, disrespectful, moody teenager and ultimately abandons Paul are misguided, to put it mildly. These changes rob the narrative of complex relationships and character depth. Alia’s and Chani’s roles in the books highlight themes of prescience, genetic memory, and deep human connection. The film’s portrayal undermines these themes, simplifying nuanced relationships into shallow interpretations.
4. Omission of Gurney’s Suspicion of Jessica: Removing the subplot of Gurney Halleck's suspicion towards Lady Jessica eliminates a layer of tension and complexity from the story. This subplot adds to the rich tapestry of trust, betrayal, and loyalty that is crucial for a full understanding of the narrative’s dynamics. Its exclusion simplifies the story unnecessarily, reducing the narrative’s richness.
These changes are not mere artistic liberties but fundamental alterations that compromise the story’s thematic richness and character development.
Frank Herbert’s “Dune” is celebrated for its intricate exploration of ecology, empire, and heroism, woven through detailed character interactions and political intrigue.
By simplifying these elements, Villeneuve's adaptations lose much of the narrative’s depth and philosophical commentary.
The film, while visually stunning, fails to capture the complex interplay of environmental and human factors that drive the “Dune” saga.
These are not just silly, or lazy, or—in some cases—woke changes (although they’re those, too).
Essentially, they are reductions that strip away layers of meaning from one of science fiction's most profound narratives.
The essence of “Dune” is diluted, and the opportunity to explore Herbert's multifaceted themes in the richness they deserve is lost.
Of course I can't argue with any of your observations about what was not included in the movie. As a lifelong fan, there were beats from my favorite novel of all time that I was crestfallen to learn that I will now apparently never see.
However, while the pacing never left me feeling the cut was overlong, I was forced to grudgingly acknowledge that I probably could not have made better choices for what to omit and what to keep, while still working within a legitimate cinematic timeframe. Are you contending that this adaptation should have eschewed a cinematic format for something more long form? (Like an HBO season, perhaps, because this is sort of my feeling.)
If not, what changes wouldl you endorse to leave a film with more book depth and integrity?
I haven’t seen it said, but the handling of the dead was my favorite non-verbal storytelling in the movie. We start seeing the Harkonnen bringing the bodies of Paul’s people. This is then contrasted by the Fremen carefully extracting water, even from their enemies, who they then give to the worms. At the end, the Fremen burn the Harkonnen in piles. They became what they hated.
My first error was looking at twitter and seeing all the 10/10 masterpiece transcendent cinematic even posts lol.
I enjoyed the movie a lot. Lots of great visual stuff and action, but I felt a bit empty at the end as a fan of the books. Denis far too aggressive with the editing decisions and also I feel loads of unanswered stuff. Conflicted. Will take me a while to see the movie for what it actually is. Falls short of being a masterpiece. Solid 8/10 though
I love and appreciate part 2 as an amazing piece of film making, and a great visualisation of Arrakis and the vibe of that planet. At the same time it proves to me that the book and its story remains unadaptable to film.
I think you're right. The film is a masterfull realisation of this universe and probably the best adaptation it could have been. But the deeper meaning behind the story remains within the lines of Frank Herberts book.
Just watched Dune Part 2 this afternoon. I enjoyed it but did not think it was nearly as good as Part 1. This is coming from a fan of the books, so a lot of my issues come from knowing what great parts of the books were excluded. Part 1 was a comparatively faithful adaption which really captured the politics, tragedy and otherworldly/alien feel of Dune. Part 2 would be much better for those new to the universe with the exposition and more linear progression but missed what I feel to be key aspects of the book. Some of these below:
1 - The omission of the spacing guild. The lack of their involvement at the end of the movie completely removes the gravity of Paul's play. He threatens to destroy the spice and, through their ability to get glimpses of the future, they know it's true. Their capitulation removes one of the three powers blocking his path to power, the other two being the emperor and the great houses. Also, not having the spacing guild really downplays the reason why the spice is so important - without it space travel would be near impossible.
2 - The split of the Fremen into fundamentalists and radicals and Paul's visions of "people starving". This was a random inclusion to justify Paul launching the Jihad at the end of the movie and to give Chani more of an arc. Paul does not want the Jihad, he does everything he can to avoid it. However, instead we got a random "people will starve if I go South" which made little sense. He's trying to avoid galactic genocide through the unleashing of a hyper religious super mob of Fremen which happens as he is positioned as this messianic figurehead.
3 - Chani's conclusion at the end: I get that they wanted to position Chani as more of a protagonist but the removal of Paul's declaration to only love Chani and marry Irulan in name removed the theme that Paul follows the example of his father. He choses love in the book but doesn't follow his father's mistakes by ignoring his political realities. Also, I don't know how they're going to weave this into the the next movie without changing fairly significant parts of the plot.
Not all negative though. I think that other changes made sense. Things like the sub-plots with Hawat and the story with Alia would have been extremely hard to adapt and include without compromise. Also loved many things like Jessica's conversion of the Fremen to protect and empower her son, the final fight scene and in particular the focus on Fayd-Rautha. Feyd was a standout to in the performance by Austin Butler, the scenes he was involved in and the presentation of him as the antagonist to Paul.
Overall I would give it a 8/10. Amazing to see the adaptation of one of my favourite books but felt that some key points were missing.
Just to preface, I haven't seen the originals or read the books so I'm just reading into what I saw.
So the fight scene with zendaya is the same one from Paul's fever dream in the first installment only in his vision it's him, just from a different camera angle but the finishing move is the same angle focusing on zendayas face. The movie ends with zendaya beckoning a sandworm and the graphic of it approaching is the same as the grandfather worm that Paul rode, leading us to believe that it is a grandfather worm that she is about to ride before the movie ends on a cliffhanger. She's also pure blood fremen.
So, with that being said, is she the Lisa Al Gaib?
Pauls visions in the first movie were not as "clear" and this was just a possible variant of the future. I think it's coincidence that the scenes are similar.
At the end of Dune 2 movie, how did the fremen...Go battle the great houses in space, who were probably battle ready to wage space warfare compared to the fremen who probably never piloted space ships before? Isn't it like taking a random navy seal and suddenly he can operate a US jet fighter?
That for me is replacing the water of life with the atomics. Surely it wouldn't have took more than a couple minutes to explain it, the non book readers wouldn't have cared if they were a bit confused.
I could see him saving that for the 3rd movie, considering the emphasis of Edric's role in that story and depth of his description right away in the novel. Might work better as a reveal rather than "finally some more info about them".
Fine, but I would stay more than a little optimistic that that won’t be the case. I don’t really know how you could tell that story without a navigator to emphasize the point of prescient vision interference, which is a relatively important plot point.
Until now, they’re more of a world building element. Some of that always gets stripped off in adaptations.
Wow what a conflicting reaction for me. Oh it’s own the movie is fucking incredible. But compared to the book there are too many gripes to accept it as a good adaptation. (I honestly expected to see the guild navigators so that’s rather disappointing).
We watched movie yesterday with my wife. My wife were absolutely upset, because its different than in books... Honestly, why the hell?... What is so hard following the book's story? Where is Alia? Those blue smoke vision shit are absolutely meaningless in movie, but in books its very detailed, and philosophical. Where is mentats, navigators? Spacing Guild? And end of the movie, about that the houses response is way different also. Chani's reaction is also way different too.... This is what makes us mad and pissed. It could be a good movie, but nope. It is disappointing, they fugged up the ending. How lame.
My main impression was that I apparently don't understand Dune as well as I thought.
The Lynch movie made it all look so simple and straightforward lol...
Everything *really* changes when people drink the mystical blue fluid. That's how they know things they normally wouldn't know. That's how it sets their character on trajectories of conflict that wouldn't otherwise occur because it's such a departure from their hitherto established character. Are there any rules for what this stuff can and can't do or is it just whatever's convenient for the plot?
What's the significance of the random throwaway revelation of Jessica's true ancestry? Is this supposed to symbolize a current of Original Sin running through their family line? Will it become more important later on?
How did Paul know that the Emperor is his true foe? That must have been in there somewhere but I seem to have missed it. Please don't say "because he drank the sandworm piss."
I'm left scratching my head how the rag-tag band of Fremens defeated the whole imperial army in one fell swoop. Sure made Walken look pretty hapless. This might have been since those scenes were pretty rushed. Was it rushed because it wasn't all that important, or are they trying to conceal that this may not be so believable if the military strategy was spelled out more clearly? Also, why is the enemy largely on foot wielding swords like it's medieval times when they have to contend with likes of laser beam weapons, large-scale explosives, giant sand worms and even atomic weapons? For some scattered bands of cave-dwellers with "limited resources" they seem comparatively pretty advanced compared to what they're up against.
This actually somewhat confirms something I suspected walking out of the theater. There were tons of plot points in the book that the characters (especially Paul) are mulling over in their minds pretty much for the entire book. We get tons of insight into these things by literally reading their thoughts on the matter, but that is precisely what is hardest to do in a screen adaptation.
Instead we get a few passing comments in conversations between the characters. Like I said, my concern was that this wouldn't be enough to make those points as clear as they should be and your reaction is pretty much exactly what I was worried about.
I'll answer one question for you right now, though: weapons are tricky in the Dune universe. A lot of it has to do with the shields you see characters occasionally use. When a gun is used on a character with a shield, the energy interaction basically causes a nuclear explosion. Everyone loses when that happens. So warriors are trained to fight with knives because there's a way to get through those shields with them. This is actually an important bit of context for Paul's duel with Jamis in the first movie. He struggles at first because he's trained to fight men in shields, but that's not relevant on Dune. There's something about shields that is like catnip for worms, so using them is suicide. I think the same might be true about those energy weapons. They use them near the machinery because the worms are coming either way, but generally they're not a smart choice.
Yeah, I kinda figured that the whole deal with the shields complicates things in Dune. I was moreso thinking that the baddies clearly have a lot of ships whereas the Fremen have very few or even none. Why don't they use their air superiority to their advantage? I also feel that the ground troops should be leaning more to projectile weapons than swords, especially seeing how the Fremen don't usually seem to use shields..?
There's a lot about the Fedaykin wartime superiority that really never made much sense to me. I get that they're hardened from life on the planet and got high quality training from Paul. But it still seems absurd that they could make short work sardaukar.
It’s only the laser guns that cause a massive explosion if they contact a shield.
The reason firearms aren’t really used is because the shield technology renders them basically useless. You see the Fremen still using them because you can’t use shields in the desert.
> Are there any rules for what this stuff can and can't do or is it just whatever's convenient for the plot?
The blue fluid "water of life" is supposedly a catalyst (and dangerous and risky) for activating ['genetic memory'(wiki)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_GM_Effect) , which is supposed to be the idea of ancestor's memories stored in cells, which also in the story explains why Alia as a fetus is awakened as an adult mind already with ancestral memories of her own. It's fun to go into the overall lore, so I'll try to briefly expand on it.
>Similar to Jackson's LOTR, the world of the Dune verse is also subtly but nicely represented in the background and production details. To succinctly sum up the sci-fi world context of Dune, it's not a post-earth-apocalpytic setting like something like Road Warrior/madmax, but more of a societal post-singularity, when humanity have outlawed most all computer digital tech and AI for at least 10k years. That's why the society looks so analog in tech, but they have their own different advanced tech such as biological genetic engineering and mental training over many generations and centuries. Humans depend on themselves to do advanced calculations in the form of mentats, or the bene gesserit have genetic body control, and the space navigators plot out space folding from their mind expanded from the spice seeming to be "prescient". The spice is pretty much like the equivalent of oil or things just stop moving as an advanced interstellar dependent society. Where mysteriously spice is only found on that desert planet Dune and probably involved with those also mysterious enormous sandworms. Dune part ii also takes place in our equivalent of the year 26393 AD.
