Dune Nerds review Dune 2
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- Coach Lee (regular Dune nerd) and Coach Nicole (HUGE Dune nerd) give us their thoughts on the latest Dune movie.
Want to train with us from anywhere in the world? Check out our online program! -www.bloodandiron.ca/online
Check out our Patreon if you'd like to support our work :) / bloodandironhema
Or Buy Us a Coffee www.buymeacoffee.com/bloodand...
If you are looking to join our in person classes and would like more information and pricing please email us at info@bloodandiron.com
You can find our discord server here / discord
100% agree with your review.
Chani is supposed to be supportive figure following the steps of her father (Dr. Liet Kynes project of terraforming)...
so an gardener and motherly figure. Beautiful female character!
But you can't have that in the "modern" cinema.
They had to make her "boss babe strong independent"...
Half way through the movie I cringed so hard every time she appeared on screen.
Like wtf???
Don't they realize how sexist they are for insisting that the only type of strength is male strength?
interesting.
I am surprised to hear you welcome more battle scenes. Those should have been depicted as either formation fighting or medieval skirmishes, but instead we got the same cheesy hack and slash tropes, overplayed and has dominated the cinema landscape simply because the flourishes has better tempo for today's audience.
It is unfortunate Denis Villeneuve's Dune did not break away from those tropes.
I need to actually watch the first movie yet...
I( disagree about the final fight - the movie makes it look like Paul and Feyd-Rautha were evenly matched, but the book makes it very clear that Paul was a vastly superior fighter while Feyd-Rautha relied on poisoning his blade, and he STILL only managed to scratch Paul. The fight in the book was slow and uneventful, but for some reason, Villeneuve just *had to* have the stupid Hollywood boss fight at the end :(
Diversity of thought among the Fremen is entirely believable. Chani serves as an avatar for the audience, which allows them to see that Paul and Jessica are manipulating the Fremen to achieve their goals. Paul left Chani in the dark when it comes to the decisions he ended up making, so her reactions are entirely justified. Her storming off at the end doesn't mean that her relationship with Paul is broken forever. After taking the water of life Paul says, when referring to Chani "she'll come to understand, I've seen it". Before the duel Chani says to Paul "this isn't over yet". Paul vs Feyd was awesome. I felt every punch and stab. Timothée Chalamet's depiction of Paul Atreides/Muad'Did in this film was flawless. He's conflicted because going south means that billions will die in his name. The destruction of Sietch Tabr and his inability to predict it, along with the visions of Chani and Jamis is what lead him to take the water of life and embrace the prophesy of the Lisan al Gaib. Where's Alia?? Alia is in her mother's womb, talking to her mother. She also appeared as an adult in one Paul's visions. Where are the Mentats?? They died in part one. Rabban's death is not clearly stated in the novel.
Dune 2!!! 🎉 🌌🌏🌎🌐🗡🏜🎉🗡 🚀 🌟 💪!! Blood & Iron!!!
Modernized Chani behaves like a Lois Lane that dates Superman while publishing articles about a Kryptonian threat.
I got a heavy dislike when a movie company let pepole change a story for personal and political reasons. It´s ok to change things for it to work as a movie. But if you buy the rights to adapt a book to a movie. Why then change the parts that made it a good story.
I was getting the kind of vibes you're confirming in your review just from watching the previews and clips of the first movie. Not as strongly as you describe them in the second installment, but the undertone was there. Which makes me sad, because, in so many *other* ways, these two Dune movies get things right.
Even "minor" things like the ornithopters. No other version of Dune I've seen got them right. They were vectored-thrust craft in the SyFy version, for example. The giant, mechanical dragonflies in this version are what I've been trying to see every time I've read the book. Or the fact that the Guild Highliners are not so subtly styled after Sandworms. And the sense that the tech we're seeing is not so much understood (the way we today might understand the basic concepts of how a cell phone or a car work), but rote-learned, its operation almost ritualized.
I would love to go see these movies on a big screen. But I know my tolerance of how modern socio-political values are being injected into so many movies is far too low for me to tolerate spending the money on a theater ticket. A pity.
I disagree with you, and your mention of the Lord of the Rings movies points out why. Using your criteria, anyone who loves the LotR books should hate the movies for their many changes and omissions, and in fact the book purists at the time sounded much like you do now about these films. But as it has happened, now that things have shaken out, pretty much everyone loves the LotR movies.
Really, Dune (again, in a parallel to The Lord of the Rings) remains an unfilmable story. There is just too much story and too much subtlety, and too much that is essential doesn't translate well to visual media. Alia had to be removed because, yeah the other adaptations have included her but did you pay attention to how ridiculous she looked in both of them? There is no child actor alive, dead, or yet born who can, could, or ever will be able to properly play that role. Keeping her as a fetus communing with her mother allowed her to be in the film without being hamstrung in that way. The only thing she does that is of plot consequence is kill the Baron (yes, she has other story functions, but those are not necessary to the main throughline and are adequately covered by her communion with her mother,) but as the movie showed that role could be easily taken by Paul. Frankly, the lack of the first Leto II who was killed in a Harkonnen raid seems even more essential to the story to me, but I can also see why Villeneuve left that out-not only is it likely to confuse casual viewers, especially ones who see the next movie, but apparently even superfans often forget about his existence.
Because the story is unfilmable, a creator has to take a part of it and concentrate on that. Villeneuve wasn't very interested in mentats or Bene Gesserit superpowers. He was interested in exploring what the politics of the Fremen must have been like (find me any large group of human beings who don't have internal differences and I'll buy your dislike of exploring such differences but otherwise it just sounds like boring textual purism,) and he was interested in the large social forces moving around in the Imperium. As for Paul not wanting to go south (and that's just a way of saying into the deep desert, you might be reading a bit too much into things there) in the film, that seems like a way to portray book Paul's deep fears of taking on the role of messianic leader and being responsible for the oceans of blood to be spilled in his, and more importantly his father's and sons', name without resorting to extensive voiceover dialogue as other adaptations have done.
Anyway, I reserve final judgement on the series until the third movie happens, if it does (it probably will), but so far it looks very promising as adaptations go. Let go of book purism and take them for what they are instead. Even if you end up not liking them on their own terms, you will always have the books. You know, up until that irreparable cliffhanger at the end of book 6 (so stop with the end of book 4).
Whoever licensed the producers, had a moral obligation to insist that they stick closely to the lore. Instead, they were allowed to inject all sorts of political modern nonsense. People go there to see Dune, not political propaganda dressed as Dune!