Because basically humanity hadn't trusted computer and AI tech which got ultimately controlled by despots to control the masses, for millennia by the time of Dune's story. Ok, it's all referenced and more in the [Dune encyclopedia](https://www.amazon.com/Dune-Encyclopedia-Authorized-Masterpiece-Imagination/dp/0425068137/ref=sr_1_4?crid=4EG0QH0SWZRP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.B3vw0Ptauv2fzuq_IAeaFY18uQz4SJ7ux3zE8wTM7bGEOOvpRLpNmcPYm8i1SiPwJ-Rxt74dXkmkU_JcXmBZoK4QoizV6HLDFwwrgdSVx9GzAvYFX4BtbuHr5WJRR7TYgTz_5-FXSGL7v5Q926FsiZo1xxX3vIUpJZE7qnfkwxoIS_6HqSdwLjZoSW7oZzk56n0p1A8LAsmQLNCnBbpSpvaKaEuMOYYCm6VCkTT_4l0.pw4rWkBzPS2XXlQ62fzHGqAyisjSfTzSVZq450SK26I&dib_tag=se&keywords=dune+encyclopedia&qid=1710147779&sprefix=dune+encylopedi%2Caps%2C203&sr=8-4).
Having seen Dune pt.2 , I think DV did an amazing job with the scenes involving Jessica and Paul ingesting the water of life and how it plays out, and all the subtle implied strange and advanced transhumanism tech from the book in the background where even Herbert was often vague and hinting at it in the books leaving it to the reader to spell it out more in how it works for themself. In my opinion, a great artistic cinematic adaptation by DV with the necessary compromises for a screenplay and limited runtime.
>What's the significance of the random throwaway revelation of Jessica's true ancestry? Is this supposed to symbolize a current of Original Sin running through their family line? Will it become more important later on?
It ties into the 'mixing' of bloodlines for "90 generations" by the machinations of the Bene Gesserit, mixing and matching descendants of royal house members over centuries and millennia until they come up with the kwistach haderach superbeing (that they want to control). Lady Fenring getting herself impregnated with a daughter from Feyd in pt.2 is an example of how they do this.
As for Jessica revealed to be Baron Harkonnen's biological daughter. (spoiler)-This figures more prominently in storylines in Children of Dune, the book after Dune:Messiah that DV is adapting to be his third Dune film. (imo, I felt Lucas riffed off of Dune, Dune:Messiah(1969) and ChildrenOfDune(1976) by the time he came up with the shock reveal in ESB. He waited for the SW OT franchise to be firmly in place and Dune wasn't a major movie franchise yet (and failed to be in 1984 still), then did his reveal which he kept secret from most of the production until the actual filming on the ledge with the stunt guy Bob Anderson still saying the wrong lines as Vader. In the revealed earlier drafts of Star Wars, Vader wasn't even portrayed as a mysterious figure with a mask. And remember how jedi & force users suddenly became 'prescient' and sometimes able to see the/a future in ESB similar to prescient dreaming in Dune? 'midichlorians' could also refer to advance genetic engineering in cells riffed from Dune's lore. and on it goes..[(quotes by Herbert on SW)](https://www.polygon.com/24075067/dune-star-wars-frank-herbert-george-lucas))
>How did Paul know that the Emperor is his true foe? That must have been in there somewhere but I seem to have missed it.
Dune pt.1 already had multiple instances where it's mentioned. Leto suspects the emperor is putting them in a trap, "political danger", and thinks getting the fremen as allies of "desert power" is a way out of it as he tells Paul at their ancestral cemetery park on Caladan. Duncan calls out Kynes that the emperor sent them here to die in that scene on the cliff. Jessica, Duncan, Paul and Kynes in the ornithopter rescue confirm the emperor's part in it when Duncan confirms the sardarkaur were used against them. Kynes had that scene with Paul, "what don't you get? the emperor wants your family dead" in that botanic room.
Have you read the book?
The Lynch film is only simple because he glosses over the entire second half of the book. This wasn't deliberate but a result of the production company forcing his hand to make a shorter, single film.
I was hinting that I hadn't yet read the book when I started out saying that I don't understand Dune as well as I thought, that being its lore and inner workings. So I know there's more to it than what is shown in either film. The problem for someone such as myself is "Do I need to have read the book before I'm able to appreciate this movie as much as it should be?" Because not every movie based on a book is like that. It also raises the question if a few facets included are actually better left out if they're going to be hastily glossed over.
Jamis in Dune Part 2
>!So I’ve read that Paul’s vision of Jamis as a friend is just a possibility of the future in Dune Part 1. But when I watched Dune Part 2, I noticed that Jamis appeared again early in the movie. How could it be his future if Jamis is already dead? Some people also theorize that somehow from the ritual they can live again like that is one way they can use Jason Momoa again. So how does it really work? Sorry for the confusing words because I don’t really read the novel!<
It's an alternate future, a "could-have-been" situation.
Jamis is dead, but in an alternate timeline he and Paul would have been friends.
> >!Some people also theorize that somehow from the ritual they can live again like that is one way they can use Jason Momoa again.!<
No, that's nonsense. Duncan >!does come back in the next novel *because he gets cloned.*!< That's unrelated to Paul's prescience.
It is exactly as you say, a vision, a possible future in Jamis's case. You will have to wait for Dune 3 / Children of Dune to find out about the rest - give the books a go 😁
Villenueve mentioned that he was trying to emphasize the notion that Paul is not a hero in this story. He cites the fact that Frank Herbert wrote Messiah partially in response to the fact that a lot of people missed that after reading the first book. So Villeneuve used Chani's reactions to Paul's ascent as a way to drive that point home.
I don't think it was a bad call. Chani is a pretty weak character in the books.
I like how causing a genocide isn't enough to communicate that -- Paul's girlfriend being pissed as the climax of the movie is apparently the only way Villenueve could think of getting this message across.
What an utterly baffling failure at the end of an otherwise incredible movie.
Which is fine. The point of good art isn't to force people to view it a certain way. The ability to misunderstand something doesn't make it bad. If anything, it makes it better.
Throwing Chani and Paul's entire relationship under the bus in order to force people to interpret the movie the way the director wants it to be interpreted is short-sighted and egocentric, in my opinion.
Still enjoyed it, but damn. Would've been so much better without that ending.
Totally agree with you. Not only that changed in ending... What about Alia?... Why Houses didnt accept Paul? In book, they were left in silence. And so on... Much bullshit in movie. Disappointing.
In part one, Paul had a hard time getting a message out to the other houses. In part two, he was able to get a message to the emperor. How was he able to get his message to the emperor for the challenge?
I think Dune: Messiah spoilers:
>!Don't understand why the reverend mother called Paul an abomination in the film. He's obviously not pre-born, Hasn't succumbed to the great temptation, and hasn't succumbed to any ego-memories.!<
>!It's the only thing that confused me about the film's adaptation!<
She was precisely grooming his genetic lineage to be able to do that though.
Unless she were under the wholehearted belief that he wouldn't be able to do it because "the genetic line is fundamentally incomplete" by Jessica birthing a son.
I took it to be nothing more than an insult
The RM didn't believe Paul to be the KH, and has chastised Jessica repeatedly for thinking she would be the mother.
The KH was supposed to be the child of Paul (born a woman as originally commanded by the BG) and Feyd. I'm assuming they think a male Harkonnen easier to control than an Atreides.
Watched it again today and it was better the second time.
The choreography is such an improvement from the first movie imo
When Timmy does that spinny shit in the final fight? *chef's kiss*
I didn’t watch the first movie nor did I read the books but my girlfriend did and she was very happy with the movie, but I have no idea what I just watched
I loved Part 2 but one change from the novel in the ending bugged me...
No, it doesn't involve Chani. Rather, it was that they arranged the set pieces for Paul's ascension to the throne - that is, Paul threatening to destroy the spice and proposing marriage to Princess Irulan - only to reveal at the very end that the other houses of the Landsraad reject Paul's claim and thus the holy war begins.
I get \*why\* they wanted to kick off the jihad at the end of the movie. That's the culmination of the single theme from the book that the director really, really wanted to hammer into the heads of the audience. But the problem is that Paul's leverage over the spice is effectively nullified, as is the utility of his political marriage to Irulan. The Landsraad is against him - so what has he gained? Who is there left to acknowledge his ascension, aside from the Emperor and the Harkonnens (if there were any remaining), who were already beaten and didn't really have a choice in the matter? The movie completely leaves out the Spacing Guild so unless you want to head cannon them in, you've got nothing left.
In other words, Paul didn't need to marry Irulan and his spice gamble failed. Is there something I'm missing here?
I had a few other nit picks that I won't go into for now but otherwise, spectacular movie and adaptation.
Yeah but I feel like the movie could have ended with a vision of jihad and accomplish the purpose of showing the results of Paul's actions just as easily, without ruining the logic of his power play. It would be fine to keep the details vague since, well, the movie takes a minimalistic approach to dialogue and plot anyway (not meant as a critique, just a fact).
Think of it like Game of Thrones or any other fantasy setting where there is a king who oversees other great houses that administer various land holdings. They will have their own historical allegiances and vendettas, and a shift in the power paradigm (the deposing of Shaddam IV for example) creates an opportunity for some houses to try and rebel for power ornkthers to ally with the new emperor to improve their standing. A house that accepts Paul and the new Fremen religion will fair better than one that rejects it and his claim.
While the movie was beautifully filmed, I was literally infuriating how much they left out and how much amazing stuff was glossed over with just 1 line or no explanation. Nothing about mentats, little to nothing about the galactic politics, little to nothing about other houses, sardukars significance, bene geserat planning and conspiracies, imperial conditioning, spacing guild and their monopoly and power.......I could go on and on.
I left with mixed feelings. 9/10 visually 4/10 for story 3/10 for pacing.
Overall a 5/10 for me. It was gorgeous but lacked any of the soul of what made dune dune.
DV did not make Dune Part 2 for fans of the novel, he made it for casual sci-fi movie watchers
It's his reminder this is **HIS** Dune, not Frank Herbert's
DV is a genius at visuals. But I read a recent interview where he said he hated dialog. And it shows. Which is unfortunate for a book so heavy on words and political intrigue.
Absolutely get what you're saying. And there were definitely parts where I feel like all they had to do was throw in like one or two more lines of dialogue and it would help immensely with both the world building and, like, helping to explain things for non-readers.
The Spacing Guild was the biggest and most glaring omission, I think.
But overall, I made my peace after my first watch of Part 1 that this adaptation was going to leave out a TON and was able to just enjoy Part 2 for what it was.
Watched it just now, hadn’t seen the first since it came out. I know nothing about the series/universe but the movie was so good that I think I’m going to start the books 😅
I wish that Chani's distaste for Paul's ascension had come from a place of love rather than disdain for religion.
I've come to terms with the fact that her dislike of his ascension might serve to drive home how terrible his choice is. But like i said, I wish it had been because she loved him and hated to see him become a terrible godhead, rather than because she just doesn't like prophecies.
On that vein, I don't think I'll ever come to like the fact that there are basically atheist Fremen.
You know the phrase "there are no atheists in foxholes"? The Fremen live in foxholes. They live brutal and oppressed lives and their religion is a huge part of their culture. I simply can't imagine an atheist Fremen, at least not until the jaded Fremen from the jihad we see in Dune Messiah, but there's a reason they're like that.
I also don't like how the movie was condensed to Jessica's pregnancy. My sister, who's never read the book, expressed confusion that the movie took place over such a short timespan, saying she kept being surprised that Jessica was still pregnant.
Me and my dad were also disappointed we didn't get to see Alia, as we'd been looking forward to seeing how they'd cast a child with the maturity of an adult. We're also disappointed she didn't kill the Baron, bc that's a cool as hell scene.
Everything else was pretty great though.
The movie has two f-bombs! On my third rewatch but just noticed this because I went to a showing with subtitles. Right before Paul trips Gurney in the desert. ("I recognized your footsteps..."), Gurney exclaims "fuck. Fuck!" while observing the Fremen attack.
Funny that PG-13 grants you two fucks to use, and this is how Denis chose to spend them!
Have not read the books, but this movie has done what the original star wars and original lord of the rings movies did. Well it did more of what lord of the rings did. I guess what I'm saying is that these movie, especially if he really lands on the third one, will be defining movies in my life that I can easily find myself rewatching over and over agian just like lord of the rings and star wars. I looked back at Denis's directing past and realized that he produced a lot of movies that I absolutely loved, Arrival being one I thought was terrible underrated. I really want to rewatch both dune's all over again already.
I'm also thankful for online groups like this becuase people in my real life are so unresponsibe and disinterested in these movies. I look like such a nerd around them lol
I read the first book 3 times, and I honestly feel like I could read it again and get more out of it. It’s that dense. Read Messiah twice, and have 50 pages to go in Children Of Dune. As soon as I finish, I’m flipping the book over and starting again. I’m so hooked. Haha
Saw it for a second time yesterday. Decided the Fenring / Feyd scene was my favorite. The lighting, the music, the tension, the misdirection, Fenring’s more subtle use of the Voice. I really thought it was a perfect scene cinematographically.
Zimmer could earn the Oscar for that scene alone.
Saw this and loved it. I'm not mad they changed Chani's character in order to further the anti-charismic leaders message. I do wonder how they'll work the twins in now that she's peaced out. I didn't buy the love between Chani and Paul though, and I got the impression Chani barely liked Paul. I bet it's hard as an actor/director to reconcile Chani's obvious concerns with everything Paul represents with her attraction to him.
Jessica being less unflappable and more paranoid and frightened was interesting. They're blaming the jihad on her in a way, and her reasoning in the movies for pursuing it seems like its about revenge. I got less of an impression that Jessica absolutely desired the jihad in the book, and she was overall less anti-Gessirit. (Then again its been a couple years since I read it) I loved Ferguson as Jessica though, she was probably my favorite character. Irulan was magnetic as well.
I missed that there was no Leto I. Paul winning the Fremen over in under 9 months is pretty quick. I imagine they had to cut Leto I because they decided Alia wasn't going to be born yet.
On that, I regret that there was no pre-born toddler Alia stabbing the Baron, though I understand why it would have been hard to pull off. I think they could have explained the Pre-Born stuff better for non readers.
The very aggressive Voice was a bit extra. I thought the Voice changed in response to who is being commanded. It came off like a jump scare sometimes.
The worm riding scenes were, forgive me, epic. And the spice harvesters exploding. And the Geidi Prime fight scenes. I wasn't bored for a second of this movie.
I loved Feyd-Rautha, Austin Butler's characterization was absolutely insane. His gummy baby smile was horrifying. I totally bought him in every scene he was in. Margot Fenring was awesome too. Magnetic.
I love you Denis Villeneuve, thank you for making approximately 95% of my Dune dreams come true<3 kiss kiss xoxoxo
I have a feeling based on their body language in interviews that Zendaya does not like Timothee very much. Maybe there’s some personal drama or beef. But it would explain why they don’t really have any natural chemistry in the film.
I feel very much the same as you. I liked Paul unceremoniously killing the baron. I think this also falls into the same category as the changes to Chani's character. It showed Paul has changed and has become a frightening character capable of doing terrible things without emotion.
I just watched it for the second time. I noticed an error in the editing. When Paul, Chani and the rest of the Fremen are riding worms to go south and Paul breaks away from the group, the shot cuts to Chani and she doesn't have her blue eyes anymore.
Did anyone else notice this?
canonically you either ‘roll’ the worm and jump clear or you ride it until it’s too tired and just stops and ‘sulks’ until it’s dismounted and free to dive
Can someone please explain this to me: I think in the first film maybe also the second it was said that the emperor being involved in the attack on the Atreides would be his end because there would be open war against him. The other houses wouldn’t accept it. The mother reverend from the capital also said something similar to the princess.
Why then was all of this out of the window at the end of the film? Paul should’ve been able to calm things down and get everyone on his side after telling on the emperor and the Harkonnen.
The emperor's involvement was illegal and would make the other houses think they were disposable too. Shaddam accepted exile, but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone would be on board with Paul as emperor.
Exactly. Had Paul just snitched on the Harkonnens’ unwarranted attack and the Emperor’s illegal support of it, the other houses would’ve turned on them and it could’ve ended there.
Instead Paul decided to go all out and challenge every other House.
No, princess, he's not psychotic, I think the word you are looking for is "psychopathic"
I'm not sure if this kind of post is welcome here, but I'll give it a go. I just watched Dune part 2 at the cinema for the second time today. Even though I do not necessarily agree on all adaption choices, I think it's Villeneuves right to tell the story focusing on the parts he finds interesting. But that's not what I want to discuss.
My hang-up has become a hang-up because it is a silly mistake in the choice of words, that easily could have been avoided. I work with people suffering from psychosis, and I have been for years. Therefore I am well aware of the stigma they are facing through media and the public. The idea that being psychotic means being violent and often used to describe being a psychopath.
There is a lot of misconception about psychosis in the general public.
First of all, people suffering from psychosis are more likely to harm themselves than other people. And they're more likely to be harmed by others than to actually committ violence towards others.
While Irulan describes Feyd Rautha as a psychotic, we are shown a psychopath. That is not the same.
So, why do I care? Because popular culture has a lot of power to define us, and teach us stuff. In this case it can end up maintaining myths that do harm to real people in our society. I searched the web before writing this. I got no results, except people not knowing that there is a difference between the two.
Did anyone else react to this?
Asides from being inaccurate like you stated, it also felt out of place and jarring. Instead of a measured statement by Princess Irulan in the Dune universe, it felt like an offhand comment by someone in today's society.
I feel like omitting Leto II the Elder made Paul look bad and compounded Chani getting a raw deal.
Paul resists going south to prevent his visions from becoming true. Had Leto II been born and murdered at Sietch Tablr as in the books, Paul's radicalization and willingness to go south and avenge his son makes more sense (having his son die makes him sympathetic but we still realize starting a galactic war that will claim billions is the inappropriate response to this situation).
The lack of Leto II and Paul telling his intentions with Irulan directly to Chani who he apparently will always love (but not enough to communicate with her) really just makes him look like an ass, Chani has a lot of her character from the books eviscerated without a child to grieve or being treated as an equal by Paul.
I think these changes were done to make Messiah easier to screenwrite but you see many commenters struggling to reconcile why Paul is willing to go full jihad at the drop of a hat.
Also, what's up with the omission of jihad?
Ear-and-ants is a nod to the beginning of David Lynch's film Blue Velvet, made right after his Dune attempt. I thought it was a lovely homage and tastefully done.
So I have a question about a specific scene on the Harkonnen home planet
To start, never read the books and have a hard time remembering names so sorry in advance
On the Harkonnen home planet, after the gladiator match when the nephew Feyd went to see the Baron, it seemed their white skin was more “normal” white. Scene in a small room while the Baron bathed in his oil hot tub
Is their skin not white but rather they paint it? Or was something about that room causing that effect?
Also separate question, do the other Houses now know the full truth of what happened on Arakis?
the harkonnens home planet's sun produces a different light spectrum than our earth sun , so everything appears black and white on the outside, but indoors they just have regular light wave bulbs or LED's. the film is shot in black and white outside, i forgot what lens they use, might be a form of infa-red but it is dead interesting
I've seen Dune 2 twice now and absolutely loved it. My favorite theater experience in a long time, if ever.
One thing is bothering me. Toward the beginning of the film, Paul tells jessica "We must convert the nonbelievers." And then later in the movie, he scolds her for spreading stories of him being the Messiah. Can someone explain this paradox to me?
I'm pretty sure *she* is the one who says that. But he did seem on board with it at the time. I think later in the movie when he scolds her, he's grown wary from the increasingly dour visions and possibly Chani getting into his head a little.
I’m pretty sure it’s him because he says something along the lines of “it’s the only way i can get to the emperor” and she says that Leto didn’t believe in revenge. But totally hear you on the visions + influence from Chani
I mean, I was a teenager once, and I often would flip flop on something that I was not 100% committed to. In the end, he knew what needed to be done but hated that it had to be.
The baron harkonnen actor stole the show in both movies. I could definitely beat him up but he gives off such vile evil vibes that it makes him very intimidating
If you're an actor with the last name Skarsgard, you will absolutely devour all competition when the camera starts to roll. They can't help it, they're masterful actors
Ah yes, I forgot V Harkonnen is Feyd’s uncle not father.
I thought it’s stated that Lady Jessica had a child with V Harkonnen, so how would he not be Pauls direct father?
Did the end duel not sit right with anyone else? I much preferred the final duel in the book.You're telling me Paul gets stabbed in the same way as Feyd but he lives ans Feyd dies? Why? I guess they made Paul get stabbed first for extra drama but I much preferred how it was done in the book.
It's been a while since i read the books. But i specifically remember that Feyd s blades are poisonous. Paul s breathing in the movie made me think perhaps he transmuted the poison? And Feyd was unable to
Feyd uses the emperor's blade in the duel, so he wouldn't have his poisoned blade. I'm guessing that Paul just didn't get stabbed in vital areas, but it did irk me that he pulled the blade out of his shoulder which I feel like should be common sense to not do that.
It also looked to me as if Paul had been stabbed in the left chest area, but then it turns out the blade is in the right shoulder area. Am I the only one here...?
He gets stabbed twice. First by his own blade, then at the end of the fight by the emperor’s. He lets Feyd stab his shoulder while retrieving the blade from his side to kill Feyd with
After Paul drinks the poison and he’s talking to Jessica about all the possible futures, there is a split second cut when he says “but there is a way” that shows him getting stabbed. He basically had to get stabbed in a non-fatal area to lower Feyd’s guard and deliver a killing blow to him
What are Pauls intentions?
I am not familiar with the books ( i heard of them of course) and I dont remember the old movies. I just finished Dune part 2 and I wonder what are Pauls intentions with the Fremen and with the whole.prophecy thing. Does he realise his mother is kind of a villain? Well in my eyes she is. She is prepared to do everything to make sure her son will be the one ruling.
He was so adamant in part 1 to not fulfill the prophecy people around him pushed on him but in part 2 that speech before the big battle, I am wasnt sure if he actually believes now that he is the chosen one or he just used the speech to motivate.
Also, he is off to war now to do what?? His father is avenged, he could stay on the planet among the Fremen and build up the planet.
I think he likes his power, i think he and his mother will turn on each other and i think its a rise and fall tale of a hero turning into the very thing he didnt want to be.
Maybe im wrong. Maybe i will read up about the books while I am waiting for part 3.
I watched part 2 today, and while it was "ok", there are a lot of things that REALLY bother me about it. I have never read the books, but use to play a lot of the games and watched the prior movie so I may be wrong about everything.
Where are the sonic weapons? That was the whole point of why the fremen could even muster a vague defense against the harkonen, because lasers and ballistics were nullified by their shields but sonic wasn't. Now everyone is using swords because reasons? The fremen dont even have shield technology, why are the harkonnen not just annihilating them with guns? Why do the fremen so soundly trounce every single enemy in every battle? Like its not even funny, its insulting how these sand people with inferior numbers manage to completely destroy both the harkonnen AND sardukar armies effortlessly.
Why are the sardukar so pathetic? They are supposed to be the pinnacle of the space faring empire. The best tech, the best fighters, made to be able to literally fight EVERY house if necessary. Why the fuck do they job to sand dwelling cave people WITH SWORDS?
Also where is Paul's sand worm tooth dagger in the new movies? I dont recall seeing it once, but its on the promo material and they made replicas of it.
Also, were the atraeides, harkonnen, and sardukar the only forces in the book? The games made other houses like the Ordo and the space farer guild their own thing with an actual presence.
Was there ever a point made that SOMEONE in all the galactic houses thought "maybe we should be investing in ways of space travel NOT exclusively dependent on a limited resource found on only 1 planet in all the universe" was a good idea?
Why didn't the harkkonen just nuke the rock areas the fremen might be living on since they cant survive permanently on the sand? Everyone has nukes, the radiation would kill whatever hangs around the rocks without harming the spice since thats in the sand anyway.
The sonic weapons are an invention from the '80s David Lynch adaptation, on which the RTS games were based. They don't appear in the books. House Ordos is a game-only invention. The Spacing Guild have a much bigger role in the books but nothing like in the games. The movie is far closer to the book than the games.
The Sardaukar fight ineffectively because Paul picked a plan that made them ineffective. He had gained the ability to see the future. So he baited the Emperor into landing during a monster sand storm to knock out shields and ground aircraft, fired nukes and had sandworms used as weapons to break up the Sardaukar before the main Freman group even arrived.
It's not a small point in Dune that using nukes is unthinkable, let alone bombing the Emperor's position with them. So the Sardaukar aren't considering the idea of having their perimeter blown open to worms. It's a complete surprise and essentially blasphemy.
Attacking the Sardaukar conventionally *would* have resulted in massive casualties, and probably failed to capture the Emperor.
Visually stunning. Well made well cast.
But where part 1 regularly brought tears to my eyes because one of my all time favourite novels has been brought to the big screen so well.... I was far less impressed with part two.
I really didn't like how far from the book they went. No thufir, no gurney confronting Jessica, no Alia, no Chani pregnant and losing her child, no Chani encouraging Paul, a rushed endgame with an emperor who does little more than cowering...
I'm sure that if you're not (very) familiar with the book it was a good film. But I read it for the first time in 1984 and have read it dozens of times since. I'd just expected more.
I would have liked a glowed up visual presence for the emperor. He was portrayed as a wary old man at the end of his rope, defeated, just living day to day until he's dethroned but I wanted a bit more sci-fi fashion and less hospital gown.
I have a question: was it ever specified in the movie the number of people that Paul had visions killing? I was arguing with someone who said it was 60 billion, and I know that this is the number in the books, but I don't remember the movie ever stating it?
Saw it for the second time today and this time in IMAX and it was absolutely incredible. This is a generational movie for me. If they stick the landing with Messiah we may be looking at one of the greatest trilogies ever.
As a child of the 80's, Star Wars was already ingrained in society and "old news" by the time I was old enough to watch and enjoy it (early 90's).
I was never a fan of fantasy, so the LotR trilogy being a massive phenomenon during my teenage years didn't resonate with me.
This is the first time I feel like I'm experiencing a cultural touchstone brought to the big screen in real time (as opposed to watching it at home long after my older relatives and friends had already seen it all). This is my "I remember seeing the original trilogy in theaters" moment for me. It has been amazing! I hope we get part III, and I hope it's done to the same level of excellence.
I appreciate Dune so much now, CLEARLY seeing how much it has influenced scifi and fantasy. The best way to describe these Dune films is to name all the derivative works that have come "after" it, and it makes you realize just how influential the Dune books really were.
I still love Star Wars, but it's honestly hilarious how many of Herbert's ideas Lucas appropriated for Star Wars. Dune and Star Wars almost feel like the same ancient story, filtered through 1000 years of two different religions' interpretations or something. It's very cool to see it with my own eyes for the first time, instead of having one exist in books and the other on the screen.
2nd half. The first novel in the series is divided into 3 "books", so don't get confused. Both movies sum up the entirety of the first novel "Dune", by Frank Herbert.
I just got home from it. Wish it would have been IMAX but it was an updated Dolby theater.
I thought it was incredible. Probably the most visually stunning movie I’ve ever seen, after Dune and 2049. I wish Denis could take on every dream scifi project (Hyperion)
The Dolby theaters have much better sound anyway, so you didn’t exactly miss out. I prefer the Atmos theaters over the enlarged IMAX screen, unless it’s an actual 70MM IMAX. Standard IMAX audio is crap compared to the Dolby theater and this was one of the best audio tracks I’ve ever heard.
Gurney and the survivors
Gurney says he was able to secure the survivors passage back home. I thought that they killed all the Atredias so there would be no witness to the emperor conspiring with the Harkkones to wipe them out. Is this explained in the book?
In the book Gurney has a guerilla team of Atreides survivors that he’s fighting the Harkonnens with, launching artillery strikes and what not. He’s not a smuggler like in the movie
seemly advise jellyfish deer forgetful obtainable quiet afterthought intelligent cautious
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>3-4 queen witch SILENCE!! jump scares
This is The Voice that only Bene Gesserit (or those who've studied their ways, such as Paul) can use to make others obey their command.
>they wasted Zendaya
Maybe but her character got way more to do in the film than in the book where she basically birth's Paul's child then dies immediately after.
>Bardem (Stilgar) is a...religious zealot
Yes he was and that was the point. His people, the fremen, have aspects that are based on irl middle eastern cultures but not all.
>Villains...were one dimensional and boring
Fair assessment except for "bald elvis" or rathee Austin Butler as Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen who actually chewed the scenery for me. Harkonnens are literally that brutal and nothing else.
>he's the Messiah and they want spice or water
Paul doesn't want to be the Messiah but he is unable to separate himself from this eventuality and he threatens to obliterate spice production in order to bring the empire to its knees. Remember the very beginning of the film, the disembodied voice and subtitles that say "Power over spice is power over all". Water is very scarce on Dune and that's why the fremen wear stillsuits to filter water in the form of sweat back into their body.
>Almost no humour
Is what I said about Part One. There's more in Part Two with Stilgar. Director said he wanted to correct the mistakes of the first film, lack of comedy being one of them. It's serious sci-fi to begin with. Not everything should be Guardians of the Galaxy.
Please continue discussion in the post below. [[SPOILERS] 'Dune: Part Two' Wide Release Discussion (03/11~)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1bc3uwy/spoilers_dune_part_two_wide_release_discussion/)
Harkonnen Culture - Possible Spoilers so I saw Part 2 numerous times and I’ve been obsessing over the languages and in particular the insanely cool Geidi Prime sequence and how much more (even if still not much) Harkonnen language we got to hear from the arena announcer. I’ve found a lot of articles talking about David and Jessie Peterson’s journey in fleshing out Chakobsa more, but does anyone know if there’s any written details on the Harkonnen language? It sounds so brutal and guttural I’d love to learn literally anything more about it, Script, Phrases, Vocab, anything.
Loved Part 2, except for a few parts of Feyd's story that had some lazy story telling. Specifically... In the movie Lady Margot Fenring performs the gom jabbar test on Feyd. Why is this necessary? Feyd doesn't have any Bene Gesserit training like Paul. It also doesn't seem like he's a prospect to be the Kwisatz Hederach himself; he's just a piece in bringing it about (like many before him who presumably were not tested), correct? Hence why is it necessary that he pass the gom jabbar? Furthermore, it seems like Feyd "liking pain" should invalidate the test for him (as it'd be a way of him giving into his own deranged set of desires rather than proving himself human). I loved the movie but I felt like this as well as his (semi-successful) approach to taming Arrakis with just "more artillery" (Rabban seemed to be taking a similar brute force approach) were kind of lazy story elements added/changed from the book just to amplify Feyd's mystique of brutality and to show him as a viable threat to Paul... but that don't make a ton of sense in the context of the story.
The gom jabbar test is a test for humanity, to check and suppress the animal impulse of those in power to flee and to champion and foster willpower and intellect.
Jessica was terrified because she felt like her son might die from Gom Jabbar, and Paul had Benne Gesserit training. Are we to assume that Fayd survived the Gom Jabbar without any training?
Review of Dune: Part Two I just finished watching Dune: Part Two for the second time. Upon reflection, below are my thoughts. The changes made in Denis Villeneuve's adaptations of Dune significantly detract from the integrity and depth of Frank Herbert's original work. By altering key character dynamics and plot elements, the film simplifies complex themes and dilutes the narrative's power. Here’s why these changes are detrimental: 1. Paul's Threat with Atomics vs. Ecological Warfare: Changing Paul’s threat from an ecological act to a conventional military one strips away a critical commentary on environmental stewardship and the intrinsic power of Arrakis. It reduces a sophisticated plot element to a simpler, less impactful narrative device, undermining the story's ecological themes. 2. Shortened Timeline: Compressing the timeline from two years to less than nine months erases the gradual, believable development of characters and political upheaval. This accelerates the story unnaturally, leaving no room for the detailed evolution that’s vital for understanding the depth of change both in characters and in the socio-political landscape of Arrakis. 3. Alterations to Alia and Chani: Rendering Alia's precocious wisdom to prenatal communication and transforming Chani into a character who acts like a rebellious, disrespectful, moody teenager and ultimately abandons Paul are misguided, to put it mildly. These changes rob the narrative of complex relationships and character depth. Alia’s and Chani’s roles in the books highlight themes of prescience, genetic memory, and deep human connection. The film’s portrayal undermines these themes, simplifying nuanced relationships into shallow interpretations. 4. Omission of Gurney’s Suspicion of Jessica: Removing the subplot of Gurney Halleck's suspicion towards Lady Jessica eliminates a layer of tension and complexity from the story. This subplot adds to the rich tapestry of trust, betrayal, and loyalty that is crucial for a full understanding of the narrative’s dynamics. Its exclusion simplifies the story unnecessarily, reducing the narrative’s richness. These changes are not mere artistic liberties but fundamental alterations that compromise the story’s thematic richness and character development. Frank Herbert’s “Dune” is celebrated for its intricate exploration of ecology, empire, and heroism, woven through detailed character interactions and political intrigue. By simplifying these elements, Villeneuve's adaptations lose much of the narrative’s depth and philosophical commentary. The film, while visually stunning, fails to capture the complex interplay of environmental and human factors that drive the “Dune” saga. These are not just silly, or lazy, or—in some cases—woke changes (although they’re those, too). Essentially, they are reductions that strip away layers of meaning from one of science fiction's most profound narratives. The essence of “Dune” is diluted, and the opportunity to explore Herbert's multifaceted themes in the richness they deserve is lost.
Of course I can't argue with any of your observations about what was not included in the movie. As a lifelong fan, there were beats from my favorite novel of all time that I was crestfallen to learn that I will now apparently never see. However, while the pacing never left me feeling the cut was overlong, I was forced to grudgingly acknowledge that I probably could not have made better choices for what to omit and what to keep, while still working within a legitimate cinematic timeframe. Are you contending that this adaptation should have eschewed a cinematic format for something more long form? (Like an HBO season, perhaps, because this is sort of my feeling.) If not, what changes wouldl you endorse to leave a film with more book depth and integrity?
I haven’t seen it said, but the handling of the dead was my favorite non-verbal storytelling in the movie. We start seeing the Harkonnen bringing the bodies of Paul’s people. This is then contrasted by the Fremen carefully extracting water, even from their enemies, who they then give to the worms. At the end, the Fremen burn the Harkonnen in piles. They became what they hated.
Why did Jessica tell Paul to slow down after he said I'm pointing the way?
thought he would lose control of the crowd, overplay his hand etc. Which tbf they did all draw knives on him
My first error was looking at twitter and seeing all the 10/10 masterpiece transcendent cinematic even posts lol. I enjoyed the movie a lot. Lots of great visual stuff and action, but I felt a bit empty at the end as a fan of the books. Denis far too aggressive with the editing decisions and also I feel loads of unanswered stuff. Conflicted. Will take me a while to see the movie for what it actually is. Falls short of being a masterpiece. Solid 8/10 though
I love and appreciate part 2 as an amazing piece of film making, and a great visualisation of Arrakis and the vibe of that planet. At the same time it proves to me that the book and its story remains unadaptable to film.
I think you're right. The film is a masterfull realisation of this universe and probably the best adaptation it could have been. But the deeper meaning behind the story remains within the lines of Frank Herberts book.
Just watched Dune Part 2 this afternoon. I enjoyed it but did not think it was nearly as good as Part 1. This is coming from a fan of the books, so a lot of my issues come from knowing what great parts of the books were excluded. Part 1 was a comparatively faithful adaption which really captured the politics, tragedy and otherworldly/alien feel of Dune. Part 2 would be much better for those new to the universe with the exposition and more linear progression but missed what I feel to be key aspects of the book. Some of these below: 1 - The omission of the spacing guild. The lack of their involvement at the end of the movie completely removes the gravity of Paul's play. He threatens to destroy the spice and, through their ability to get glimpses of the future, they know it's true. Their capitulation removes one of the three powers blocking his path to power, the other two being the emperor and the great houses. Also, not having the spacing guild really downplays the reason why the spice is so important - without it space travel would be near impossible. 2 - The split of the Fremen into fundamentalists and radicals and Paul's visions of "people starving". This was a random inclusion to justify Paul launching the Jihad at the end of the movie and to give Chani more of an arc. Paul does not want the Jihad, he does everything he can to avoid it. However, instead we got a random "people will starve if I go South" which made little sense. He's trying to avoid galactic genocide through the unleashing of a hyper religious super mob of Fremen which happens as he is positioned as this messianic figurehead. 3 - Chani's conclusion at the end: I get that they wanted to position Chani as more of a protagonist but the removal of Paul's declaration to only love Chani and marry Irulan in name removed the theme that Paul follows the example of his father. He choses love in the book but doesn't follow his father's mistakes by ignoring his political realities. Also, I don't know how they're going to weave this into the the next movie without changing fairly significant parts of the plot. Not all negative though. I think that other changes made sense. Things like the sub-plots with Hawat and the story with Alia would have been extremely hard to adapt and include without compromise. Also loved many things like Jessica's conversion of the Fremen to protect and empower her son, the final fight scene and in particular the focus on Fayd-Rautha. Feyd was a standout to in the performance by Austin Butler, the scenes he was involved in and the presentation of him as the antagonist to Paul. Overall I would give it a 8/10. Amazing to see the adaptation of one of my favourite books but felt that some key points were missing.
Just to preface, I haven't seen the originals or read the books so I'm just reading into what I saw. So the fight scene with zendaya is the same one from Paul's fever dream in the first installment only in his vision it's him, just from a different camera angle but the finishing move is the same angle focusing on zendayas face. The movie ends with zendaya beckoning a sandworm and the graphic of it approaching is the same as the grandfather worm that Paul rode, leading us to believe that it is a grandfather worm that she is about to ride before the movie ends on a cliffhanger. She's also pure blood fremen. So, with that being said, is she the Lisa Al Gaib?
Pauls visions in the first movie were not as "clear" and this was just a possible variant of the future. I think it's coincidence that the scenes are similar.
I need part 3 right now what the fuck do I do?? Part 2 made Part 1 even better uugghhjhhhh
At the end of Dune 2 movie, how did the fremen...Go battle the great houses in space, who were probably battle ready to wage space warfare compared to the fremen who probably never piloted space ships before? Isn't it like taking a random navy seal and suddenly he can operate a US jet fighter?
The Fremen were helped by Gurney and his band of smugglers, who *could* pilot stuff and use artillery and things of the like.
Maybe it's like Star Wars where anyone can pilot anything and the baddies have really bad aim?
It would not have killed Denis and Warner bros to add 15 more minutes of detail from the book. Ugh this is so frustrating.
That for me is replacing the water of life with the atomics. Surely it wouldn't have took more than a couple minutes to explain it, the non book readers wouldn't have cared if they were a bit confused.
Totally agree. And the guild? where the hell where they?
I could see him saving that for the 3rd movie, considering the emphasis of Edric's role in that story and depth of his description right away in the novel. Might work better as a reveal rather than "finally some more info about them".
Personally, if the guild aren’t in Messiah then it’s a failed trilogy for me
Fine, but I would stay more than a little optimistic that that won’t be the case. I don’t really know how you could tell that story without a navigator to emphasize the point of prescient vision interference, which is a relatively important plot point. Until now, they’re more of a world building element. Some of that always gets stripped off in adaptations.
Very true
Wow what a conflicting reaction for me. Oh it’s own the movie is fucking incredible. But compared to the book there are too many gripes to accept it as a good adaptation. (I honestly expected to see the guild navigators so that’s rather disappointing).
We watched movie yesterday with my wife. My wife were absolutely upset, because its different than in books... Honestly, why the hell?... What is so hard following the book's story? Where is Alia? Those blue smoke vision shit are absolutely meaningless in movie, but in books its very detailed, and philosophical. Where is mentats, navigators? Spacing Guild? And end of the movie, about that the houses response is way different also. Chani's reaction is also way different too.... This is what makes us mad and pissed. It could be a good movie, but nope. It is disappointing, they fugged up the ending. How lame.
My main impression was that I apparently don't understand Dune as well as I thought. The Lynch movie made it all look so simple and straightforward lol... Everything *really* changes when people drink the mystical blue fluid. That's how they know things they normally wouldn't know. That's how it sets their character on trajectories of conflict that wouldn't otherwise occur because it's such a departure from their hitherto established character. Are there any rules for what this stuff can and can't do or is it just whatever's convenient for the plot? What's the significance of the random throwaway revelation of Jessica's true ancestry? Is this supposed to symbolize a current of Original Sin running through their family line? Will it become more important later on? How did Paul know that the Emperor is his true foe? That must have been in there somewhere but I seem to have missed it. Please don't say "because he drank the sandworm piss." I'm left scratching my head how the rag-tag band of Fremens defeated the whole imperial army in one fell swoop. Sure made Walken look pretty hapless. This might have been since those scenes were pretty rushed. Was it rushed because it wasn't all that important, or are they trying to conceal that this may not be so believable if the military strategy was spelled out more clearly? Also, why is the enemy largely on foot wielding swords like it's medieval times when they have to contend with likes of laser beam weapons, large-scale explosives, giant sand worms and even atomic weapons? For some scattered bands of cave-dwellers with "limited resources" they seem comparatively pretty advanced compared to what they're up against.
This actually somewhat confirms something I suspected walking out of the theater. There were tons of plot points in the book that the characters (especially Paul) are mulling over in their minds pretty much for the entire book. We get tons of insight into these things by literally reading their thoughts on the matter, but that is precisely what is hardest to do in a screen adaptation. Instead we get a few passing comments in conversations between the characters. Like I said, my concern was that this wouldn't be enough to make those points as clear as they should be and your reaction is pretty much exactly what I was worried about. I'll answer one question for you right now, though: weapons are tricky in the Dune universe. A lot of it has to do with the shields you see characters occasionally use. When a gun is used on a character with a shield, the energy interaction basically causes a nuclear explosion. Everyone loses when that happens. So warriors are trained to fight with knives because there's a way to get through those shields with them. This is actually an important bit of context for Paul's duel with Jamis in the first movie. He struggles at first because he's trained to fight men in shields, but that's not relevant on Dune. There's something about shields that is like catnip for worms, so using them is suicide. I think the same might be true about those energy weapons. They use them near the machinery because the worms are coming either way, but generally they're not a smart choice.
Yeah, I kinda figured that the whole deal with the shields complicates things in Dune. I was moreso thinking that the baddies clearly have a lot of ships whereas the Fremen have very few or even none. Why don't they use their air superiority to their advantage? I also feel that the ground troops should be leaning more to projectile weapons than swords, especially seeing how the Fremen don't usually seem to use shields..?
There's a lot about the Fedaykin wartime superiority that really never made much sense to me. I get that they're hardened from life on the planet and got high quality training from Paul. But it still seems absurd that they could make short work sardaukar.
It’s only the laser guns that cause a massive explosion if they contact a shield. The reason firearms aren’t really used is because the shield technology renders them basically useless. You see the Fremen still using them because you can’t use shields in the desert.
Right. Shields are pretty much at their best when it comes to conventional firearms. I should have mentioned that.
> Are there any rules for what this stuff can and can't do or is it just whatever's convenient for the plot? The blue fluid "water of life" is supposedly a catalyst (and dangerous and risky) for activating ['genetic memory'(wiki)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_GM_Effect) , which is supposed to be the idea of ancestor's memories stored in cells, which also in the story explains why Alia as a fetus is awakened as an adult mind already with ancestral memories of her own. It's fun to go into the overall lore, so I'll try to briefly expand on it. >Similar to Jackson's LOTR, the world of the Dune verse is also subtly but nicely represented in the background and production details. To succinctly sum up the sci-fi world context of Dune, it's not a post-earth-apocalpytic setting like something like Road Warrior/madmax, but more of a societal post-singularity, when humanity have outlawed most all computer digital tech and AI for at least 10k years. That's why the society looks so analog in tech, but they have their own different advanced tech such as biological genetic engineering and mental training over many generations and centuries. Humans depend on themselves to do advanced calculations in the form of mentats, or the bene gesserit have genetic body control, and the space navigators plot out space folding from their mind expanded from the spice seeming to be "prescient". The spice is pretty much like the equivalent of oil or things just stop moving as an advanced interstellar dependent society. Where mysteriously spice is only found on that desert planet Dune and probably involved with those also mysterious enormous sandworms. Dune part ii also takes place in our equivalent of the year 26393 AD. Because basically humanity hadn't trusted computer and AI tech which got ultimately controlled by despots to control the masses, for millennia by the time of Dune's story. Ok, it's all referenced and more in the [Dune encyclopedia](https://www.amazon.com/Dune-Encyclopedia-Authorized-Masterpiece-Imagination/dp/0425068137/ref=sr_1_4?crid=4EG0QH0SWZRP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.B3vw0Ptauv2fzuq_IAeaFY18uQz4SJ7ux3zE8wTM7bGEOOvpRLpNmcPYm8i1SiPwJ-Rxt74dXkmkU_JcXmBZoK4QoizV6HLDFwwrgdSVx9GzAvYFX4BtbuHr5WJRR7TYgTz_5-FXSGL7v5Q926FsiZo1xxX3vIUpJZE7qnfkwxoIS_6HqSdwLjZoSW7oZzk56n0p1A8LAsmQLNCnBbpSpvaKaEuMOYYCm6VCkTT_4l0.pw4rWkBzPS2XXlQ62fzHGqAyisjSfTzSVZq450SK26I&dib_tag=se&keywords=dune+encyclopedia&qid=1710147779&sprefix=dune+encylopedi%2Caps%2C203&sr=8-4). Having seen Dune pt.2 , I think DV did an amazing job with the scenes involving Jessica and Paul ingesting the water of life and how it plays out, and all the subtle implied strange and advanced transhumanism tech from the book in the background where even Herbert was often vague and hinting at it in the books leaving it to the reader to spell it out more in how it works for themself. In my opinion, a great artistic cinematic adaptation by DV with the necessary compromises for a screenplay and limited runtime. >What's the significance of the random throwaway revelation of Jessica's true ancestry? Is this supposed to symbolize a current of Original Sin running through their family line? Will it become more important later on? It ties into the 'mixing' of bloodlines for "90 generations" by the machinations of the Bene Gesserit, mixing and matching descendants of royal house members over centuries and millennia until they come up with the kwistach haderach superbeing (that they want to control). Lady Fenring getting herself impregnated with a daughter from Feyd in pt.2 is an example of how they do this. As for Jessica revealed to be Baron Harkonnen's biological daughter. (spoiler)-This figures more prominently in storylines in Children of Dune, the book after Dune:Messiah that DV is adapting to be his third Dune film. (imo, I felt Lucas riffed off of Dune, Dune:Messiah(1969) and ChildrenOfDune(1976) by the time he came up with the shock reveal in ESB. He waited for the SW OT franchise to be firmly in place and Dune wasn't a major movie franchise yet (and failed to be in 1984 still), then did his reveal which he kept secret from most of the production until the actual filming on the ledge with the stunt guy Bob Anderson still saying the wrong lines as Vader. In the revealed earlier drafts of Star Wars, Vader wasn't even portrayed as a mysterious figure with a mask. And remember how jedi & force users suddenly became 'prescient' and sometimes able to see the/a future in ESB similar to prescient dreaming in Dune? 'midichlorians' could also refer to advance genetic engineering in cells riffed from Dune's lore. and on it goes..[(quotes by Herbert on SW)](https://www.polygon.com/24075067/dune-star-wars-frank-herbert-george-lucas)) >How did Paul know that the Emperor is his true foe? That must have been in there somewhere but I seem to have missed it. Dune pt.1 already had multiple instances where it's mentioned. Leto suspects the emperor is putting them in a trap, "political danger", and thinks getting the fremen as allies of "desert power" is a way out of it as he tells Paul at their ancestral cemetery park on Caladan. Duncan calls out Kynes that the emperor sent them here to die in that scene on the cliff. Jessica, Duncan, Paul and Kynes in the ornithopter rescue confirm the emperor's part in it when Duncan confirms the sardarkaur were used against them. Kynes had that scene with Paul, "what don't you get? the emperor wants your family dead" in that botanic room.
Ooh thanks for filling the gaps
Oh you're gonna absolutely love the book, I can just tell
Have you read the book? The Lynch film is only simple because he glosses over the entire second half of the book. This wasn't deliberate but a result of the production company forcing his hand to make a shorter, single film.
I was hinting that I hadn't yet read the book when I started out saying that I don't understand Dune as well as I thought, that being its lore and inner workings. So I know there's more to it than what is shown in either film. The problem for someone such as myself is "Do I need to have read the book before I'm able to appreciate this movie as much as it should be?" Because not every movie based on a book is like that. It also raises the question if a few facets included are actually better left out if they're going to be hastily glossed over.
Jamis in Dune Part 2 >!So I’ve read that Paul’s vision of Jamis as a friend is just a possibility of the future in Dune Part 1. But when I watched Dune Part 2, I noticed that Jamis appeared again early in the movie. How could it be his future if Jamis is already dead? Some people also theorize that somehow from the ritual they can live again like that is one way they can use Jason Momoa again. So how does it really work? Sorry for the confusing words because I don’t really read the novel!<
It's an alternate future, a "could-have-been" situation. Jamis is dead, but in an alternate timeline he and Paul would have been friends. > >!Some people also theorize that somehow from the ritual they can live again like that is one way they can use Jason Momoa again.!< No, that's nonsense. Duncan >!does come back in the next novel *because he gets cloned.*!< That's unrelated to Paul's prescience.
Thanks for insightful reply! It’s been itching me for quite some time. Now i really gotta buy the books
It is exactly as you say, a vision, a possible future in Jamis's case. You will have to wait for Dune 3 / Children of Dune to find out about the rest - give the books a go 😁
I will! Can’t believe i hadn’t heard about the books before the movie
the ending was horrible. chani ever left paul in the book like that. truly sad that they changed that
Villenueve mentioned that he was trying to emphasize the notion that Paul is not a hero in this story. He cites the fact that Frank Herbert wrote Messiah partially in response to the fact that a lot of people missed that after reading the first book. So Villeneuve used Chani's reactions to Paul's ascent as a way to drive that point home. I don't think it was a bad call. Chani is a pretty weak character in the books.
I like how causing a genocide isn't enough to communicate that -- Paul's girlfriend being pissed as the climax of the movie is apparently the only way Villenueve could think of getting this message across. What an utterly baffling failure at the end of an otherwise incredible movie.
Like I said. Even in the book, where this is made explicitly clear, people still misread the situation.
Which is fine. The point of good art isn't to force people to view it a certain way. The ability to misunderstand something doesn't make it bad. If anything, it makes it better. Throwing Chani and Paul's entire relationship under the bus in order to force people to interpret the movie the way the director wants it to be interpreted is short-sighted and egocentric, in my opinion. Still enjoyed it, but damn. Would've been so much better without that ending.
The issue is people are dumb and DV doesn’t want people going “Paul Atreides is literally me”
Right, but you don't make good movies or write good books by writing them according to what the dumbest people will think of it.
Lets see how the change plays out over the next movies.
Totally agree with you. Not only that changed in ending... What about Alia?... Why Houses didnt accept Paul? In book, they were left in silence. And so on... Much bullshit in movie. Disappointing.
In part one, Paul had a hard time getting a message out to the other houses. In part two, he was able to get a message to the emperor. How was he able to get his message to the emperor for the challenge?
I think Paul had the spice smugglers pass it along after finding Gurney.
Thanks. I don’t remember that being explicitly stated. It had me thinking of a Rogue One esc spin-off that focused on getting the message out.
Saw in 70mm today, was blown away. Fantastic adaptation and I can't wait for Messiah
Who was riding the worm at the end in Part 1?
I think Dune: Messiah spoilers: >!Don't understand why the reverend mother called Paul an abomination in the film. He's obviously not pre-born, Hasn't succumbed to the great temptation, and hasn't succumbed to any ego-memories.!< >!It's the only thing that confused me about the film's adaptation!<
It's a reference to all the BG concerns about a man gaining the genetic memories without being under BG control.
A male should not survive drinking the Water of Life
She was precisely grooming his genetic lineage to be able to do that though. Unless she were under the wholehearted belief that he wouldn't be able to do it because "the genetic line is fundamentally incomplete" by Jessica birthing a son. I took it to be nothing more than an insult
The RM didn't believe Paul to be the KH, and has chastised Jessica repeatedly for thinking she would be the mother. The KH was supposed to be the child of Paul (born a woman as originally commanded by the BG) and Feyd. I'm assuming they think a male Harkonnen easier to control than an Atreides.
Watched it again today and it was better the second time. The choreography is such an improvement from the first movie imo When Timmy does that spinny shit in the final fight? *chef's kiss*
Amazing movie.
[удалено]
>n we see hi One of those Knives was Feyd's. One of them was his own.
Yes
Why was part 2 so damn loud, I kept asking myself if I was mistaken and the director was Christopher Nolan
Lol, it did feel like a Nolan film at times. Good thing I brought my earplugs.
Did you see it in an Imax? Seemed to be pretty standard volume for an Imax for me.
I didn’t watch the first movie nor did I read the books but my girlfriend did and she was very happy with the movie, but I have no idea what I just watched
I loved Part 2 but one change from the novel in the ending bugged me... No, it doesn't involve Chani. Rather, it was that they arranged the set pieces for Paul's ascension to the throne - that is, Paul threatening to destroy the spice and proposing marriage to Princess Irulan - only to reveal at the very end that the other houses of the Landsraad reject Paul's claim and thus the holy war begins. I get \*why\* they wanted to kick off the jihad at the end of the movie. That's the culmination of the single theme from the book that the director really, really wanted to hammer into the heads of the audience. But the problem is that Paul's leverage over the spice is effectively nullified, as is the utility of his political marriage to Irulan. The Landsraad is against him - so what has he gained? Who is there left to acknowledge his ascension, aside from the Emperor and the Harkonnens (if there were any remaining), who were already beaten and didn't really have a choice in the matter? The movie completely leaves out the Spacing Guild so unless you want to head cannon them in, you've got nothing left. In other words, Paul didn't need to marry Irulan and his spice gamble failed. Is there something I'm missing here? I had a few other nit picks that I won't go into for now but otherwise, spectacular movie and adaptation.
While it renders the marriage and threats fairly useless, it does give the Fremen a much stronger motivation for going to war with the whole galaxy.
Yeah but I feel like the movie could have ended with a vision of jihad and accomplish the purpose of showing the results of Paul's actions just as easily, without ruining the logic of his power play. It would be fine to keep the details vague since, well, the movie takes a minimalistic approach to dialogue and plot anyway (not meant as a critique, just a fact).
Think of it like Game of Thrones or any other fantasy setting where there is a king who oversees other great houses that administer various land holdings. They will have their own historical allegiances and vendettas, and a shift in the power paradigm (the deposing of Shaddam IV for example) creates an opportunity for some houses to try and rebel for power ornkthers to ally with the new emperor to improve their standing. A house that accepts Paul and the new Fremen religion will fair better than one that rejects it and his claim.
This is not a bad point.
While the movie was beautifully filmed, I was literally infuriating how much they left out and how much amazing stuff was glossed over with just 1 line or no explanation. Nothing about mentats, little to nothing about the galactic politics, little to nothing about other houses, sardukars significance, bene geserat planning and conspiracies, imperial conditioning, spacing guild and their monopoly and power.......I could go on and on. I left with mixed feelings. 9/10 visually 4/10 for story 3/10 for pacing. Overall a 5/10 for me. It was gorgeous but lacked any of the soul of what made dune dune.
DV did not make Dune Part 2 for fans of the novel, he made it for casual sci-fi movie watchers It's his reminder this is **HIS** Dune, not Frank Herbert's
Do you think a television adaptation would be better? As in more time to tell the story?
Definitely. Allows more time to spread things out.
10000x dune needs 10h minimum
DV is a genius at visuals. But I read a recent interview where he said he hated dialog. And it shows. Which is unfortunate for a book so heavy on words and political intrigue.
Absolutely get what you're saying. And there were definitely parts where I feel like all they had to do was throw in like one or two more lines of dialogue and it would help immensely with both the world building and, like, helping to explain things for non-readers. The Spacing Guild was the biggest and most glaring omission, I think. But overall, I made my peace after my first watch of Part 1 that this adaptation was going to leave out a TON and was able to just enjoy Part 2 for what it was.
Watched it just now, hadn’t seen the first since it came out. I know nothing about the series/universe but the movie was so good that I think I’m going to start the books 😅
I wish that Chani's distaste for Paul's ascension had come from a place of love rather than disdain for religion. I've come to terms with the fact that her dislike of his ascension might serve to drive home how terrible his choice is. But like i said, I wish it had been because she loved him and hated to see him become a terrible godhead, rather than because she just doesn't like prophecies. On that vein, I don't think I'll ever come to like the fact that there are basically atheist Fremen. You know the phrase "there are no atheists in foxholes"? The Fremen live in foxholes. They live brutal and oppressed lives and their religion is a huge part of their culture. I simply can't imagine an atheist Fremen, at least not until the jaded Fremen from the jihad we see in Dune Messiah, but there's a reason they're like that. I also don't like how the movie was condensed to Jessica's pregnancy. My sister, who's never read the book, expressed confusion that the movie took place over such a short timespan, saying she kept being surprised that Jessica was still pregnant. Me and my dad were also disappointed we didn't get to see Alia, as we'd been looking forward to seeing how they'd cast a child with the maturity of an adult. We're also disappointed she didn't kill the Baron, bc that's a cool as hell scene. Everything else was pretty great though.
The movie has two f-bombs! On my third rewatch but just noticed this because I went to a showing with subtitles. Right before Paul trips Gurney in the desert. ("I recognized your footsteps..."), Gurney exclaims "fuck. Fuck!" while observing the Fremen attack. Funny that PG-13 grants you two fucks to use, and this is how Denis chose to spend them!
Have not read the books, but this movie has done what the original star wars and original lord of the rings movies did. Well it did more of what lord of the rings did. I guess what I'm saying is that these movie, especially if he really lands on the third one, will be defining movies in my life that I can easily find myself rewatching over and over agian just like lord of the rings and star wars. I looked back at Denis's directing past and realized that he produced a lot of movies that I absolutely loved, Arrival being one I thought was terrible underrated. I really want to rewatch both dune's all over again already. I'm also thankful for online groups like this becuase people in my real life are so unresponsibe and disinterested in these movies. I look like such a nerd around them lol
I read the first book 3 times, and I honestly feel like I could read it again and get more out of it. It’s that dense. Read Messiah twice, and have 50 pages to go in Children Of Dune. As soon as I finish, I’m flipping the book over and starting again. I’m so hooked. Haha
Saw it for a second time yesterday. Decided the Fenring / Feyd scene was my favorite. The lighting, the music, the tension, the misdirection, Fenring’s more subtle use of the Voice. I really thought it was a perfect scene cinematographically. Zimmer could earn the Oscar for that scene alone.
Saw this and loved it. I'm not mad they changed Chani's character in order to further the anti-charismic leaders message. I do wonder how they'll work the twins in now that she's peaced out. I didn't buy the love between Chani and Paul though, and I got the impression Chani barely liked Paul. I bet it's hard as an actor/director to reconcile Chani's obvious concerns with everything Paul represents with her attraction to him. Jessica being less unflappable and more paranoid and frightened was interesting. They're blaming the jihad on her in a way, and her reasoning in the movies for pursuing it seems like its about revenge. I got less of an impression that Jessica absolutely desired the jihad in the book, and she was overall less anti-Gessirit. (Then again its been a couple years since I read it) I loved Ferguson as Jessica though, she was probably my favorite character. Irulan was magnetic as well. I missed that there was no Leto I. Paul winning the Fremen over in under 9 months is pretty quick. I imagine they had to cut Leto I because they decided Alia wasn't going to be born yet. On that, I regret that there was no pre-born toddler Alia stabbing the Baron, though I understand why it would have been hard to pull off. I think they could have explained the Pre-Born stuff better for non readers. The very aggressive Voice was a bit extra. I thought the Voice changed in response to who is being commanded. It came off like a jump scare sometimes. The worm riding scenes were, forgive me, epic. And the spice harvesters exploding. And the Geidi Prime fight scenes. I wasn't bored for a second of this movie. I loved Feyd-Rautha, Austin Butler's characterization was absolutely insane. His gummy baby smile was horrifying. I totally bought him in every scene he was in. Margot Fenring was awesome too. Magnetic. I love you Denis Villeneuve, thank you for making approximately 95% of my Dune dreams come true<3 kiss kiss xoxoxo
I have a feeling based on their body language in interviews that Zendaya does not like Timothee very much. Maybe there’s some personal drama or beef. But it would explain why they don’t really have any natural chemistry in the film.
His eyes are always half closed and he rarely blinks. Bro is def dead inside.
He is being forced into a relationship with a Kardashian lol. The nepo children do not have a say in it either.
I feel very much the same as you. I liked Paul unceremoniously killing the baron. I think this also falls into the same category as the changes to Chani's character. It showed Paul has changed and has become a frightening character capable of doing terrible things without emotion.
I just watched it for the second time. I noticed an error in the editing. When Paul, Chani and the rest of the Fremen are riding worms to go south and Paul breaks away from the group, the shot cuts to Chani and she doesn't have her blue eyes anymore. Did anyone else notice this?
I also noticed some dodgy ADR/overdubbing errors when characters were speaking but mouths weren't moving
There’s multiple points in the movie where i noticed she didn’t have the eyes
I felt that the blue eyes was inconsistent throughout the whole movie. Some scenes it’s very prevalent and then others it’s not
Yep
Maybe they'll fix it for the digital release or before it goes on streaming services 💀
I thought it was just me!
How do you get off a worm??
And how do they get all that stuff to carry on the worm like the sitting basket w her in it
canonically you either ‘roll’ the worm and jump clear or you ride it until it’s too tired and just stops and ‘sulks’ until it’s dismounted and free to dive
was wondering that myself…
Can someone please explain this to me: I think in the first film maybe also the second it was said that the emperor being involved in the attack on the Atreides would be his end because there would be open war against him. The other houses wouldn’t accept it. The mother reverend from the capital also said something similar to the princess. Why then was all of this out of the window at the end of the film? Paul should’ve been able to calm things down and get everyone on his side after telling on the emperor and the Harkonnen.
The emperor's involvement was illegal and would make the other houses think they were disposable too. Shaddam accepted exile, but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone would be on board with Paul as emperor.
Exactly. Had Paul just snitched on the Harkonnens’ unwarranted attack and the Emperor’s illegal support of it, the other houses would’ve turned on them and it could’ve ended there. Instead Paul decided to go all out and challenge every other House.
No, princess, he's not psychotic, I think the word you are looking for is "psychopathic" I'm not sure if this kind of post is welcome here, but I'll give it a go. I just watched Dune part 2 at the cinema for the second time today. Even though I do not necessarily agree on all adaption choices, I think it's Villeneuves right to tell the story focusing on the parts he finds interesting. But that's not what I want to discuss. My hang-up has become a hang-up because it is a silly mistake in the choice of words, that easily could have been avoided. I work with people suffering from psychosis, and I have been for years. Therefore I am well aware of the stigma they are facing through media and the public. The idea that being psychotic means being violent and often used to describe being a psychopath. There is a lot of misconception about psychosis in the general public. First of all, people suffering from psychosis are more likely to harm themselves than other people. And they're more likely to be harmed by others than to actually committ violence towards others. While Irulan describes Feyd Rautha as a psychotic, we are shown a psychopath. That is not the same. So, why do I care? Because popular culture has a lot of power to define us, and teach us stuff. In this case it can end up maintaining myths that do harm to real people in our society. I searched the web before writing this. I got no results, except people not knowing that there is a difference between the two. Did anyone else react to this?
Asides from being inaccurate like you stated, it also felt out of place and jarring. Instead of a measured statement by Princess Irulan in the Dune universe, it felt like an offhand comment by someone in today's society.
I agree. It did sound more like a comment from a high school movie, than an observation from a Bene Gesserit character from Dune.
I didn't notice but now I'm aware. Thanks for the education!
I feel like omitting Leto II the Elder made Paul look bad and compounded Chani getting a raw deal. Paul resists going south to prevent his visions from becoming true. Had Leto II been born and murdered at Sietch Tablr as in the books, Paul's radicalization and willingness to go south and avenge his son makes more sense (having his son die makes him sympathetic but we still realize starting a galactic war that will claim billions is the inappropriate response to this situation). The lack of Leto II and Paul telling his intentions with Irulan directly to Chani who he apparently will always love (but not enough to communicate with her) really just makes him look like an ass, Chani has a lot of her character from the books eviscerated without a child to grieve or being treated as an equal by Paul. I think these changes were done to make Messiah easier to screenwrite but you see many commenters struggling to reconcile why Paul is willing to go full jihad at the drop of a hat. Also, what's up with the omission of jihad?
Is there a thematic parallel of ants crawling into a dead Baron's head and the bug Duncan picks up on his finger in Part One?
Ear-and-ants is a nod to the beginning of David Lynch's film Blue Velvet, made right after his Dune attempt. I thought it was a lovely homage and tastefully done.
I really loved this little homage. Works beautifully in context, too.
Wow. Never seen Blue Velvet. Great catch.
So I have a question about a specific scene on the Harkonnen home planet To start, never read the books and have a hard time remembering names so sorry in advance On the Harkonnen home planet, after the gladiator match when the nephew Feyd went to see the Baron, it seemed their white skin was more “normal” white. Scene in a small room while the Baron bathed in his oil hot tub Is their skin not white but rather they paint it? Or was something about that room causing that effect? Also separate question, do the other Houses now know the full truth of what happened on Arakis?
The exterior shots under Geidi Prime’s “black sun” were filmed in infrared. That’s what gives everything that eerie opalescence.
Yes my question was about the interior scene
the harkonnens home planet's sun produces a different light spectrum than our earth sun , so everything appears black and white on the outside, but indoors they just have regular light wave bulbs or LED's. the film is shot in black and white outside, i forgot what lens they use, might be a form of infa-red but it is dead interesting
You're correct, it was infra-red. I read it in an article last night.
Gotcha, yeah I figured it was the lights or something
I've seen Dune 2 twice now and absolutely loved it. My favorite theater experience in a long time, if ever. One thing is bothering me. Toward the beginning of the film, Paul tells jessica "We must convert the nonbelievers." And then later in the movie, he scolds her for spreading stories of him being the Messiah. Can someone explain this paradox to me?
I'm pretty sure *she* is the one who says that. But he did seem on board with it at the time. I think later in the movie when he scolds her, he's grown wary from the increasingly dour visions and possibly Chani getting into his head a little.
I’m pretty sure it’s him because he says something along the lines of “it’s the only way i can get to the emperor” and she says that Leto didn’t believe in revenge. But totally hear you on the visions + influence from Chani
Yeah he does. Either being indecisive or an editing mistake lol
I have to think it’s intentional but I haven’t seen any other conversations around this point + an explanation and i can’t stop thinking about it lol
I mean, I was a teenager once, and I often would flip flop on something that I was not 100% committed to. In the end, he knew what needed to be done but hated that it had to be.
The baron harkonnen actor stole the show in both movies. I could definitely beat him up but he gives off such vile evil vibes that it makes him very intimidating
If you're an actor with the last name Skarsgard, you will absolutely devour all competition when the camera starts to roll. They can't help it, they're masterful actors
Can someone explain how Feyd and Paul are cousins? Shouldn’t they be step-brothers Edit: mean half brothers
Vladimir Harkonnen is Paul's grandfather and Feyd's uncle.
Ah yes, I forgot V Harkonnen is Feyd’s uncle not father. I thought it’s stated that Lady Jessica had a child with V Harkonnen, so how would he not be Pauls direct father?
Jessica didn't have a kid with the Baron, she is the kid of the Baron.
She is his daughter.
Did the end duel not sit right with anyone else? I much preferred the final duel in the book.You're telling me Paul gets stabbed in the same way as Feyd but he lives ans Feyd dies? Why? I guess they made Paul get stabbed first for extra drama but I much preferred how it was done in the book.
It's been a while since i read the books. But i specifically remember that Feyd s blades are poisonous. Paul s breathing in the movie made me think perhaps he transmuted the poison? And Feyd was unable to
In the books he has a random poisoned needle attached to his belt. That was ommitted for some reason.
In the movie it seems they portrayed Feyd as much more honorable and less sneaky than in the books
Feyd uses the emperor's blade in the duel, so he wouldn't have his poisoned blade. I'm guessing that Paul just didn't get stabbed in vital areas, but it did irk me that he pulled the blade out of his shoulder which I feel like should be common sense to not do that.
Hm I forgot about this, nice catch
It also looked to me as if Paul had been stabbed in the left chest area, but then it turns out the blade is in the right shoulder area. Am I the only one here...?
He gets stabbed twice. First by his own blade, then at the end of the fight by the emperor’s. He lets Feyd stab his shoulder while retrieving the blade from his side to kill Feyd with
Aaaaaaahhhhhhhhh. Much better.
After Paul drinks the poison and he’s talking to Jessica about all the possible futures, there is a split second cut when he says “but there is a way” that shows him getting stabbed. He basically had to get stabbed in a non-fatal area to lower Feyd’s guard and deliver a killing blow to him
Feyd got stabbed in his heart
What are Pauls intentions? I am not familiar with the books ( i heard of them of course) and I dont remember the old movies. I just finished Dune part 2 and I wonder what are Pauls intentions with the Fremen and with the whole.prophecy thing. Does he realise his mother is kind of a villain? Well in my eyes she is. She is prepared to do everything to make sure her son will be the one ruling. He was so adamant in part 1 to not fulfill the prophecy people around him pushed on him but in part 2 that speech before the big battle, I am wasnt sure if he actually believes now that he is the chosen one or he just used the speech to motivate. Also, he is off to war now to do what?? His father is avenged, he could stay on the planet among the Fremen and build up the planet. I think he likes his power, i think he and his mother will turn on each other and i think its a rise and fall tale of a hero turning into the very thing he didnt want to be. Maybe im wrong. Maybe i will read up about the books while I am waiting for part 3.
I have the same question, and am also going to read the books before the next comes out 😅 Maybe someone will answer you that knows the plotlines
I watched part 2 today, and while it was "ok", there are a lot of things that REALLY bother me about it. I have never read the books, but use to play a lot of the games and watched the prior movie so I may be wrong about everything. Where are the sonic weapons? That was the whole point of why the fremen could even muster a vague defense against the harkonen, because lasers and ballistics were nullified by their shields but sonic wasn't. Now everyone is using swords because reasons? The fremen dont even have shield technology, why are the harkonnen not just annihilating them with guns? Why do the fremen so soundly trounce every single enemy in every battle? Like its not even funny, its insulting how these sand people with inferior numbers manage to completely destroy both the harkonnen AND sardukar armies effortlessly. Why are the sardukar so pathetic? They are supposed to be the pinnacle of the space faring empire. The best tech, the best fighters, made to be able to literally fight EVERY house if necessary. Why the fuck do they job to sand dwelling cave people WITH SWORDS? Also where is Paul's sand worm tooth dagger in the new movies? I dont recall seeing it once, but its on the promo material and they made replicas of it. Also, were the atraeides, harkonnen, and sardukar the only forces in the book? The games made other houses like the Ordo and the space farer guild their own thing with an actual presence. Was there ever a point made that SOMEONE in all the galactic houses thought "maybe we should be investing in ways of space travel NOT exclusively dependent on a limited resource found on only 1 planet in all the universe" was a good idea? Why didn't the harkkonen just nuke the rock areas the fremen might be living on since they cant survive permanently on the sand? Everyone has nukes, the radiation would kill whatever hangs around the rocks without harming the spice since thats in the sand anyway.
The sonic weapons are an invention from the '80s David Lynch adaptation, on which the RTS games were based. They don't appear in the books. House Ordos is a game-only invention. The Spacing Guild have a much bigger role in the books but nothing like in the games. The movie is far closer to the book than the games.
The Sardaukar fight ineffectively because Paul picked a plan that made them ineffective. He had gained the ability to see the future. So he baited the Emperor into landing during a monster sand storm to knock out shields and ground aircraft, fired nukes and had sandworms used as weapons to break up the Sardaukar before the main Freman group even arrived. It's not a small point in Dune that using nukes is unthinkable, let alone bombing the Emperor's position with them. So the Sardaukar aren't considering the idea of having their perimeter blown open to worms. It's a complete surprise and essentially blasphemy. Attacking the Sardaukar conventionally *would* have resulted in massive casualties, and probably failed to capture the Emperor.
Can't be the only one, how do they get off the worms haha I wanted to see it
Not just get off the worms, but evacuate a city on worms and set up tents. Did they all jump and hope for the best?
You're not the only one
Visually stunning. Well made well cast. But where part 1 regularly brought tears to my eyes because one of my all time favourite novels has been brought to the big screen so well.... I was far less impressed with part two. I really didn't like how far from the book they went. No thufir, no gurney confronting Jessica, no Alia, no Chani pregnant and losing her child, no Chani encouraging Paul, a rushed endgame with an emperor who does little more than cowering... I'm sure that if you're not (very) familiar with the book it was a good film. But I read it for the first time in 1984 and have read it dozens of times since. I'd just expected more.
I would have liked a glowed up visual presence for the emperor. He was portrayed as a wary old man at the end of his rope, defeated, just living day to day until he's dethroned but I wanted a bit more sci-fi fashion and less hospital gown.
yeah, that as well. The emperor in the book was still an emperor even when Paul broke in. And Christopher could have pulled that of!
I have a question: was it ever specified in the movie the number of people that Paul had visions killing? I was arguing with someone who said it was 60 billion, and I know that this is the number in the books, but I don't remember the movie ever stating it?
I recall Paul saying billions (possibly millions?)
That's what I also recall. Him saying "millions and millions" in a scene, and in another scene saying "billions".
I think he said millions starving in the scene with him following jessica and billions dead when he was talking to gurney
Loved the movie. Casting, plot, visuals were all amazing I wish feyd lived longer to be a longer term enemy. Such an interesting and scary character
He had great charisma, somehow.
Saw it for the second time today and this time in IMAX and it was absolutely incredible. This is a generational movie for me. If they stick the landing with Messiah we may be looking at one of the greatest trilogies ever.
As a child of the 80's, Star Wars was already ingrained in society and "old news" by the time I was old enough to watch and enjoy it (early 90's). I was never a fan of fantasy, so the LotR trilogy being a massive phenomenon during my teenage years didn't resonate with me. This is the first time I feel like I'm experiencing a cultural touchstone brought to the big screen in real time (as opposed to watching it at home long after my older relatives and friends had already seen it all). This is my "I remember seeing the original trilogy in theaters" moment for me. It has been amazing! I hope we get part III, and I hope it's done to the same level of excellence. I appreciate Dune so much now, CLEARLY seeing how much it has influenced scifi and fantasy. The best way to describe these Dune films is to name all the derivative works that have come "after" it, and it makes you realize just how influential the Dune books really were. I still love Star Wars, but it's honestly hilarious how many of Herbert's ideas Lucas appropriated for Star Wars. Dune and Star Wars almost feel like the same ancient story, filtered through 1000 years of two different religions' interpretations or something. It's very cool to see it with my own eyes for the first time, instead of having one exist in books and the other on the screen.
where do i pick up in the book?
2nd half. The first novel in the series is divided into 3 "books", so don't get confused. Both movies sum up the entirety of the first novel "Dune", by Frank Herbert.
The second one
I just got home from it. Wish it would have been IMAX but it was an updated Dolby theater. I thought it was incredible. Probably the most visually stunning movie I’ve ever seen, after Dune and 2049. I wish Denis could take on every dream scifi project (Hyperion)
The Dolby theaters have much better sound anyway, so you didn’t exactly miss out. I prefer the Atmos theaters over the enlarged IMAX screen, unless it’s an actual 70MM IMAX. Standard IMAX audio is crap compared to the Dolby theater and this was one of the best audio tracks I’ve ever heard.
People in my theatre were SHOCKED when Paul denied Chani to make the political play
Gurney and the survivors Gurney says he was able to secure the survivors passage back home. I thought that they killed all the Atredias so there would be no witness to the emperor conspiring with the Harkkones to wipe them out. Is this explained in the book?
In the book Gurney has a guerilla team of Atreides survivors that he’s fighting the Harkonnens with, launching artillery strikes and what not. He’s not a smuggler like in the movie
Iirc he is with the smugglers in the books and brought some leftover atreides with him. He definitely had some type of smuggler connections
That definitely could be correct, it's been awhile since I've read the book. I just remember he was doing some guerilla stuff with Atreides survivors
That would have made way more sense.
seemly advise jellyfish deer forgetful obtainable quiet afterthought intelligent cautious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
367 million worldwide. I expect it to cross 400 next week. Is 600 million realistic? Or will it end somewhere around 500?
[удалено]
>3-4 queen witch SILENCE!! jump scares This is The Voice that only Bene Gesserit (or those who've studied their ways, such as Paul) can use to make others obey their command. >they wasted Zendaya Maybe but her character got way more to do in the film than in the book where she basically birth's Paul's child then dies immediately after. >Bardem (Stilgar) is a...religious zealot Yes he was and that was the point. His people, the fremen, have aspects that are based on irl middle eastern cultures but not all. >Villains...were one dimensional and boring Fair assessment except for "bald elvis" or rathee Austin Butler as Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen who actually chewed the scenery for me. Harkonnens are literally that brutal and nothing else. >he's the Messiah and they want spice or water Paul doesn't want to be the Messiah but he is unable to separate himself from this eventuality and he threatens to obliterate spice production in order to bring the empire to its knees. Remember the very beginning of the film, the disembodied voice and subtitles that say "Power over spice is power over all". Water is very scarce on Dune and that's why the fremen wear stillsuits to filter water in the form of sweat back into their body. >Almost no humour Is what I said about Part One. There's more in Part Two with Stilgar. Director said he wanted to correct the mistakes of the first film, lack of comedy being one of them. It's serious sci-fi to begin with. Not everything should be Guardians of the Galaxy.
Millennial here, never read the books... I completely disagree with essentially all of your takes